D90 and ED AF NIKKOR 80-200mm 1:2.8 D

[weiwuwei]

hello
I am using a ED AF NIKKOR 80-200mm 1:2.8 D for portraits with my D90 and mostly a tripod . the lens ( or the camera ?) often doesnt focus as accurate as i expect...i am aware there are different quality of lenses out there.maybe my copy is just not great...? sometimes i get better results then other times... or... i have heard that the camera might need some kind of calibration to optimize the lens focus ...
does anybody have some advice...

thanks a lot
regards
weiwuwei

[ricktas]

post some photos with EXIF in-tact and let us see what you mean

[weiwuwei]

what is exif in tact ???

[ricktas]

what is exif in tact ???

EXIF is the data embedded within a digital photo that tells us about the camera used, lens, and all the settings that were used to take the photo. It can reveal a lot about the photo, including the cause of any issues.

[weiwuwei]

ok here is an example photoDSC_0374 - Copy (750x495).jpg
the face should be much sharper in my opinion ???

[weiwuwei]

...and how do i bring the exif data across here ?? resized ? with an attachment?

[Kym]

Using an EXIF viewer... (in Firefox - see the Library)

Camera Model: NIKON D90
Image Date: 2011-01-18 20:14:53 (no TZ)
Focal Length: 92mm (35mm equivalent: 138mm)
Aperture: f/4.5
Exposure Time: 0.100 s (1/10)
ISO equiv: 640
Exposure Bias: -0.33 EV
Metering Mode: Matrix
Exposure: shutter priority (semi-auto)
White Balance: Auto
Flash Fired: No
Orientation: Normal
Color Space: sRGB

[ricktas]

few issues here.

Firstly this was taken at 1/10th of a second, if you were hand holding this, a shutter speed of 1/10th of a second is way to slow, cause you will have moved. Also a slow shutter speed picks up any slight movement in your subject, and thus again, results in a 'softer' result.

Your white balance is off, your subject is way to orange/yellow

Again you are using an ISO that is to high (640) which has introduced noise (grain) into the photo.

I think you need to get some better light sources (brighter) to lit your subject more, thus allowing faster shutter speeds to stop the softness, decrease your ISO, and learn about getting the white balance right for your light and subject.

If you work towards all of these, your results will improve. It is a lovely portrait and it seems you have a willing subject so work at it. Also consider not placing your subject so central in your frame. Consider the background (the chair?) is distracting and takes our eyes away from the young lady.

[ricktas]

...and how do i bring the exif data across here ?? resized ? with an attachment?

The EXIF is there, all I needed to do was right click and using my EXIF reader (browser add-on), I can see a heap of detail about the photo.

[weiwuwei]

so thank you for your advice,lower iso and faster speed makes sense,i did use a tripod but she might have moved...and it seems auto white balance is not enough here....and ... maybe matrix mode is not the best thing here as well ? does that mean that my lens is a good one ??
again thx for advice

[ricktas]

Your lens is only as good as the photographer behind the camera. I think you need to get back to basics, and an understanding of the relationships between ISO, Aperture and shutter speed, and understand why a certain shutter speed will not work for a given situation and how to adjust to make the camera take the photo you want it to.

Pop over to the LIBRARY, and have a read through the NEW To PHOTOGRAPHY section to refresh your memory about how it all goes together to get the photo you want.

[weiwuwei]

angli and tao (1 of 1) (2) (750x485).jpg

here same lens ,different settings......any feedback ??
thanks a lot

[arthurking83]

You can't really determine if any of the gear is to blame in an image where: ISO setting is @ ISO640, shutter speed is at 1/10s(even of a tripod) on a movable subject, and mirror slap may have been an issue(you did say you used a tripod??)

Possible causes for a lack of sharpness: Noise! even at ISO640 there is going to be some noise(no matter what anyone says, there is noise!!) The problem with noise is that it's random, and the effect can be anywhere from insignificant to significant and all points in between.
For 100% surety, you want to use base ISO or lower.
At 1/10s you almost certainly got a small amount of movement from the subject, especially a young person(who tend not to sit still for any length of time exceeding a millisecond or two! ).
Mirror slap may also have been an issue at 1/10s too, if you were on a tripod, but I'd reckon subject movement is more likely to be an issue over mirror slap.

Did you use the lens's tripod collar to mount to a tripod, or via the camera's mount, with the lens hanging precariously and dangerously a mile out!

80-200/2.8 is not particularly well known for a sturdy tripod foot, but at least it's short in height so any sloppiness is kept to a minimum.

I did some test a few years back and found that at about 1/10s to reduce the possibility of mirror slap affecting images, it was better to mount the set up to the tripod via the camera's tripod mount, rather than the lens's collar, as there was less tendency to blurriness from mirror slap. Not enough pixel space to explain why this is so, other than to explain that the camera's mount(bot to the lens and the tripod footing) need to be very sturdy, and I wouldn't want to try that on a D90(I used a D300).

So there are some points for you to consider as you do more testing to determine the what's and why's of your issues.

To eliminate all the possible variables, first of all you need some exact reference material to be sure you have a set baseline of exactly how sharp this lens/camera combo can be.
Good light, secure and stable target, something positive to focus on, and get yourself some nice sharp sets of images as a base level.
Once you determine this, you can then be more positive about the level of sharpness in this particular image, and any other images you capture.

Quickly: and FWIW: I had this lens, and found it very difficult to get always sharp images from it, on both my D70s and D300. I managed to get very sharp images on the odd occasion, tho .. so there was definitely some degree of high quality from this lens. Turned out that the lens backfocused on me at a particular focused distance and really only at 200mm. Did test after test, and found the exact same problem time and again. Not saying that your lens is backfocusing, in fact I'd wager that it's both user related and subject movement issues if you say this image is not sharp, so don't automagically assume that your lens is backfocusing here(it's only at 90odd millimeters and f/4.5, so DOF should be ok anyhow).
But this lens can require a lot of effort on the part of the user to extract excellent images from it.

[mongo]

Why don't you just turn off the auto focus and try focusing manually !! that should reveal a few truths !

PS - shutter speeds of 1/10th to 1/20th at about 130 to 140mm focal length equivalent (even on a tripod and hoping nothing moves including the subject) is really pushing your luck

[weiwuwei]

thx ,yes good suggestion with the manual focus: Doh:

[Danielepaolo]

I agree with remarks you have received but the one which could be of great assistance I would think is the suggestion of understanding exposure. Another great read is a book of the same name "Understanding Exposure, 3rd Edition" by Bryan Peterson. An excellent informative read and costs less than $30 including postage from amazon.

[arthurking83]

I don't think that the OP is in need of a better understanding of exposure as a concept.
A more advanced understanding is always helpful.... there's no doubt about that, and how to best use exposure is never a wasted effort.
.... But the OP's issue here is not really about exposure. The two sample images they've presented clearly show a decent understanding of exposure itself, and further understanding of the concept is not really going to help them sort out the opposing issue of sharpness vs high ISO.
Understanding the importance of concepts such as shutter speed vs focal lengths, handling techniques, subject movement and coaching moving subject to keep still .. taking breath relaxing .. or whatever else is required to capture a sharper image.

I think this thread is clearly about 'proper' technique .. and possibly even about gear(or lack of) in terms of lighting. A good quality external speedlight is always helpful in these situations.
On a D90, I reckon nothing less than a SB700 is worth the effort. SB900 is you can stretch it that far, or an old SB800 if it's a lot cheaper than an SB700(but in the long run an SB700 is going to be a better option to an SB800 anyhow, so it has to be a lot cheaper!)

In these situations, what I would subsequently do, or try is: mount a faster aperture lens(50/1.4 or 50/1.2 are the primary candidates) but an f/1.8 lens is also going help provide higher quality images too.
35/1.8 is a very nice lens, and I suspect a 50/1.8 AF-S version is also going to provide hours of entertainment as well as thousands of high quality images in conditions like these over the course of the next few years.
The other thing I'd try which involves a lot less cash layout .. (basically!.. $0) by comparison to a new flash or faster lens ... multiple frame shooting.
Faster fps doesn't always help so you don't necessarily need a D7000 or D300 or greater, and 3fps is about as much as you'd need in this situation so the D90's 3 or 4fps is fine, but the technique of shooting multiple frames in sequence has netted me many images worth keeping when confronted with similar low light conditions.

Hope this helps.

[Danielepaolo]

.... But the OP's issue here is not really about exposure. The two sample images they've presented clearly show a decent understanding of exposure itself, and further understanding of the concept is not really going to help them sort out the opposing issue of sharpness vs high ISO.

The OP took an image of a child at 1/10s using a FL of ~130mm and is wondering why the image is not sharp one time but sharp another. That clearly shows a lack of understanding of exposure.

In these situations, what I would subsequently do, or try is: mount a faster aperture lens(50/1.4 or 50/1.2 are the primary candidates) but an f/1.8 lens is also going help provide higher quality images too. 35/1.8 is a very nice lens, and I suspect a 50/1.8 AF-S version is also going to provide hours of entertainment as well as thousands of high quality images in conditions like these over the course of the next few years.

What you are suggesting here clearly requires an understanding of exposure.

[weiwuwei]

again, thanks a lot, arthur , for your advice,
i have a basic understanding about exposure and i think the issue of focal lenght and shutter speed and handling technics are something i have to look into. .. i am having a sb 600 speed light and i am just starting to look how to use this one especially for low light situations....to take my 50/1.8 lens is certainly another way to go...with the photos above the issue was primarily to test and how to use the 80/200..the first shoots...iwas courious what results do i get with different exposure,with a tripod but no external speedlight....

the mps mode ....what excactly would be different ? it would stop the object... i would have more samples from a very similar photo ?
or are there other benefits shooting with mps ??

so far i got some great advice here
thanks again
weiwuwei

[arthurking83]

The OP took an image of a child at 1/10s using a FL of ~130mm and is wondering why the image is not sharp one time but sharp another. That clearly shows a lack of understanding of exposure.

I beg to differ here, for a simple logic fact! If the focal length and the shutter speed are at odds with each other in any way, then the misunderstanding is obviously with technique.
Has nothing to do with exposure at all. I regularly shoot with those variables and get similarly exposed images but I won't shoot a moving target at 1/10s which is nothing to do with exposure and a lot more to do with technique shutter speed is too slow for a moving target like that ... exposure is not in question here. You may have missed the point about the tripod being used.

But you are also entitled you your opinion as well.

.... What you are suggesting here clearly requires an understanding of exposure.

What I explained about using a faster aperture lens doesn't necessarily require a lot of in depth knowledge about exposure, more so than the fact that such gear exists is readily available and quite cheap.
A basic understanding of the fact that a faster aperture lens will yield a brighter image is required, for sure.. and this argument could be taken either way. But as I saw it, the OP must have, as a minimum, a basic understanding of this concept if they've used a fast, pro level 80-200/2.8 zoom lens, and not a standard kit lens at the longest focal length at f/9 or something like that.