Soft images from a D90, what could be the problem?

<p>I have been having problems getting sharp images from my Nikon D90. Image after image comes out soft no matter what, whether I stop down or use a tripod does not make a difference. I reseted the custom settings. But didn't solve the problem. For the longest time I was blaming the lens. But after testing a variety of lens, it's definitely the camera.<br>

I on purposely darkened the rest of the image, while highlighting the blown up area. This image was shot with a D90 with a <strong>24mm AIS </strong>manual focus lens. Lens set at infinity. Shutter speed 1/1000 s.<br>

<img src="http://i214.photobucket.com/albums/cc152/asusenior/Photography/zDSC_3964c.jpg" alt="" /></p>

<p>This image shot with a D300 with the same 24mm AIS lens:<br>

<img src="http://i214.photobucket.com/albums/cc152/asusenior/Photography/zDB1_8223c.jpg" alt="" /></p>

<p> Another example. This with a <strong>70-300 mm</strong> autofocus lens on the D90:<br>

<img src="http://i214.photobucket.com/albums/cc152/asusenior/Photography/zDSC_3959b.jpg" alt="" /></p>

<p>And on the D300:<br>

<img src="http://i214.photobucket.com/albums/cc152/asusenior/Photography/zDB1_8222b.jpg" alt="" /></p>

 

<p>How is sharpening set on both cameras? Also, the exposures seem very different, and I don't know how much of it is that.</p>

<p>On the first pair of images, btw, the close-up doesn't seem to match the lighting on the "full frame". Perhaps they are from different frames.</p>

<p>Also, on the last two imates, I notice that the sharpening on the D90 image is set to "normal" and on the D300 it's "hard". That could have something to do with it. And... the exposure is a little different, too.</p>

<p>How is sharpening set on both cameras? Also, the exposures seem very different, and I don't know how much of it is that.</p>

<p>On the first pair of images, btw, the close-up doesn't seem to match the lighting on the "full frame". Perhaps they are from different frames.</p>

<p>Also, on the last two imates, I notice that the sharpening on the D90 image is set to "normal" and on the D300 it's "hard". That could have something to do with it. And... the exposure is a little different, too.</p>

<p>That doesn't look like blurry, it looks like less contrasty due to exposure or raw processing or active d-lighting or something.</p>

<p>To tell you the truth, I didn't think much about the sharpening. I always leaves it on default. The default is fairly low (3rd bar from the left). I am going have to reshoot some of those images tomorrow at a higher sharpening.<br>

I on purposely darkened the picture post processing. I think I overdid it. Will get some more images tomorrow.</p>

<p>did you test the 24mm on the D300s? why did you choose 1/1000s?<br>

how about 1/500s or 1/250s?</p>

<p>Nikon takes the blame and/or the credit. The D90 and D300 have the same size sensor, but they are not identical in performance. You may never get the same results with each camera, same lighting, same lens...but you may try to do so. The same situation goes for the Nikon D3 and the Nikon D700 bodies...both are FX camera bodies, but the results are not equal.</p>

<p> </p>

<p>Check out the review on dpreview.com of the D90. Essentially the results of their testing showed it really didn't gain much resolution over the D80, and despite having the same sensor as the D300, it does not have the same internal processing, so it does not have identical image quality to the D300. A lot of people think the D90 is just a D300 with features stripped away, and this is not true. If the image quality of the D300 is what you are looking for you'll have to buy one to get it, plain and simple.</p>

<p>@ Jerry, <strong> "The same situation goes for the Nikon D3 and the Nikon D700 bodies...both are FX camera bodies, but the results are not equal."</strong><br>

never heard of that on any discussions here before. Doubt it very much.</p>

<p><em>"Image after image comes out soft no matter what, whether I stop down or use a tripod does not make a difference"</em></p>

<p>Have you tried applying a little extra sharpening?</p>

<p>What program are you opening your images with? If you are using NX, in-camera settings are applied to your images and the default sharpening/contrast differences between the two could account for the differences in your images. If you use a program like Photoshop and shoot RAW, none of the in-camera settings are taken into account when the RAW files are opened and you can perhaps get more accurate comparison shots.</p>

<p>It also appears you took the shots at vastly different times (as the contents of your crop show differences in the position of the garage door height and one of the window treatments), perhaps a different shooting location,, different lighting (the shadow areas vary) and a different camera angle. For testing purposes, you should try to keep everything equal.</p>

<p>In any case, it appears the only real differences between the two could be 'corrected' with a bit of extra sharpening to your D90 shot.</p>

<p>I find this site very reliable for comparison photos:<br>

<br /> <a href="http://www.imaging-resource.com/IMCOMP/COMPS01.HTM">http://www.imaging-resource.com/IMCOMP/COMPS01.HTM</a></p>

<p>Checking the D300 vs the D90 there, it appears there are virtually no differences.</p>

<p>Adding a bit of sharpening to your D90 shot (crop) in Photoshop seems to level the playing field per the corrected sample below. I don't believe your camera is defective is that is your thought. But if you have any doubts, why not send your camera in for a checkup.</p>

<p> </p><div></div>

<p>"<em>Cameras with same sensors, but with different performance...</em> "<br /> As far as I know, the anti-aliasing filters are very important in current camera performance. There could be a noticeable difference here. I have read anywhere that it also highly affects camera costs.</p>

