d300 and soft focus with different lens

<p>I'm new here but I've been searching to find the answer to a problem i'm having with my d300. I've had it for roughly a year now and it's my FIRST dSLR. It came with the 18-200 kit lens and i have since order the Nikon 50mm 1.8 and the Tamron 28-75 2.8. I am unable to get a TACK sharp picture with any lens. I have sent the Tamron back and still waiting on the return of repair. in the mean time i bought the 50 and have the same problems so i'm wondering if n e thing was wrong with the tamron to being with. The problem is pictures are NEVER sharp. I shoot hand held with my camera set to "S" on the front (beside lens) I use toggle focus points to select my focus. In some pictures its hard to tell WHAT is in focus. It's not HORRIBLY OOF but it's enough to drive me nuts and would loook horrid on a BIG print. Is it something i'm doing wrong? or is it the camera? I konw it's probably NOT the lens since i'm having the same problem with 2 different lens.... </p>

<p>I will try to post a few pics. Forgive me if i do it incorrectly.... there were with my 50 since the tamron is in the shop... i can dig up some previous tamron pics if u think that would help??? Thanks SO much.</p>

<p>1. focus was on his head but shoes look to b in focus???<br>

<img src="http://i876.photobucket.com/albums/ab322/DealGirl19/trentsisson2.jpg" alt="" /><img src="http://i876.photobucket.com/albums/ab322/DealGirl19/trentsisson1.jpg" alt="" /></p>

<p><img src="http://i876.photobucket.com/albums/ab322/DealGirl19/adamsoftlightBURNED.jpg" alt="" /></p>

<p>First of all every digitally captured image <strong>requires </strong>some amount of sharpening. This can be done in camera or in post processing or both. The amount of sharpening will depend on the image itself and how it is to be displayed (web, print, etc.). Second, I don't think the images you have posted are overly soft. The third photo was taken at f:1.8 and from fairly close. As a result the depth of field dictates that if his eyes are in focus his ear will not be. No exif data available on the first two images.</p>

<p>Besides the sharpening issue, just about any lens will look its softest when shot wide open. Try closing the aperture down a couple of stops and see if that helps.</p>

<p>For sharpness, try the 50 f/1.8 at f/4 (where it is roughly at its best, and about as sharp as affordable lenses will ever get), and then check.<br>

The 18-200 is not the sharpest lens (but one of the most versatile), so if you're critical about sharpness, it's not the lens to test with. The 50 f/1.8 is not very sharp wide open either, it starts to deliver real sharpness from ~f/2.8 on, below that it can be a tad soft too.</p>

<p>Also check the settings for shutter release priority. For single-shot AF it should be "focus" by default, for continuous it should be "focus and release". If it is set to "release" it means you can start taking pictures before the AF achieved focus. Judging from the pictures, it's not the issue, but worth ruling out.</p>

<p>Don't shoot in (S) shutter priority, change to (A) aperture priority and close the aperture down like D.B. says. Nothing is wrong with the lens.<br>

Wider aperture i.e. smaller number in your 50s case 1.8 will give a shallow depth of focus. Your 50mm with an aperture setting of 1.8 when shooting at a distance of 3 feet will have a focal plane of about 0.85 inches so anything closer or further from that 0.85 inch sweet spot will be out of focus. Now when increase the aperture (higher number, smaller opening within the camera) that sweet spot gets larger. Taking a picture of someone 3 feet away with your 50mm and the aperture is set to 11 then the sweet spot is just shy of 6 inches. The higher the aperture number the deeper the area of crispness you'll have.<br>

Check out this DOF calculator. It will give you an idea of the ..<br>

<a href="http://www.dofmaster.com/dofjs.html">http://www.dofmaster.com/dofjs.html</a><br>

And this Wikipedia article has good examples.<br>

<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Depth_of_field">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Depth_of_field</a></p>

<p>Jessica,<br>

The not so easy answer is often provided in the capability of the D300: focus calibration<br>

of each lens that you use. This requires a tripod, flash to provide exposure speed, and<br>

a <strong>properly</strong> designed test target and correct alignment of target and camera. Then you<br>

would gain control and know if the problem is solved or lies with shake, lens or camera.<br>

