Went for a Wander

[pippin88]

These were taken today, the birds with my 70-300ED and the others with my Sigma 105.






























I'm not really happy with the sharpness of the 70-300ED, photos all have a soft glow and arn't sharp at all. I'm not using a filter and most of my phots are taken at F7.1 to 8. Maybe camera shake? But I wouldn't have though that would introduce the glow like effect / haze and it's in virtually ever photo.

[radar]

I'm not really happy with the sharpness of the 70-300ED, photos all have a soft glow and arn't sharp at all. I'm not using a filter and most of my phots are taken at F7.1 to 8. Maybe camera shake? But I wouldn't have though that would introduce the glow like effect / haze and it's in virtually ever photo.

Hi Pippin,

got the same lens, 70-300ED. I quite like it, but must say that it does come out a bit soft at times. It got the lens from a friend and he certainly got some great shots from it, but he is a pro.

So there is certainly an element of shake in there, on my part. I certainly try not to have to shoot at anything slower then 1/300s or 1/400s when handheld. Just something I read somewhere. At this point, a VR lens is not an option  BTW, I still like the pictures you took. The Sigma works well by the look of it.

Cheers,

André

[robboh]

Im not a great one for figuring this out, but it does look like camera shake to me.

From what I have read, the classic signs of camera shake are slight blurring/smudging and loss of small detail, both of which are showing in the magpie photo. I dont think its looks like CA, though people do complain that the 300ED is fairly soft at the long end. You could have a look [url=http://www.pbase.com/cameras/nikon/70-300_4-56d_ed_af]here[url] at pics that others have taken with that lens.

Some 100% crops from the other two (i like the first one by the way) would be helpful as they are showing higher shutter speeds in the EXIF than the magpie, and would also show if we are seeing any CA better as they have higher contrast between the subject and background.

Cheers
Rob.

[avkomp]

looks like camera shake to me.
I have taken enough just like that to recognise it.
With longer lenses you get more magnification and the slightest movement will cause the loss of detail.
I find that photographing birds can test out your long lens technique because they have hard edges along the beak/ head area and shake etc really stands out .
I read how we are supposed to roll our finger over the shutter release and to use 1/focal length as a suggested minimum shutter speed. The problem is that sometimes I forget. gotta follow thru with longer lens also. hold the camera steady til the shot is finished.
If I get my act together and do all the right stuff you get the right results.

Steve

[pippin88]

Thanks for the advice, might have to start shooting at over 1/500 rather than around 1/300.

EDIT:
But have a look at these: they still have some of the soft glow and the brown bird was taken at 1/800 and the black one at 1/1250. They were taken at ISO400 and F7.1





That's why I didn't think it was camera shake, just softness?

[Aussie Dave]

I also find that it often helps to hold my breathe for the duration of the shot....and lock those arms in nice & tight....

AT LEAST 1/focal length is a must with these lenses. At 300mm, I'd even try 1/500sec. if possible (light permitting)

[avkomp]

I also find that it often helps to hold my breathe for the duration of the shot....and lock those arms in nice & tight....

AT LEAST 1/focal length is a must with these lenses. At 300mm, I'd even try 1/500sec. if possible (light permitting)

yep, the holding breath etc is part of what I meant by following thru also

Steve