<p>Just a guess, but i would say you have two different "picture control settings" the top looks like "standard" and the bottom image looks like "vivid" look at the yellow poles at the bottom of each pic, the d300 is more vibrant yellow, while the d90 is kinda dull.<br>

If you are using the same settings, then check your WB, maybe you could use a grey card to set both cameras, then try your comparison.<br>

Sharp or not sharp, there is no way the two cameras are that far apart in colour rendition.</p>

<p>The D90 does indeed have sharpening set kinda low by default compared to other cameras.</p>

<p>J W, after a little tweaking and re-testing, I'd love to know if you can get them closer. That said, the pixel-peeping differences that are shown here will not, I am guessing, make a huge difference in final printed output. We should also keep that thought in mind.</p>

<p>Reading through the Magic Lantern D90 Guide, It recommends that if you are using the JPEG files to print directly, then you should slightly increase the in-camera sharpening. If you are shooting primarily in NEF format with intent to post-process, then they recommend reducing the in-camera sharpening to 0. This will give a soft shot in jpeg, but will allow for shapening to be done in post-process without the risk of doubling up.<br>

These settings can be adjusted in the Shooting Menu, under Picture Control, by modifying one of the existing settings, ie: Standard, Neutral ect. These have different sharpening settings by default, as well as contrast, brightness, saturation, and hue.<br>

Hope this helps you to get the best out of your camera,<br>

cheers :)</p>

<p>Both the D90 and D300 were shot in their standard picture mode (not vivid). I have shot both Raw and Jpeg and it doesn't seem to make a difference in picture quality. I have used Capture NX, Micrografx (an old program), and Lightroom to view the pictures. They all looked the same to me. I will test out the D90 with higher sharpening and see what happens. I took thousands of pictures with the D90 on a trip a couple months ago. The softness is similar to what camera shake or misfocus would look like. But I know that is not the case.</p>

<p>J W,</p>

<p>I have the same issue right now in figuring out how best to set this camera (although I'm not comparing it to anything, just trying to figure out how best to set the sharpening).</p>

<p>As far as picture modes, right now I'm using Vivid and sharpening just a tad more than vivid calls for. I'm very interested in finding out what you come up with, and may do my own tests here shortly. Obviously, the defaults on these two cameras produce wildly different images (okay, maybe not wildly, but clearly different), but I suspect that you will be able to get the two cameras to take very very similar photos, as the reviews I've read state clearly that this is possible.</p>

<p>"...I took thousands of pictures with the D90 on a trip a couple months ago." And now for the rest of the story... Have you had (a guess?) your D90 in for a service check at Nikon? With thousands of exposures, the camera *<strong>in the consumer class</strong>* may be a bit worn out already. It does not have the shutter life cycles that a Nikon D700 or D3 has.</p>

<p> </p>

<p>Might be worth checking with Nikon if you can't figure out the soft image problem but the D90 is rated to 100,000 shutter cycles right from Nikon: "Durable, high precision shutter: Testing to over 100,000 cycles assures shutter life and accuracy." I can't see it being a wear issue. My D80 have 10,000 cycles when I gave it to my Dad and it still works flawlessly (except the matrix metering tending to overexposure in certain situations which is well documented.)</p>

<p>I have my sharpness set higher than default with my D90 and still sharpen a little more in Photoshop.</p>

<p>Your image from the D90 is underexposed. See how dark those buildings are? I would test again with more even exposure between the two images.</p>

<p>j w-i would check some items. 1. make sure that EVERY SETTING in the d90 and d300 are set the same. there is an obvious coloration diffewrence between the test shots. that should be accounted for. 2. as a suggestion, and a big one, set the sharpening to slightly above the neutral or middle position. THEN, AND MOST IMPORTANT, plan and do some sharpening in pping. ALL dslrs are meant to have their images pped to some extent, and this includes sharpening. what i would try if you have pse or csx is to simply use auto sharpen in the image menus. this would adjust the sharpening to the standard amount that the auto setting is set for. and if one dslr takes more than the other then that dslr would get it. then do a comparison. 3. when shooting make sure the lens iso shutter speed and fstop are the same with no EC adjustment in either camera. 4. i personally would not expect 2 different models from the same maker to give identical results. even if the sensors are the same size. there is no guernetee that the incamera processing is the same. in fact, they very are not. if they were the same then what would be the sense of making 2 different models? the 2 dslr internally would be too close to end up with 2 legitemently different models.</p>

<p>When I read the Dpreview review of the D90 it was mentioned that the D90 was softer than the D300.</p>

<p>Stuart,</p>

<p>Did it say that or did it say that the default setups in the D90 were softer?</p>

<p>You'd really need to take the two raw files and put a few minutes into making them the same to judge if there are real differences. Like I said, I wouldn't have said one of these is sharper than the other unless you'd told me that was true, but the exposure isn't the same and the color and contrast treatment are different. You're just seeing a lot of speculation now on why a D90 would be less sharp when there's nothing here to suggest that's true. How fine can you split two these hairs when one of your knives is dull? Or something to that effect.</p>

<p>Here is one page that mentions the difference between the D300 and D90</p>

<p>http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/nikond90/page29.asp</p>

<p>And here is the other page that suggests why there could be such differences.</p>

<p>http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/nikond90/page33.asp</p>

<p>The D90 has 16k actuations. Should not be anywhere close to worn out.</p>