It takes time and work.<br>

Gabe</p>

<p>In the size you posted the shots look ok. Bear in mind that on a face the eyes are often the only high contrast part and those need to be sharp in order to give a sharp impression. Can you post a 100% zoomed crop of the area you expected to be in focus along with shot data (lens, aperture, shutter speed)? Otherwise it's hard to say much about it.</p>

<p>A quick way to determine if there is a significant problem is to mount the camera on a tripod and using Live View focus manually - zooming in using the '+' button - on something that covers the central focusing point. Take its picture. Then switch to AF and take another picture. If everything is working as it should then the lens shouldn't need to refocus at all apart from maybe a little iterative jitter. Nevertheless the second picture should be broadly speaking as good as the first. Make sure you are using just the central focus point though!</p>

<p>These are the worst photos you could come up with to use as examples? These look great. No problems here. I have the Tamron 28-75 and it is a fantastic lens. You probably owe Tamron an apology for sending their lens back when it didn't need repair.</p>

<p>You know that when you shoot with a SLR camera you often get out of focus areas? This is because the SLR will use certain apertures which create a shallow <a href="http://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tutorials/depth-of-field.htm">depth of field</a>, something your point and shoots were never capable of. Some photographers call this "bokeh" and use it as a desired artistic effect. Shoot everything at f/8 or f/11 and you will get the pictures you are expecting.</p>

<p>Wouter, it is unfair to 'blame' the 18-200 for the OP's issue as he clearly states " I am unable to get a TACK sharp picture with any lens". I sold a friend of mine my very early production 18-200mm and it did and still does provide TACK sharp images. I am not the only one reporting this.</p>

<p>Jessica, you need to determine whether your camera is focusing correctly meaning perfectly focused on the focus point you select. If not, you need to determine whether it is front or back focusing and then fine tune the focusing for your lenses using the in-camera adjustment setting. If your camera simply does not ever under any circumstances give you ultra sharp images, you may need to send it in for service.</p>

<p>thanks everyone for your answers. <br>

Hal, i understand about bokah and apertures. that wasn't what i was getting at. I was saying that in picture 1 i focused on his head and his SHOES are sharper than his head. the details on his head are fuzzy at best. I will post a 100% crop to show what i mean... <br>

As far as Fine Tuning, I have tried that BEFORE i sent the tamron back but i really don't have the means to do the correct set up... Can someone at a camera shop do this for me?? <br>

I have also tried the Live View focusing as was mentioned and it was hard for me to tell the difference. Nothing seems as sharp as i expect it to be.</p>

<p><img src="http://i876.photobucket.com/albums/ab322/DealGirl19/trentcrop.jpg" alt="" /></p>

<p>The EXIF on the cropped pic is 50mm 3.2 ap 1/100 ss iso 400</p>

<p>I don't see (on my monitor) that his shoes are any sharper than his head. And in the crop one can see individual eyelashes which suggests that there is not a great deal of softness there. You do not comment on whether or not you have sharpened the images. I repeat, some degree of sharpening is a must with every digitally captured image.</p>

<p>The eyes are not sharp in the crop and it looks like a misfocus. Try to set up the camera on some fairly easy target but realistic target the same size as the boy and do some focus tests, first using AF then using live view and see if you get the focus where it should be and if the pic gets sharper. Do this when light is abundant, e.g. f4, 1/500 s, ISO 200.</p>

<p>I have taken the liberty of copying the posted crop, brought it into PS and applied a bit of sharpening and then saved it out as a jpeg. Not a workflow which is recommended to improve the image quality, hence the increased noise, etc. But it does give you an idea of what a bit of sharpening can accomplish.</p><div></div>

<p>Thanks Mike and Oskar. I did apply USM to every picture posted. I used 75/4/3 on all pics. Is that a good setting or no? Mike, ur sharpened version looks better but very noisey to me?? is that b/c of the small file u were dealing with? what did u use to sharpen??<br>

I did some testing with Live View but not on something the same size as the boy. That would be difficult to find. My focus point was on eye to the right (looking AT the image) the eye towards the dead space in the picture. I'm not seeing a difference between Lv view and AF??? which is good i suppose. My settings were using my Tamron (which JUST came back today) 75mm f/2.8 1/500ss 200iso. i thought i had it on f/4 but i misread it apparently. These are alot sharper i believe but VERY unrealistic settings ya know? no child will sit that still and i never take THAT much time taking a picture. However the higher SS might have helped???</p>

<p>live view picture<br>

<img src="http://i876.photobucket.com/albums/ab322/DealGirl19/duckliveview.jpg" alt="" width="800" height="531" /><br>

AF Picture<br>

<img src="http://i876.photobucket.com/albums/ab322/DealGirl19/duckaf.jpg" alt="" /><a href="http://i876.photobucket.com/albums/ab322/DealGirl19/duckaf.jpg"></a></p>

<p><img src="http://i876.photobucket.com/albums/ab322/DealGirl19/duckliveviewzoomcrop.jpg" alt="" /><br>

 <br>

100% crop of live view as well...</p>

<p>excuse my horrible typing on the image but wasn't sure how to do that. just wanted to point out what i c. thanks somuch</p>

<p><img src="http://i876.photobucket.com/albums/ab322/DealGirl19/duckliveviewzoomcropwords.jpg" alt="" /></p>

<p>Is it possible that his head was on the same plane as his knees when you focused on him, and then he rocked back a little bit just before you clicked the shutter? It looks like everything is in focus from his shoes up to his head, but I can see why you might think the head is a little fuzzier.</p>

 

<blockquote>

<p>Nothing seems as sharp as i expect it to be.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Well, the problem is either that the photos aren't sharp, or you are expecting too much. I still don't see a problem. I would say the details on his face are fuzzy at "worst", not at "best". His milky skin doesn't have much detail, so there's nothing to see there. I can see individual hairs and eyelashes that are smaller than the grains of digital noise that you can see from shooting at ISO 400. That is a good indication that he is in focus: when the details are finer than the noise.</p>

<p>Oskar and James: Why would Live View provide a better focus than using the optical view?</p>

<p>Re: the duck. It looks like your AF outdid you this time. I actually prefer the AF picture. It look like it got the eye on the right in focus a little better. Your manual focus using Live View looks like you ended up back-focusing by about 1/2".</p>

<p>I think Live View uses a different type of focus mechinism. Contrast based maybe?? </p>

<p>So maybe i'm expecting too much but i see sharp sharp pics all over the net and mine are no where near that sharp.... Is it maybe Noise that i'm seeing from shooting at 400??</p>

<p>Hal - with live view you don't manually focus. it focuses by itself....i think. right? i didn't manually focus it n e how.</p>

<p>Sorry, I thought the recommendation was that you compare the auto-focus to a manual-focus. Use the manual-focus as a "control" and see if the auto-focus can do as well.</p>

<p>Most of the really, really sharp pictures that you are probably seeing are shot with the lens "stopped down" about 2 stops. This ISN'T just to get larger depth of field. It is ALSO to compensate for some of the imperfections inherent in every lens. No lens is at its sharpest when "wide open" as your Tamron is at f/2.8, even at the plane of best focus. You have to stop down to probably f/5.6 before you can achieve the maximum potential sharpness for your lens.</p>

<p>I would really urge you to stop fretting over this, however. Your pictures are beautiful. I really, honestly, truthfully, and with ever ounce of my being do not see anything at all wrong with the 3 photos you have posted above, with the one possible exception that maybe you are using too wide an aperture and limiting your depth of field too much when you really want to be opening it up more.</p>

<p>Finally, be very careful with that USM tool. Sharpness can never be removed, and some people tend to really overdo it, like the example posted by Mike earlier. You sharpened your shots much more carefully. In the future, you might try using (Smart Sharpen --> Lens Blur) instead of USM. USM is an old tool, and maybe not your best option anymore.</p>

<p>Thanks Hal. I c now that i misread the instructions to MANUALLY focus on Live View. shoot. I will try tomorrow maybe and c.... but i feel that my SS could be some of my problem in the first pictures. and the WIDE open ap as well...<br>

What am i suppose to do tho when the light isn't enough to stop it down to 5.6 cause it puts my SS so low and i dont want to up my iso past 400 really? and i have no external flash. just the pop up which i never use....<br>

Also, on Smart Sharpen, which settings should i use with the Lens Blur? Like the amount and radius?</p>