Jump to content

Nikon 17-55mm Camera Shake?


nick herbert

Recommended Posts

<p>Every now and then I will take several shots using my D200 and 17-55mm f/2.8 which all turn out to be 'out of focus'. There just doesn't seem to be anywhere in the image that is in focus. I originally thought there was a problem with the lens/camera. However, I have had plenty of ultra-sharp images from this lens. The only explanation I can come up with would be blur from camera/lens shake due to the lens being very heavy. I don't seem to have this problem with any of my other lenses.<br>

Does anyone else have experience of this problem with this lens?</p>

<p> </p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 65
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

<p>If you can post a 100% crop from one of those troubled images, including EXIF data, and with the cropped area showing some detailed features - that will usually provide the forensics to see what's going on. Certainly, at slow enough shutter speeds, you could absolutely be introducing enough camera wiggle to do the deed. For me, though, heavier lenses actually help me to reduce movement. But then, I'm an orangutan, so you never know.<br /><br />It is also possible that you've got your D200 set up for shutter release priority, not focus priority, and you're actually getting the shot off before focus has settled down.</p>
Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>What aperture are you shooting at? I know 17-55mm is fairly wide angle, but if you're using f/2.8 a lot the range of focus isn't going to be terribly deep.</p>

<p>The reason I bring this up is that I recently tried some concert photography with an 85mm f/1.8 and, naturally, cranked it open to f/1.8. Even though I was shooting from distances of 10-15 feet, f/1.8 left too little in focus and most of the shots looked *off*. The next opportunity I had with the same band I used f/4 and things were much better. </p>

<p>Now I'm thinking I need a newer generation body with good ISO 3200...</p>

<p> </p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>Hmmm, could it be because you have been shooting for quite a while and your arms ache? I know I have that problem once in a while when shooting events; especially with the SB-800 on too.</p>

<p>But as Matt suggested, a photo with the EXIF data would certainly help us better understand what might be the problem.</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>Matt... :) I won't argue about you being an orangutan or not... :) but I am slim and not tall but I also feel my camera more stable when using a heavy lens like my 17-55 than when using a small prime. Also the heavy lens and heavy camera combo helps me to stay grounded when the wind blows to hard. :) Before I thought that was strange but here in P/N I heard about many people who think the same way as we (you & I) do.</p>
Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>I have the same problem. I just took about 400 pictures of my kids today for their 9 month pictures using a D90 and the 17-55. Almost half of them came out blurry. Nothing in the photo was in focus.<br>

Earlier this week I took probably 30 pictures of the inside of a house that was flooded. D90 and 17-55, most of the time at 2.8. I was photographing entire rooms, so I know that everything wouldn't be in focus. There are plenty of those pictures where nothing in the room is in focus. I came home that night and put the camera on a tripod and took a bunch of pictures. I had the same problem, even using smaller apertures.<br>

I have no idea what the problem is. I feel like I might be doing something wrong, like introducing camera shake, but I got the same results on a tripod.</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>I hope this is correct. I had to read up on 100% crops, as I didn't know what that meant. Here is a picture. I used auto focus, aimed between the eyes, then slightly recomposed the photo. The center of the picture was on his right cheek.</p>
Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>I hope this is correct. I had to read up on 100% crops, as I didn't know what that meant. Here is a picture. I used auto focus, aimed between the eyes, then slightly recomposed the photo. The center of the picture was on his right cheek.</p><div>00TMSs-134667784.jpg.c5d74e0c164a36936629c4d314760e35.jpg</div>
Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>That looks out of focus -- not a result of camera shake. I'm not sure what to say. Was it in-focus in the viewfinder when you took this shot? Are you using manual override after it autofocuses? Are you in AF-A, AF-S or AF-C mode?</p>
Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>You need to aim at something with a structure, some graphical structure or edge the AF can focus on (forgive the pun). See the camera manual for examples. There is not much between the eyes, just skin. Try to aim right to one eye. Note that recomposing can destroy your focus, particularily when shooting wide open.</p>
Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>I have occsionally been caught out with an AF-S lens with an out of focus image like this. My exposures were sometimes just out of focus - I worked out that it was my handling / lens skills that were at fault. I was using AF to focus on my desired spot but my left hand was on rare occasions brusing the manual focus ring just after the AF had set itself thus taking the subject out of focus. Maybe this is the same habit occuring in these two instances?</p>

<p> </p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>Jason,</p>

<p>Also... 1/50th on that lens at 48mm might be slow for getting things sharp, too (also in the mirror-slap range, I believe). I generally use the 35mm equivalent focal length to determine my exposure in the 1/xxx formula where xxx is your focal length and 1/xxx is your shutter speed. I round up. Which means that I would have considered 1/100 the right speed indoors without flash for that image. Could've bumped up the ISO.</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>I shot in AF-S. No manual override or fine tuning by me. All my pictures look in focus when I take them. Of course, seeing something in focus in the viewfinder doesn't always translate into an in-focus picture on the screen when you blow it up. I don't see how people can manual focus. I can turn the focus ring very slightly one way or the other and not notice a difference in the viewfinder. My eye sight was 20/40 last time I had it tested.</p>

<p>Michael, I have tried focusing on everything. The focus always snaps into place immediately like it has a sharp focus lock. When I try to focus on something less contrasty, like a wall, it will hunt and never find a focus point (understandably). Can recomposing from a front-on shot where the new center is on the same plane only inches from the original point (between eyes to upper cheek) really matter that much? I was probably 6 feet away while taking these pictures. The aperture of 3.5 for this picture (I think) should give me enough DOF for the whole face to be in focus.</p>

<p>Peter, I'm not sure what you are talking about. I'm new to DSLRs. I'm not sure what shutter speed has to do with sharpness, other than camera shake. What is mirror slap?</p>

<p>Thanks for the ideas.</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>Jason, thank goodness I am not alone. I fully understand your frustration.<br>

I took over a hundred shots of my daughter on her 4th birthday the other day. She was dressed up like a princess when I took some full length portrait shots (indoor, ISO200, f4 with flash). Not one of them turned out in perfect focus. I was gutted - I may get away with them printed at 6x4. No chance of any larger. (The shutter speed was 1/60th - but she was stationary/posing for the camera).<br>

We then went outside where I took plenty of shots of her on her new bike (f5.6, ISO200). Again, every one of them blurred. (Shutter speeds ranged from 1/80th to 1/100th).<br>

Since reading the responses in this thread, I've since taken some test shots to see if it was in fact possible for me to be 'nudging' the focus ring as I press the shutter. Impossible. My hand is no-where near - its actually gripping/supporting the lens hood which I find is the most comfortable and 'sturdy' place to steady my aim.<br>

The only thing I can put it down to is camera shake. Maybe my grip with this particular lens is not that sturdy after all. I have never seemed to have this problem with any other lenses.<br>

I'm going to try some more shots but bump the ISO up to see if the faster shutter speeds make any difference. I hope to god they do - this thing cost me a fortune!</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>Does nobody else see what looks like some vertical shake evident in this photo? I could be wrong but I'm seeing this at the tops of the ears, for example, and in the light's reflections in the eyes. 1/50 at 48mm on DX is prime shutter speed for this kind of shake. In fact, I'd be surprised if your shots <em>were</em> sharp.</p>

<p>It is possible to get sharp shots at 1/focal length shutter speeds but it requires steady hands and excellent camera holding technique.</p>

<p>My advice is to use higher ISO or wider apertures (is possible, not sure what this was shot at), or use a little fill flash to up the lighting, when shooting in this kind of environment. To be safe your shutter speed should be something like quadruple the focal length the lens is set at, and even then you have to take at least a little care.</p>

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>What are you referring to with focus priority? I looked all through the camera menu and didn't see anything about it.</p>

<p>Nicholas, did you try shots on a tripod? I did, and it didn't seem to make much of a difference. I just got this lens a couple of weeks ago. I want to love it, but I have much better results with my 18-105mm and 50mm 1.4 lenses. </p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>Jason, if your 18-105 is a VR lens (I'm not aware of any other version), then I would again suspect camera shake. A tripod does not necessarily rule this out. Tripod technique is a discussion to itself and a cheap tripod - if that is what you're using - is just as bad as no tripod within a fairly broad range of shutter speeds.</p>

<p>Focus priority is only a settable function on the higher end bodies. If you're using one of the consumer bodies it is not user-selectable and varies with other focus settings you choose. With the camera set to AF-S, you should always get good focus before it will let the shot be taken.</p>

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>I had trouble using my 17-55mm f2.8 on a D200. When I moved to a D300, the problem went away. Now I can shoot f2.8 - f4 without any problem.<br /> It could have been a camera problem, or it could have been a personal problem, I don't know.<br /> Just my 2¢</p>
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



×
×
  • Create New...