From Bridge to DSLR
Discussion
I've just traded up from a Panasonic FZ200 bridge camera to a Nikon 5200. I'm a little disapointed with the image quality when using a Nikon 70-300 VR zoom telephoto
Is this a pretty crap lens? On the other hand the image quality of my Nikon standard 16-85mm f/3.5-5.6.6g is pretty amazing. I'm just wondering if i'm doing something wrong with the 70-300? I'm tending to shoot everything in shutter priority mode at 320th/sec to avoid camera shake. ISO is set on auto but it's not exceeding 400 at the moment. I'm starting to think the Leica lens on my bridge camera is of better quality for tele work
Is this a pretty crap lens? On the other hand the image quality of my Nikon standard 16-85mm f/3.5-5.6.6g is pretty amazing. I'm just wondering if i'm doing something wrong with the 70-300? I'm tending to shoot everything in shutter priority mode at 320th/sec to avoid camera shake. ISO is set on auto but it's not exceeding 400 at the moment. I'm starting to think the Leica lens on my bridge camera is of better quality for tele work
Edited by rolex on Sunday 12th January 16:46
An example would be good. Don't want to be patronising but is it in focus? I found the autofocus to be pretty slow on that lens when I borrowed it. Compared to your bridge the shallow depth of field at big apertures (that you'll need to achieve 1/320s) will make everything look soft if you don't nail the focus. If you've got moving targets that might explain why you're unhappy with the results?
I was pretty impressed with the image quality of the lens for the money. If you search a site like Flickr with the lens name you can see lots of examples of some pretty sharp pictures.
I was pretty impressed with the image quality of the lens for the money. If you search a site like Flickr with the lens name you can see lots of examples of some pretty sharp pictures.
woots787 said:
An example would be good. Don't want to be patronising but is it in focus? I found the autofocus to be pretty slow on that lens when I borrowed it. Compared to your bridge the shallow depth of field at big apertures (that you'll need to achieve 1/320s) will make everything look soft if you don't nail the focus. If you've got moving targets that might explain why you're unhappy with the results?
I was pretty impressed with the image quality of the lens for the money. If you search a site like Flickr with the lens name you can see lots of examples of some pretty sharp pictures.
I would try shooting in full manual for a bit to get control (and understanding) of what is going on with the lens. The basic lens for the camera will be what the automatic systems were principally designed for, which is why you get good results with that. I was pretty impressed with the image quality of the lens for the money. If you search a site like Flickr with the lens name you can see lots of examples of some pretty sharp pictures.
davepoth said:
The basic lens for the camera will be what the automatic systems were principally designed for, which is why you get good results with that.
What?Anyway, for maximum sharpness on that lens, go out on a bright day and set manual mode. Get the shutter speed to 1/500th second or greater, switch off stabilisation, and go for an aperture of f8. Then set your ISO speed such that the exposure is good. (I'd guess at ISO 400 on a fairly bright day)
Focus on something with strong edges, that's not moving, and with some nice fine detail. A fence or sign perhaps. Shoot a few shots.
If you still can't achieve sharp results then the lens could be faulty.
budfox said:
What?
That. The automatic system is designed to work best with the "default" kit in the normal operating window for that kit, mainly because that's when it's expected that it will get the most use; some people do use SLRs as pointy-clicky cameras, although I really don't know why. At the extremes of the operating window of the camera (fast exposure times, extreme zooms, low light, not particularly obvious focusing, big lens) the automatic system (in my experience at least) will struggle to get the perfect shot. That's when knowing what everything does on the camera and being able to work it manually is useful.
I get into that sort of situation trying to take pictures without flash in the dark of a nightclub. The AF can't work out what I'm trying to do in such conditions and the light meter can't work out the flashing lights to figure out the exposure time, so I have to do everything manually and judge from experience what the settings need to be. It gets to be a natural way of working after a while.
davepoth said:
At the extremes of the operating window of the camera (fast exposure times, extreme zooms, low light, not particularly obvious focusing, big lens) the automatic system (in my experience at least) will struggle to get the perfect shot.
That doesn't mean automatic settings are designed to work best with 'ordinary' lenses, simply that they can't perform magic.It could be mis focusing, it could be shutter speed, it could be vr not settling , it could be a fault with any one of several things
The OP is using another lens perfectly well so we'll rule out a stuffed sensor but shooting at 300mm ( effective 450mm) is a whole different kind of thing to 18-55mm.
The OP is using another lens perfectly well so we'll rule out a stuffed sensor but shooting at 300mm ( effective 450mm) is a whole different kind of thing to 18-55mm.
davepoth said:
That. The automatic system is designed to work best with the "default" kit in the normal operating window for that kit, mainly because that's when it's expected that it will get the most use; some people do use SLRs as pointy-clicky cameras, although I really don't know why.
Do you have a link to substantiate that claim, because I've never heard that suggested before. If it's just personal opinion then I believe you're wrong. Nikon design their cameras to work with all of their lenses (with few exceptions such as focus motor omissions in low-end models). If they made cameras that worked best with cheap kit lenses, why would anyone pay hundreds or thousands for top end models?hELP ,GENTS & GENTESSES. Chrissy present from SWIMBO was a Fuji Finepix DSLR. On SR Auto mode - great photos, but I'm rusty from my early days on apertures/ speed times ASA settings etc. Problem is that on SR AUTO/Auto, camera needs time to setup, but I want to get shots of my dog in action .
[quote=Who me ?]hELP ,GENTS & GENTESSES. Chrissy present from SWIMBO was a Fuji Finepix DSLR. On SR Auto mode - great photos, but I'm rusty from my early days on apertures/ speed times ASA settings etc. Problem is that on SR AUTO/Auto, camera needs time to setup, but I want to get shots of my dog in action .
[/quote]
I'm guessing it's a bridge camera rather than a DSLR? Fuji haven't made a finepix DSLR for a fair few years now... If it is a bridge, best you can do with that sort of camera and moving action is to focus on a spot and wait for the subject to come into it.
All compact, bridge and mirrorless cameras use contrast detect autofocus which is notoriously poor for focusing on moving subjects. Contrast detection is very very fast and focusing on a still object (faster than most DSLRs on some newer Mirrorless cameras) but CDAF can not provide the camera any distance information so the camera has to hunt for focus, making it very slow and inaccurate for moving subjects.
DSLRs use phase detect auto focus which has it's own built in sensor to work out where an object is and tell the lens what it needs to do. This system is very fast both still and moving subjects but requires a mirror to work, hence why only DSLRs have it.
Some of the newer mirrorless cameras now are featuring "on-sensor" phase detect AF which is similar and a big step forward over contrast detect but reviews seem to suggest that it's still not as good as a proper DSLR setup.
[/quote]
I'm guessing it's a bridge camera rather than a DSLR? Fuji haven't made a finepix DSLR for a fair few years now... If it is a bridge, best you can do with that sort of camera and moving action is to focus on a spot and wait for the subject to come into it.
All compact, bridge and mirrorless cameras use contrast detect autofocus which is notoriously poor for focusing on moving subjects. Contrast detection is very very fast and focusing on a still object (faster than most DSLRs on some newer Mirrorless cameras) but CDAF can not provide the camera any distance information so the camera has to hunt for focus, making it very slow and inaccurate for moving subjects.
DSLRs use phase detect auto focus which has it's own built in sensor to work out where an object is and tell the lens what it needs to do. This system is very fast both still and moving subjects but requires a mirror to work, hence why only DSLRs have it.
Some of the newer mirrorless cameras now are featuring "on-sensor" phase detect AF which is similar and a big step forward over contrast detect but reviews seem to suggest that it's still not as good as a proper DSLR setup.
Edited by MysteryLemon on Tuesday 14th January 10:27
rolex]Thank you for the advice guys. It seems I have misjudged this lens due to some idiot leaving the VR off! said:
Nothing idiotic about that. There are plenty of reasons for switching stabilisation off. The number one reason would be when taking shots of anything that's moving a bit quick. VR will help you handhold when photographing still or slow moving things, eliminating camera shake to a good degree, but it's useless when trying to freeze something like sports action.If you're seeing better results with VR switched on then that can only be because your shutter speed was otherwise too low.
As a rule of thumb, you should be using a shutter speed of at least 1/300th when using that lens at 300mm, ideally 1/500th. Switching on the VR will drop that to around 1/125th.
Birds in flight and small birds really need high shutter speeds anyhow.
I dont have 'vr' on my 400mm and I dont miss it for that stuff but I do keep the shutter speeds up when needed.
Theres a lot of long lens technique to learn too, correct placement of hands and elbows, breathing etc.
I do miss it for panning shots at lower speeds.
I dont have 'vr' on my 400mm and I dont miss it for that stuff but I do keep the shutter speeds up when needed.
Theres a lot of long lens technique to learn too, correct placement of hands and elbows, breathing etc.
I do miss it for panning shots at lower speeds.
budfox said:
As a rule of thumb, you should be using a shutter speed of at least 1/300th when using that lens at 300mm, ideally 1/500th. Switching on the VR will drop that to around 1/125th.
I'd argue the 1/length rule should be the effective focal length - so in this case a minimum of 1/450 with VR and 1/1000 being ideal. Needless to say, VR is a big benefit either way.Gassing Station | Photography & Video | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff