DSLRUsers.com

Hi all,

The below photos are not for critique as they are pretty crapy anyway, but I want to ask you something about 70-300 G lens. I did no PP apart from converting to JPG and resizing for web.

The two photos are here: http://agitlits.m6.net/NikonD70/thai.htm
[img]
http://agitlits.m6.net/NikonD70/thai.htm[/img]

The 1st photo was taken at 1/400s, F8, ISO 1000, focal length 300 mm. As you can see it's unacceptably out of focus, not just soft. Surely 1/400s is sufficient to stop blur due to shaky hands. I checked focus point in NC and it is spot on on one of the eyes.

The 2nd photo was taken at 190 mm ISO 1000, F6.3, 1/500 s and it is fairly sharp. In fact, not all that sharp but good for a portrait to make the face just a bit soft.


Is 300 mm to be avoided on that lens unless at shutter speeds of over, say 1/500 mm?

Thanks in advance for any suggestions and comments.

Alex

Alex,

Hope this helps.





You may want to read this instruction for embedding:

http://forum.d70users.com/viewforum.php?f=18

Step by Step: How to embed an image in a post

Hi Alex - you'll find plenty of great photo's posted on this forum with this lens at 300mm. What you need to be careful of is camera shake (you have already mentioned this) - this will definately affect the quality of your pics. This lens has a few limitations, and experimentation will help you find them.
At 300mm, this lens has done me very well.

I think your problem in the first pic is what you have said - it's not in proper focus. Whether the lens is at fault, or whether you were pushing the focus speed a little too much is impossible to say without having been there

The secong pic is definately an example of what this lens is capable of - even at 300mm I have seen similar examples

Note - I also nearly always apply an unsharp mask in PP'ing.

Others will give you a better response - I'm a bit tired now after trying to get the Rabbit in for the last hour!

This is not directly related to your question, but why did you use ISO 1000??? Part of the problem with the first shot seems to be the noise (especially in the background)...

The second shot looks fine to me...

At 300mm it is probably wise to use a monopod or tripod (especially if you have shaky hands like me)... I'm not sure if there is an official shutter speed that cancels out shaking hands... If there is, let me know...

Thanks for your response guys and Fozzie thanks for the instructions on how to embed an image.

I used ISO 1000 in order to get get fast enough shutter speeds (1/500 in the 2nd one) as it was cloudy and light was not very bright. I tried to use 1/320 as min for any shot at 300 mm focal length. By the way is focus point view in NC an accurate tool?

Cheers
Alex

Focus point view will only show you which of the five focus sensors you've used.

If you use focus lock to have a paticular area of your shot (eye's for instance) in focus

i.e. using centre sensor move to focus on eyes - lock focus - recompose - take picture

It will still only show the centre sensor as being the one that was used, it won't show you that the actual point of focus is else where in the picture (on the eyes).

It is accurate in that respect though, but to my mind not that much use as I almost always use the centre focus sensor.

Does that make sense - it does to me but it also looks a little like the ramblings of a mad man!

CC

Yes, makes sense. Thank you. I'm not quite sure why would you deliberately use one of the non-centre focus points unless you were in a dynamic area mode where it is decided for you.

Cheers
Alex

Make sure you haven't shifted the AF sensor off centre. Check in the view which sensor is active (should be hilighted black). Use the controls/cursor pad at the back to change it back to centre. Then flip the switch that has a dot and L to L (=Lock).

Thanks Darryl.

Yes, I got caught out with that one a few times. Is it beneficial to use AF-C sometimes with fashion shows, for instance, since model are moving (walking)? I don't have any experience with AF-C.

Alex

Incidentally, I just noticed that the colours in IE for the above two photos are way off compared to when they are displayed in PS or NC or Nikon View.

Alex

Alex I had the same issues not long ago when I was taking photos. When saving to JPEG from PS use the option "Save for Web" don't use "Save" and select JPEG as it won't match the colors correctly for web viewing.

Thanks Darryl,

I used 'save for web' on those two. I am not sure though if I am then supposed to click or unclick embed ICC profile when saving for web or not? Any ideas?

Cheers,

Alex

Hi Alex .Sorry not a answer to your qu you after but i noticed on your web page/link pics from Mark Knopfler concert..

How did you smuggle in your D-70 camrea and take those pics un detected and have no problem with the lighting (well the couple i had a look at looked ok anyway).. what sort of lense were you using and settings please.. just curious

Hame

hame wrote:Hi Alex .Sorry not a answer to your qu you after but i noticed on your web page/link pics from Mark Knopfler concert..

How did you smuggle in your D-70 camrea and take those pics un detected and have no problem with the lighting (well the couple i had a look at looked ok anyway).. what sort of lense were you using and settings please.. just curious

Hame

Hi Hame,

Well, the tickets to the concert did not say anything about cameras (the previous concert I went to was Rolling Stones in 2003 and tickets clearly said "Cameras strictly forbidden"). So I decided to give it a go. Arrived early so that if it would be banned I would have enough time to go back to the car and live the D70 there. The security stopped me to check it wasn't a video cam. Then just before the show started a security guy approached me to check what lens I had. I had the kit lens on at the time and he said 'no worries'. I did not think I could use the other lens I had 70-300 G anyway because I think the light would be too low. Anyway, the concert started and the spotlight was so bright on Mark that at ISO 1250 and 1600 and max aperture with kit lens, the shutter speeds were above 1/500 s. It was then that I decided to give 70-300 G and I was glad I did because the shitter speeds were very acceptable most of the time at ISO 1600. After a few shots a security guy approached me and asked me not to use that lens so I changed back to the kit lens. I used spot metering system 99 % of the shots. So security was quite flexible at that particular show and it really depends on what the promoters of a particular show allow. Later I checked and they allowed lenses up to 200 mm.

Hope this answers your question.

Cheers
Alex

Yep thanks Alex and not to bad pics like i said in my opin. as most concerts i have been to they search you for everything

Hame

hame wrote:Yep thanks Alex and not to bad pics like i said in my opin. as most concerts i have been to they search you for everything

Hame

Thanks, Hame.

Alex

Yep the pics have no profile, IE and firefox assign them sRGB which makes them look flat and dull .. open them in photoshop and assign them the profile Adobe RGB and they look much better.

Hi Alex.

As an avid user of the G-machine, I'd have to say I agree with the comments made by Sheepie and Leek. I've had some really good results at 300mm. On one posted shot Gary Stark even commented that 'I'd found the sweet spot of that lens'. Variations within batches of lenses aside, there are probably other reasons for the 'problems' you perceive with the first shot.

Cheers,

Manta wrote:there are probably other reasons for the 'problems' you perceive with the first shot.

That may well be the case, but my take on this is that Alex has my lens's twin brother.

We never use this lens because it's softer than a down pillow, and the first example posted here shows exactly this absence of acuity.

gstark wrote:

Manta wrote:there are probably other reasons for the 'problems' you perceive with the first shot.

That may well be the case, but my take on this is that Alex has my lens's twin brother.

We never use this lens because it's softer than a down pillow, and the first example posted here shows exactly this absence of acuity.

May be! I just noticed that most shots at max focal lens are oof even at f8 and 1/400 s shutter speed, but I do get good ones occasionally. Shorter focal length give better results.

Alex

More than happy to bow to Gary's far greater expertise in this regard.

I'm either lucky or just easily pleased with the results I'm getting from my G.

That being said, I'm looking forward to the day when both the bank balance and Lady Manta allow me to purchase a real lens. 'Til then, I don't suppose I really know what I'm missing.

Manta wrote:'Til then, I don't suppose I really know what I'm missing.

Quick!

Somebody hand him a 70-200 VR!

If we don't get him, the lens lust will!

Yes please!!!

All in the interests of research, of course..