Camera Upgrade Question

[MadMax1412]

MMax. In the interim with those UN-displayed attachments, I notice that the 1st and second
are quite suitably focused. As before, you have an hour before they disappear as attachable
assets. FWIW these too were taken at f/2.8. (I know camera selects f-stop in this mode.)

Good luck attaching them.

Yeah I had to dash to take my daughter to Netball, and have just got back and immediately came to try to fix it, but my editing of post option not there. I'll re-do them here and hope they work.

Here is a photo using the Nikkor DX AF-S 35mm f/1.8G on a tripod. There’s no Anti-Vibration button on this lens, so it’s not a factor. I also used the timer so there’s no chance it was me pressing the button.

Nikkor1.jpg

Nikkor2.jpg

The above photo might look ok, but if you zoomed in on the face on a PC, it seems "soft". I would like sharp photos especially around the eyes etc.


This photo was taken hand-held using the Tamron 18-270mm F/3.5-6.3 DI II, standing in the same spot as the tripod. From memory, the camera focused on the edge of her arms and legs (I remember seeing 3 squares flash in those spots)

Tamron1.jpg

Tamron2.jpg

I just feel the face should be sharper. Don't forget that I'm an amateur, so I trust my camera to take sharp shots if I just want to grab it, put it in Auto or Portrait and take a quick family snap. Isn't that the point of cameras having those options?

If anyone wants to download the original JPG or NEF file that came straight off the D90, the links are below:

Nikkor JPG - https://drive.google.com/open?id=1T1...5rv76HGgz9gjKJ
Nikkor NEF - https://drive.google.com/open?id=1q3...F1q3UeQCrX0qlC
Tamron JPG - https://drive.google.com/open?id=1rH...atCSDhOhPjhaYp
Tamron NEF - https://drive.google.com/open?id=1qr...4F6K3olwLAeN5T

Anyway, I'm off to bed. 3:30am starts means early to bed :-)

Testing mentioned above will probably be done on the weekend, most likely Sunday due to morning sports for the daughter, housework and gardening etc on Saturday. No rest for the wicked.

[arthurking83]

LOL! .. I used to dream of 3:30AM starts!

.. anyhow. FWIW: I have a sneaking suspicion that your 35mm is backfocusing a little. That's a possible kind'a'sort'a maybe .. not even sure if I'm sure that I'm not sure. So don't take that to mean that it is.

So I'll describe an easy test method for you to do.

Re: soft/blurry images. Image is on the brighter side of the exposure range. Don't take that to me it's bright ... it's just brighter than 'ideal'.
Note tho, there is technically no such thing as an idea exposure .. it's a moving target .. we decide what it an ideal exposure .. that is what you think is ideal .. maybe different to what I think is ideal .. etc, etc.

Exposure can actually affect the 'sharpness' of an image. Sounds strange, but true. But it's not what you think .. that is, you can't make a crappy cheap lens look sharp by varying exposure.
But you can make a sharp image look soft .. ish .. by exposing a tad too bright. \
Contrast is one of the things we perceive as sharpness. So when an image has a bit more contrast, that usually equates in our imagination as a bit more sharpness. Obviously it's not the only way we perceive sharpness, camera shake/movement and obvious blurriness is of importance too, but sometimes an image looks soft, when it's really sharp enough .. and we think it's not sharp.
Almost every lens we read up on in reviews that gets accolades for sharpness is also a contrasty rendering lens.
But if a lens is less contrasty, say by design .. then many folks think it's not sharp. In fact it usually is ... PP by just adding a bit of contrast and dropping exposure can make the world of difference.

I mentioned software primarily because your software use is obliterating all the exif data .. so we have zero idea of how your shooting your camera.
I mentioned Nikon's ViewNX2 and CaptureNX-D, because no matter what you do, and what type of image your resizing/editing .. it doesn't remove any exif at all(unless you tick a small box for it to do so).
Also(and this is the important part of my software commentary) .. Nikon's software allows you to edit the Picture Control settings AFTER the shot .. just like you do in camera.
And your softness issue may well be just a camera setting issue .. ie. remember the comments just above re brightness/contrast and sharpness!

So the basic idea(and what I've done over the years, and still do) .. take shot, open in ViewNX2(mainly). Sometimes CaptureNX2. Very rarely in CNX-D(but doing more of that now that it's getting better).
Primary reason is the Picture Controls.
Don't worry too much about Picture Controls and tone rendering for now, other than you use it to initially edit your image without actually editing it.
This is basically what they are. pre editing .. editing! Think of it as the editing you don't do, to minimise the editing you may need too.
All cameras do their internal tone editing .. every camera. Has too. There's no option. Even on raw files.
Nikon software follows the camera settings. other software(ie. non Nikon brands) .. don't use Nikon's tone settings(ie. the Picture Controls).
Other software also does pre editing tone editing .. also has too .. otherwise you really don't get an image. Other software(Adobe/Corel/Paint.net/etc) they all HAVE to add their tone edits to open the image. In other software this is called 'profile' or 'preset'.
It's something that they all have to do. Nikon's Picture Control is exactly the same process .. just done how Nikon thought it best too. But you can edit this process to your liking.

This is the main reason I recommend Nikon users to use Nikon's software .. makes editing so much more 'nothing' or less ... easier in many ways.
FWIW: what I mean by my term makes editing 'so much more nothing' .. means that you can do some far out massively processed images by doing no editing at all.
Sorry getting off topic here, but take it for granted that there is a lot of processing/tweaking ability in these in camera settings that you don't really need any other software like Corel or Paint.net .. etc.
Only reason you need Nikon software it to edit the in camera settings.
Only reason I mention this complex stuff is that it helps to find detail(remember exposure may have hidden detail/sharpness/contrast) .. so this stuff is handy to now about.

As for the above images. #1 Nikkor lens .. looks OK .. just a tad bright(contrast) .. I'm sure I could cobble up some tweaks to make that image look sharper.
#2 .. looks backfocused(but again this depends on far too many variables to say with certainty. Why does it look backfocused? look at the leaves behind girl .. her right ear .. our left shoulder. There's more edge detail in those leaves than in the girls eyes, mouth .. etc.

I then downloaded the NEF files.
First stop was to drop exposure(not brightness!).

Nikkor2_ exposure edit only
Nikkor-VNX2_-1.3_01.JPG
With this image, the only change was -1.3Ev exposure in VNX2.

Notice that her face looks less 'angel' like .. darker .. more lines(around mouth and cheeks .. more moody/contrast/etc.
I have a 4K monitor .. very good quality and I can definitely say there's more detailed look around her eyes .. just with lower exposure.
I'll add some very basic editing(will need a brightness increase to counter the darker moody feel with lower exposure) .. etc, etc.

Nikkor2_proper edit
Nikkor.JPG
This one is a proper edit.
Like I said, simple button pushing, choose Picture Control( I chose Portrait). Choose WB(I went shade or cloudy, but changed value to 7000K). Added some sharpness(+4). Added brightness(+4). Added contrast(+2)
Set protect highlight (50). Set Protect shadows(35). Crop(this look longest to try to match your cropped image.

I'll send you a PM with the view to get the Nikkor.NEF file back to you to load onto your PC. What I recommend you do, is download and install ViewNX2(for now).

ViewNX 2.10.3 Download page
Scroll down, click accept, click country region, etc, etc.

The edits I've made in the NEF will only show up in VNX2(maybe VNX-D .. can't remember).
You will then see the edits I made to the image .. a guide I suppose.
I'll also explain how to do the testing for focus accuracy too.
Also, reason for asking about tripod .. not to take shots like the one above with tripod .. for doing the simple testing .... when you can.
Also important .. what model/brand tripod(will help me to explain more accurately for the test).

[Brigitte]

I also shoot with Nikon - D7000 and D7500 I would suggest you check out Steve Perry who uses Nikon - https://backcountrygallery.com/ his videos and e books are excellent. I got onto him when I learned how to do back button focus, this made a huge improvement to my photography. Also Auto modes leave the camera in charge not the operator. Try to get what you have working correctly before you rush in and buy new equipment. I'm not a professional and like you have learned through reading and practice.

[ricktas]

IMHO you should be getting far better images than you are. Most superzooms are of (very) questionable image quality. ...

This video should help to inform your decisions. It discusses the difference between huge prints made from images taken with a Canon 5D MkIV and an Olympus E-M1 MkII. Cut to the chase at about 9 minutes if you already know the other stuff.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OGn3yPl59ZM

tl:dr - there is no discernible difference.

Agree with John. I suspect your lens is the cause here. Spending your money on a new lens might well be what you need to do, rather than a new camera.

Even look at something like the 50mm 1.4. It is a cheap lens in the scheme of things, but for portraiture, it is a doozie.

Getting a new camera (and lens) might solve your problem, but you might be able to improve your photography without doing so.

[ricktas]

Another question as I have looked at your photos above and was trying to work out the cause.

Do you have a filter screwed to the front of this lens? Like a UV filter for example.. as protection for the lens? If so, remove it and try again. UV filters serve no purpose other than to degrade image quality if the UV filter is not really high quality. UV flitering is not needed with digital cameras. It was needed for some film back in the day. Your lens front element is hardened and whilst it can break, it is not fragile and delicate and does not need protection.

So let us know if you have a filter on the lens, remove it, and try taking photos again.

[arthurking83]

.....

So let us know if you have a filter on the lens, remove it, and try taking photos again.

[John King]

Agree with John. I suspect your lens is the cause here. Spending your money on a new lens might well be what you need to do, rather than a new camera.

Even look at something like the 50mm 1.4. It is a cheap lens in the scheme of things, but for portraiture, it is a doozie.

Getting a new camera (and lens) might solve your problem, but you might be able to improve your photography without doing so.

Good suggestion by Rick.

My niece has a D90. They are a capable camera, and can take excellent photos. She has the cheap but good 18-105 kit lens on it. Good combo.

[MadMax1412]

Another question as I have looked at your photos above and was trying to work out the cause.

Do you have a filter screwed to the front of this lens? Like a UV filter for example.. as protection for the lens? If so, remove it and try again. UV filters serve no purpose other than to degrade image quality if the UV filter is not really high quality. UV flitering is not needed with digital cameras. It was needed for some film back in the day. Your lens front element is hardened and whilst it can break, it is not fragile and delicate and does not need protection.

So let us know if you have a filter on the lens, remove it, and try taking photos again.

Yes, I do have a Marumi UV filter on the front. I did this for 2 reasons (don't forget I'm no expert so try following advice I read) that UV filter will help make better looking colours and will protect lens. I will try some photos without it.

Arthurking83, my tripod is an Optex t-560. I have got your PM's and will try doing the test shots soon. Given the above info/suggestion, I will have the UV filter off.

[arthurking83]

Yes, I do have a Marumi UV filter on the front. I did this for 2 reasons (don't forget I'm no expert so try following advice I read) that UV filter will help make better looking colours and will protect lens. I will try some photos without it....

Like Rick said, remove it. Further to that advice is to pack it away ... forever.
Try taking all your images now without it.

Arthurking83, my tripod is an Optex t-560. I have got your PM's and will try doing the test shots soon. Given the above info/suggestion, I will have the UV filter off.[/QUOTE]

OK. searched that brand/model of tripod.
I highly recommend that you keep the tripod as short as possible. If you have to elevate it to the same height as the focus target .. by placing it on some other thing that's solid(like a bench, verandah steps .. etc) and your focus target a bit lower to compensate for the lack of tripod height ... then better.

[ricktas]

Yes, I do have a Marumi UV filter on the front. I did this for 2 reasons (don't forget I'm no expert so try following advice I read) that UV filter will help make better looking colours and will protect lens. I will try some photos without it.

Arthurking83, my tripod is an Optex t-560. I have got your PM's and will try doing the test shots soon. Given the above info/suggestion, I will have the UV filter off.

Take the filter off and throw it... and try to take photos again.

UV filters do nothing to protect your lens or improve your image quality (IQ). In fact the opposite. UV filters can and do degrade your image results. Looking forward to hearing what results you get once you remove that filter.

[junqbox]

take a photo with a tripod and shutter delay to check whether its your handholding or the sharpness of lens

[arthurking83]

take a photo with a tripod and shutter delay to check whether its your handholding or the sharpness of lens

At the moment, it's looking that way(ish).
From the OPs last image post, the first image was shot on tripod, came out good.
Second image shot hand held, came out backfocused.

I've sent the OP some instructions on how to do some simple tests to determine what the issue is.

[MadMax1412]

Ok, so here's my test shots. The batteries were set up with the middle one closest, then the one to the right had it's front edge level with the back of the middle one. The one to the left of the middle had it's front edge level with the back of the 2nd one. Repeat with the last 2 with the one on the far left being the furtherest back. With the view finder shot, I put the focus on the one to the left in case it was forward focusing so it would show this by making the centre battery sharp. Live View unfortunately meant the whole set of batteries were in the focus box.

Nikkor DX AF-S 35mm f/1.8G, UV filter off, on a tripod, using 5 second timer.

Nikkor_ViewNX.jpg
Nikkor_Live_View_Cropped.jpg
Nikkor_View_Finder_Cropped.jpg

Based on the View Finder shot, it looks like it back focused as the further-est battery (the one on far left) seems to be in focus looking at the test above the red swirl. The camera was very close to the batteries. From memory I would say 40cm. I would assume the back focus issue would be more if the distance to the subject was greater?? In other words, it looks like actual focus was about 3 battery widths (about 3cm) back from where the focus point was and subject was 40 cm away, so if subject was 2 metres away (eg full body shot), would the back focus be 5x greater distance away from where the focus point was set to (ie about 15cm)???

Due to the limitations of only 5 photos per post, I'll wait until there's another post and then post the results for the Tamron lens.

[arthurking83]

Test is inconclusive!

Remember how I specified to leave some space between each battery so that the focus square only sees the one battery.

So focus is spot on via vf focusing, yet backfocused with Lv focusing.
This is the exact reverse situation anyone would ever predict.
Lv focusing relies on the actual sensor to do the focusing.
Vf focusing uses a separate focus system(separate to the sensor), and can have inaccurate alignment issues.
So in a camera/lens system with an focus issue, you'd expect to see focus error in vf captured shots, and more accurate focus in sensor based focus shots.

Also:
The further away your focus target is(or in real world photography .. your subject in focus) .. the harder it is to determine best focus plane.
Reason is, as the camera to subject distance increases, the DOF also increases. So you naturally get more of the depth in focus.

Broadly speaking, it doesn't matter so much at 'similar distances' the actual distance when you're trying to determine focus (in)accuracy.
That is, I doubt very much you will see much variance in focus accuracy on a given lens at say 0.4 - 2m or between 3m and 10m.
You may see differences in focus accuracy at largely differenct focus distances .. for example, like I said with my old Nikkor 80-200 that I had trouble with.
At between 1m and 4m, I had very obvious back focus from this lens(and only at 200mm).
Over about 10m focus distance tho, it wasn't a problem I ever worried about. Mainly because now inherently deeper DoF was also masking the issue a little too.

what all that means for you:
I wouldn't worry too much that you tested at 0.4m distance. If you shoot portraits at roughly 2m .. or even 3m distance away, the the focus testing will be accurate for that focus range(unless there's a monumental issue with the lens .. highly doubtful)

But like I said, redo at least that test with the 35mm with wider side gaps between the test subjects.

[MadMax1412]

Test is inconclusive!

Remember how I specified to leave some space between each battery so that the focus square only sees the one battery.

Apologies. I focused (no pun intended) on the instructions where you said:

Note in my test I used 5 batteries. They're arranged in a V shape, middle at front and side ones are set so that the front part of each side battery is set to align with the rear part of the battery more central to it.
So there is little to no gaps fore/aft of each layer. This is about the right fore/aft distance to gauge depth of focus. It may or may not be spot on, but is generally a good guide.
With your Tamron lens tho, becasue of the small aperture, you may need to gap the batteries depth.
Depth of Field(DoF) can mask the accuracy of focus.

My bad - sorry.

So here's the test shot for the Nikkor lens. Once again, I focused on the 2nd battery back from the front in case the actual focus was some point in front of that (so it would be picked up by the first battery).

Nikkor DX AF-S 35mm f/1.8G, UV filter off, on a tripod, using 5 second timer.

ViewNX.jpg

Nikkor_VF.jpg

Nikkor_LV.jpg

I will put the photos from the Tamron lens up tomorrow.

[arthurking83]

My apolgies too, for not being 101% clear.
Yeah, the closer-up-ness of the batteries was from front to rear, fore/aft not side to side.
Reason for this closeness is to take into account of DoF issues AND balance that with any very small focus inaccuracies.
If the batteries are too far apart front to rear of each other, you may not clearly see where the actual focus plane is.
Too close together, that is overlapping each other front to rear, and it's hard to determine an exact sharp focal plane.

The depth of a battery is just about right to balance these points.

So going by the new test shots ... I'd say no back/front focus issues.
Note the slight green and red/purple tint on the batteries in front of and behind the one you focused on.
This is normal.
Note how the battery you focused on doesn't have the red or green tint.
That red/magenta(red/purple) tint is called Longitudinal Chromatic Aberration(LoCA). Is normal for a prime lens at wide apertures.
Those uber expensive lenses that seem way out of your price range .. they tend to minimise that LoCA issue a lot more .. some to the point of zero.

So the conclusion for the Nikon 35mm .. working pretty much fine.
Solution is to change the way you operate the camera.
I posted a reply for you to use continuous focus mode for focusing.
Someone else mentioned the Back Button Focusing method. Technically the method is called AF-On method.
You camera has a a setting for you to set it up this way.
Basically, the way you hold the camera requires that your right thumb rests over the AF-On button up in the top right corner on the back of the camera.
The D90 doesn't have an AF-On button, but has a AE-L button. In the camera menu, you can set the AE-L button to be your focusing button.
In the camera menu section look for Menu F4, where you set what the AE-L button does.
Choose option AF-On.
Once you do that, you focus using the AE-L button.
This is a much more stable way to focus, due to the point that it will only focus while you press the AE-L button now.
Setting this, will remove the half shutter press to focus(better).
It may take a short while to adjust to this way, but once you get used to it, it gives you more control over both focusing and exposure.

Also, press the AF button on the camera, and turn main dial till you see AF mode set to AF-C.

So your new style of shooting stuff, will be to: frame the scene, press the AE-L button to focus, hold it down while you're framing, and then press the shutter(remember now there is no half press action other than to meter).
You will(or may) get unfocused frames, so try to shoot two or three shots(or more if you like) in succession.
Filter through the images shot, and choose the good ones.
If you use Nikon's software, as you filter through them all, it allows you to mark them as good bad OK types using a rating system.
I have my system setup so that I press a number for marking them as fit to keep.
So I use the numbers from 6-9 as good, 6 being something to keep, but is not the best overall image quality.
That is it may have some other aspects to it like a specific moment in time you want to keep, but is not sharp or exposed correctly.
I don't use 1-5(there's no 0) for IQ. I use 1-5 for any specific set type purposes(eg if I'm doing testing, or maybe a panorama.

You can also use Cntrl and 1-5 as another option. This gives the image a star rating instead(not a number).
It's less easy to use Cntrl+(1-5) than it is to just press a 7 or 8 or 9 .. if you know what I mean.
Easy to do, and makes life a lot easier once you amass more and more images.

Looking forward to seeing the Tamron results.

[MadMax1412]

Tamron 18-270mm F/3.5-6.3 DI II

UV Filter off. Image Stabisation off. Timer set to 5 seconds.

ViewNX.jpg

Tamron_VF.JPG

Tamron_LV.jpg

[MadMax1412]

I was rushing this morning before heading out as I won't be home til 10pm so only chance of posting.

The first close up is View finder and second is Live View.

I only noticed when I checked via mobile just now that the photos are cropped out cutting off the name I wrote in red text.

[arthurking83]

Going on the vf shot, I reckon your Tammy is also focusing fine .. at whatever focal length you set it too(I think 18mm in the shot posted).

I'd reckon chances are that it'll focus OK for the majority of it's focal length range, but sometimes some lenses do play up at different focal lengths .. usually at the longer end.
I think the Tammy was the 18-270mm version.

If and when you get some time too, I'd say give it a quick test(just to see for yourself, more than anything) if vf focusing at longer lengths is accurate too.
Post results if you like too .. but that would be more so for your 'peace of mind'.

Note with these superzooms .. the longer you set focal length .. the less sharp they get, even stopped down.
But at middling focal lengths can be quite good.
I can't remember the specifics of the Tammy 18-270 .. but if you want portrait shots, a good focal length range to stick too as a max would be in the 85 to 135mm type range(give or take a little).

The missed Lv focus is basically normal. Obviously not a result you want to get all the time, but seen this many times in my lenses too.
Reason for it is obvious .. the focus square is much larger so the focus square sees more stuff to focus on.
Think of it as the camera isn't quite 'intelligent' to know what it is you want .. doesn't even know what's in the scene.
It just tries to focus on the most obvious thing to focus on .. which may be different to what you want it to focus on.
It seems to have focused on the wall in the background.

But I'd say that both lenses focus accuracy isn't an issue .. or at least a major issue .. to worry about.

[MadMax1412]

Thanks everyone for your input.