User Tag List

Thanks useful information Thanks useful information:  7
Results 1 to 20 of 20

Thread: Can a lens be that bad !

  1. #1
    Site Rules Breach - Permanent Ban
    Join Date
    03 Aug 2010
    Location
    Coombabah
    Posts
    1,765
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Can a lens be that bad !

    I have just bought an older lens to try & see if I like nature photography ?
    It is a silver plastic Sigma 100-300 & I am using it on my Sigma SD15.
    The pix I took today look like I have far too much noise
    Very grainy & spotty colours, nothing in sharp focus. I can see it was getting DoF OK.
    I was using manual mode with both auto-focus & manual focus.
    I had it set for f10, ISO200 & white balance for a sunny day, adjusted the exposure for zero, each shot.
    I have a sturdy tri-pod.
    I know I need more reach now, but image quality is bad
    I have a new lens 18-200 & it is OK, just not the length.
    Cheers
    Col
    Last edited by colinbm; 27-07-2011 at 3:00pm.

  2. #2
    The Commander mikew09's Avatar
    Join Date
    27 May 2009
    Location
    Lowood, Queenland
    Posts
    4,737
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Well, without even read the post I could have answered YES - I have seen some shockers in my limited experience. Noise, hmm. I wouldn't think noise would be tht lens related unless it just looks like noise, is the lens clear in the gizzard, maybe something like a fungas grwoth inside could mimic noise and cause focus issues.

    But I tried a frends lens once (a Canon too) must hae been a bad copy but the lens was terrible. So yep, there is bad lens around for sure.
    Please be honest with your Critique of my images. I may not always agree, but I will not be offended - CC assists my learning and is always appreciate

    https://mikeathome.smugmug.com/

    Canon 5D3 - Gripped, EF 70-200 L IS 2.8 MkII, , 24-105 L 4 IS MkI, 580 EX II Speedlite, 2x 430 Ex II Speedlite


  3. #3
    Arch-Σigmoid Ausphotography Regular ameerat42's Avatar
    Join Date
    18 Sep 2009
    Location
    Nthn Sydney
    Posts
    16,827
    Mentioned
    21 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Is it an older lens? Post 2 pics, same subject ,FL, conditions, thru each lens and let's see...
    Am.
    CC, Image editing OK.

  4. #4
    Site Rules Breach - Permanent Ban
    Threadstarter

    Join Date
    03 Aug 2010
    Location
    Coombabah
    Posts
    1,765
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Hi Am
    Thanks for looking
    I am trying to post the new pixs here but I am getting an error message, even though I don't think I am doing anything different ?? I have sent in the error message & waiting for a reply ?
    Cheers
    Col

  5. #5
    Site Rules Breach - Permanent Ban
    Threadstarter

    Join Date
    03 Aug 2010
    Location
    Coombabah
    Posts
    1,765
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Hi
    Here is the offending image of the 100-300 lens in good daylight
    Cheers
    Col

    Oh not loading again ! Must be too disgraceful

  6. #6
    Site Rules Breach - Permanent Ban
    Threadstarter

    Join Date
    03 Aug 2010
    Location
    Coombabah
    Posts
    1,765
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Well how is this then ?
    Here is the offending image of the 100-300 lens in good daylight
    Col

    Still won't attatch !!

  7. #7
    Arch-Σigmoid Ausphotography Regular ameerat42's Avatar
    Join Date
    18 Sep 2009
    Location
    Nthn Sydney
    Posts
    16,827
    Mentioned
    21 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    [Cat icon] [bated breath icon]
    It's not "baited", BTW, but "bated", as in abated, like held breath...

    But the lure of the "bait" will probably disnuance this expression. (Hmm! Should go in the Murdering English thread.)

  8. #8
    Member
    Join Date
    14 Jul 2009
    Location
    NorthWest
    Posts
    723
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    In my experience lens definitely do have an effect on noise. Why, I dont know.
    Successful People Make Adjustments - Evander Holyfield

  9. #9
    Administrator ricktas's Avatar
    Join Date
    24 Jun 2007
    Location
    Hobart
    Posts
    15,644
    Mentioned
    10 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)
    You should be able to post the photos now Colin, Sorry for the issues and we are fairly sure we have resolved them
    "It is one thing to make a picture of what a person looks like, it is another thing to make a portrait of who they are" - Paul Caponigro

    Constructive Critique of my photographs is always appreciated
    Nikon, etc!

    RICK
    My Photography

  10. #10
    Site Rules Breach - Permanent Ban
    Threadstarter

    Join Date
    03 Aug 2010
    Location
    Coombabah
    Posts
    1,765
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Here is the offending image of the 100-300 lens in good daylight
    Cheers
    Col


    SDIM0701 100-300 at 300 for AP2.jpg

  11. #11
    Site Rules Breach - Permanent Ban
    Threadstarter

    Join Date
    03 Aug 2010
    Location
    Coombabah
    Posts
    1,765
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by ricktas View Post
    You should be able to post the photos now Colin, Sorry for the issues and we are fairly sure we have resolved them
    Thanks Rick, Kym & all the testers, it worked
    Col

  12. #12
    Member salnel's Avatar
    Join Date
    01 Nov 2010
    Location
    Geelong
    Posts
    3,849
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Er..this is daylight??? I don't know much about lenses but this does not look right?? Are they all like this?
    D610 and D90 with a 16-35mm f/4,a 70-200mm f/4 ,a 300mm f/4 +TC11 convertor, 18-200mmDX and 85mm micro Dx.

    Sally...CC always appreciated

    My Flickr: www.flickr.com/photos/salnel

  13. #13
    Site Rules Breach - Permanent Ban
    Threadstarter

    Join Date
    03 Aug 2010
    Location
    Coombabah
    Posts
    1,765
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Well shock, horror, I am not senile yet (no one answer that)

    And the reason I took this pix, is because the couple were doing a pose / portrait shoot with a netbook's web cam
    Of course I can't post this as a thread with such a shocker of a snap

    Here is the exif -

    File Name: SDIM0701.X3F
    File Type: X3F
    Image Dimensions: 13.9 MP (2640 x 1760 x 3)
    File Size: 13.10 MB
    Location: C:\Documents and Settings\PC User\My Documents\A SIGMA SD15 Pics\SDIM0701.X3F
    Capture Date: 27/07/2011 2:58:44 PM
    Exposure Mode: M - Manual Exposure
    Exposure Compensation: 0
    ISO Setting: 200
    White Balance Setting: Sunlight
    Color Mode: Standard
    Flash: Off
    Shutter Speed: 1/1600s
    Aperture Value: F10
    Metering Mode: Spot Metering
    Focus Setting: AF-S - Single Auto Mode
    Focal Length: 300 mm (100-300)
    Resolution: HI
    Drive Mode: Single Frame Shooting
    Camera: SIGMA SD15 1004346
    Firmware Version: 1.01.0.013
    Image Unique ID 3031303034333436A427304E63633936
    Saved X3F Settings
    Exposure: +0.0
    Contrast: +0.0
    Shadow: +0.0
    Highlight: +0.0
    Saturation: +0.0
    Sharpness: +0.0
    X3 Fill Light: +0.0
    Color Adjustment: 0


    Cheers
    Col

  14. #14
    Arch-Σigmoid Ausphotography Regular ameerat42's Avatar
    Join Date
    18 Sep 2009
    Location
    Nthn Sydney
    Posts
    16,827
    Mentioned
    21 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Well, Col. I'd say that from the EXIF, the exposure was about 2 and a bit stops under. You might have got a decent exposure at about 1/400sec and f/10. I had a look at the image in Photoshop and certainly there is just noise in the shadows - the usual. There were no blotches as such that I could ID. And a clue in the EXIF is "Spot Metering". It looks as if it has exposed "almost correctly" for the brighter shirt, sending everything else dark.
    More later. Am.

  15. #15
    Administrator ricktas's Avatar
    Join Date
    24 Jun 2007
    Location
    Hobart
    Posts
    15,644
    Mentioned
    10 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)
    I agree with Am. f10 at 1/1600s is going to result in a dark photo. Try again and maybe use the Sunny 16 rule. Sunny Day, F16 and set shutter speed to reciprocal of ISO (ISO 200 in the above data) . So - try f16, 1/200s
    Last edited by ricktas; 29-07-2011 at 12:44pm.

  16. #16
    Ausphotography Veteran Speedway's Avatar
    Join Date
    16 Sep 2008
    Location
    Cowangie
    Posts
    2,534
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    For my 2 cents worth unless they were standing next to an oil or tyre fire I would say there is something seriously wrong with this lens.
    Keith.

  17. #17
    Arch-Σigmoid Ausphotography Regular ameerat42's Avatar
    Join Date
    18 Sep 2009
    Location
    Nthn Sydney
    Posts
    16,827
    Mentioned
    21 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    BTW Col. How did you process this? Did you try at least +1 in Exposure and about +1 in Fill Light with SPP?
    (Might help a bit???)
    Am.

  18. #18
    Site Rules Breach - Permanent Ban
    Threadstarter

    Join Date
    03 Aug 2010
    Location
    Coombabah
    Posts
    1,765
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    This is SOOC (straight out of camera), except to convert to JPG & resize for AP.
    I did have a play in SPP5 but got nothinhg really better, certainly not acceptable.
    Col
    Last edited by colinbm; 29-07-2011 at 2:38pm.

  19. #19
    Amor fati!
    Join Date
    28 Jun 2007
    Location
    St Helens Park
    Posts
    7,275
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    looks to be very under exposed to me. very very... I cant see that it is a lens problem as the shirt that was probably metered on is correctly metered as far as i can see. I'd have either spot metered on the shaded part of thier bodys or matrix metered it. you can do some PP to rescue some detail but it will look shocking... this was shot in M so a slower shutter speed would have been easy to execute. i cant see excesive noise unless i try and resuce the shadded areas, then it looks crapola

    use this lens again but shoot it in aperture priority and you will notice a huge difference i bet.

  20. #20
    Site Rules Breach - Permanent Ban
    Threadstarter

    Join Date
    03 Aug 2010
    Location
    Coombabah
    Posts
    1,765
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Can a lens be that bad ! YES, when in the hands of a dill
    I have gone to matrix metering & stopped down to f16 & getting better pix thanks everyone.
    I guess I should not look at this lens for such long distance subjects & I need to get a longer lens ?
    All in the process of learning
    Col

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •