What are we doing wrong with this lens?

Discussion in 'Nikon' started by noneofyour_beeswax, May 25, 2009.

  1. My wife bought this $700 lens and it is taking terrible pictures. She is convinced that this is the way the lens is supposed to work and wants to sell it. I'm convinced she doesn't know how to use it correctly and that if used properly it would take good pictures.
    She has a Nikon D70
    The Lens is a Tamrom SP AF70-200mm F/2.8 Di LD(IF)MACRO
    The camera was on "Auto"
    The Fstop was at 2.8
    This is how the photos are turning out, what are we doing wrong:
    [​IMG]
    [​IMG]
     
  2. What's the shutter speed at in these?
     
  3. (too fast on the sumbit button)
    Reason I ask is looks like camera shake to me.
     
  4. exif says 1/1000 for the first and 1/800 on the second one... some definately looks horribly wrong here! I hope you bought the lens new, return it immediately!
     
  5. is she using a tripod? might help.
     
  6. Camera shake defiitely seems to be playing a role here. However you are shooting wide open and the limited depth of field is also contribuiting to what appears to be blur but is also just sections of the picture not in focus. Also interested in your shutter speed as well as your focal length, seems you may have been at the longer end of your zoom which can also emphasize dof. Try taking some pics in bright daylight at 70mm. If your camera is still running the lens at 2.8 try shooting in aperture priority and stopping down a little bit.
     
  7. I would return the lens.
     
  8. Well it looks like an acceptable shutter speed at 1/1000s & 1/800s - -
    My question has to be - - why were you shooting it wide open? You have a very narrow dof then & it is going to cause problems. I would imagin that stopped down to an f/8 you'll get far better results & better dof.
    Many lenses are soft wide open.
    Oh & the second shot - focus is not on the dog - it's in the grass.
    So - operator error in shooting wide open would be my first suggestion & since I have no idea how much this lens weighs - - it could be to heavy for her. So is it your wife - - as a woman I can write this - - yes, she does not know how to use it. I would not shoot that lens wide open until I'd tested it.
    Lil :)
     
  9. So you guys think there is something physically wrong with it? That would be lame... We've had it for several months already.
     
  10. She does complain that it is heavy. But she used it on a tripod for the first shot.
     
  11. Looks mainly like a focus issue to me, along with narrow depth of field. Take the camera off "Auto" and put it on Aperture priority or Manaul. Then try some shots at f/8 or f/11, in bright daylight, and see how the lens does. If it still shows problems, you may have a bad lens, but as mentioned previously many lenses are soft wide open, at f/2.8 you have a very narrow depth of field (and so only the grass near the dog and the central part of the fence may actually be in focus), and until you do some real testing, operator error is the likely source of these problems.
     
  12. Focus is on the grass in the second shot but there's no visible plane of focus in the outer areas of the image - it looks like a weird zoom-effect. The picture was shot at 120mm - assuming the performance doesn't get better zoomed-in I would say there's something wrong.
     
  13. rnt

    rnt

    I think it's likely an optical problem with the lens. The radial distortion on the first image looks a lot like the lens was zoomed during the exposure (unlikely to be true given the shutter speed) or that it was taken with a lensbaby or close relative. Try to get another lens of the same type and compare results...
     
  14. These almost look as though the lens's zoom ring was being changed as the exposure was being taken.
     
  15. Its a bad copy of the lens, I have a pentax smc 28mm f2.8 that does the same thing when its shot wide open. Return the lens and try a different copy.
     
  16. Ok,
    I've given her the info provided here.
    With the Fstop at a higher rate 10 - 20 and the pictures turn out good, but are dark.
     
  17. if you stopped down the lens to 10-20 you need to adjust the shutter speed so that the images are exposed correctly.
    let us know how that went
    but mabye try it at f/4 f8 f11 and see what it gives you.
    good luck
     
  18. Both images look like she might have been twisting the zoom ring as she took the photo.
    Is the macro setting on? That might mess up focus when you are zooming instead.
     
  19. As was mentioned ....
    Set the camera to Aperture Priority and adjust the aperture from 2.8, to 4 , to 5.6, to 8, then 11 .. etc, taking a shot at each setting. The camera will adjust the shutter speed properly so the shots should not come out too dark. Make sure you don't have any filters on the lens either. If there is a macro switch on the lens, turn it off, unless you are doing an extreme closeup shot.
    Like some have noticed, It looks like only a center spot is on focus, not a "plane " of focus at the same distance. I would like to see some other shots, to be sure, but .... I would think it's possibly time to send the lens to Tamron for repair.
     
  20. In the first picture the white mid section of the two cows are sharp. In a picture like this she needs to focus on what she wants to focus on in the middle of the pictice, or stop it down to f/8 so you have more depth of field in focus. Now I think more about it, What autofocus setting was she using? Have your wife try using setting AF-C and Single Area. Good luck and post back with your test shots.
     
  21. If you look close, the blur is from different angles..... in the first pic at the top the blur is an up and down motion......toward the bottom it is diagnal left to right.....and then on the left side it is blurred side to side....
    The only thing that I would say could cause this is MAYBE the lens is on the macro setting. I cant think of anything else that would make it focus weirdly like this. It is not DOF, there is no visable plane, its blurred in all kinds of weird places.....and at 1/800 and 1/1000, its not normal motion blur. My first instinct was zoom blur but its all over the place as i said before. MAYBE, and i say MAYBE, she was focusing AND zooming at the same time while taking a pic??? but you said it was on a tripod?......
    Try a timer setting picture from a tripod, in good light, with a high shutterspeed and say f/4 or f/8. See what happens there. If that is good then go back to 2.8. But if you cant get it to work on a tripod....then SEND IT BACK BECAUSE ITS DEFECTIVE....
    Hope we helped....
     
  22. I have to say that like some of the other posters, there seems to be something very wrong with those shots. What lens?
    Before damning the lens, I would try a couple of simple tests:
    1. Shoot a flat subject with detail across the field-of-view (the side of a building is good) that is parallel to the sensor-plane. Use a tripod, "One shot AF" and a fairly high shutter speed. Take photos wide-open and for a couple of stops down. You should have pretty even sharpness across the entire frame with incremental improvements as you stop down from wide-open to about f/8.
    2. Check for front/back focus with one of the test charts (Tim Jackson's or Bob Atkins' , for example).
     
  23. The lens does say "Macro" on the box. But there is no macro setting on the lens that I can find.
    I posted the name of the lens at the top... but here's a link to the manfacturers page: http://www.tamron.com/lenses/prod/70200_di.asp
     
  24. I just want to add my two cents worth. This lens weighs almost 3lbs. I have the sigma version which is a little heavier and my photos which were handheld came out like this. Try shooting off a tripod and raise the aperture to f/4 or f/5.6. If it still doesn't produce the desired affect take it back as you might have a bad copy.
     
  25. When one or two corners are out of focus as is demonstrated here, The lens has an optical problem. This is a severs problem uncharacteristic of Tamron lenses
    Return it to the store or send it in for warrantee service.
     
  26. The most prominent pattern of blurring in both images are centered at and rediates from the very center of themselves. This is indicative of change of FL or movement of the zoom ring while the shots were taken. There's also some general motion blur due to camera shake and subject motion.
     
  27. I'd say its a crook lens. It's trying to focus in the center but not further. My guess is that an element is not moving correctly. You should see it stopped down. Go back to the shot with the camera and exchange it for a Sigma HSM or Tokina ATX pro. Of these three generic brands I'd put Tamron third in the quality stakes. For $700 you would not be far away from a genuine Nikon or Canon secondhand.
     
  28. The focus effect looks very similar to that of a Lensbaby. I suggest you take the lens back and ask for a replacement as it definitely shouldn't behave the way it is.
     
  29. *Just further to my post, I'd only take it back if the effect is not being caused by the operator turning the zoom/focus rings on accident/purpose during the capture of the image.
     
  30. How do they look if you stop it down and try the same shots?
    I'm not suggesting that it should be that lousy at f/2.8, of course. I am just wondering if it is worth a hang at any aperture.
    --Lannie
     
  31. Camera shake defiitely seems to be playing a role here.​
    Nope. If it were camera shake, the central part of the image would be that terrible, too.
    --Lannie
     
  32. When you stop it way down (which you obviously must), be sure that you are shooting aperture priority. (That will solve the problem of the dark image--unless there really is not enough light.)
    Even so, the lens should do much better than this at f/2.8. It is flawed somehow. Yes, lenses do not typically perform as well wide open, nor do they typically perform as well around the edges as in the middle, but this is ridiculous.
    --Lannie
     
  33. She is convinced that this is the way the lens is supposed to work and wants to sell it.​
    Sell? Who would want to buy it? Return it to the store asap. If you didn't zoom during shooting it's a totally trashed copy. It happens and even "name brand" lenses can be out of whack sometimes, this is not a Tamron problem.
    Shooting at different apertures doesn't matter. Lenses can be a bit softer wide open but no lens in the world should look like this. (Lensbaby excluded.)
     
  34. This lens have an push-pull clutch AF activation mechanism. The default position ( from the factory) for AF function is set to OFF. Just grab the focus ring and pull'it 2mm. Voila , the lens will work flawlessly.
     
  35. Here are some examples I took as my canon 70-200 is usm as it was new. Shot at 2.8 some as slow as 1/100sec http://www.pbase.com/cwakefield/70_200 I am sure your Tamron lens is about the same. I would exspect the same sort of results.
     
  36. Paul B., I admittedly do not know this lens, nor do I own any Tamron lens. Therefore, I concede that you could be correct, but what you say makes absolutely no sense to me. The center of the image is in focus.
    Still, I guess it is worth a try before sending the lens back. . . .
    --Lannie
     
  37. So everyone agrees the lens is bad?
    Basically, it seems to do this when the Apereture is set bellow 3 or so.
     
  38. It might look like some misaligned group inside the lens. Definitely, this IS NOT the way it's supposed to work.
     
  39. So everyone agrees the lens is bad?​
    Apparently we are in agreement, although you might just try what Paul B. suggests above: move the focus ring a bit prior to shooting to see if that corrects the problem. I cannot believe that that is going to work, but I suppose that it is worth a try before you send it back. The idea that there might be some "push-pull clutch AF activation mechanism" (in the words of Paul B.) seems unlikely to me. Even if there is such a mechanism, it is hard to see how that would cause this particular kind of problem.
    Still, I guess that it is worth a try before you send it back: before you shoot the picture, "just grab the focus ring and pull it 2mm.," as Paul B. says.
    Why am I not optimistic that that is going to solve the problem? If you try it, in any case, push or pull it more than 2 mm.
    --Lannie
     
  40. I strongly suggest asking an experienced photographer in your town to go on a shoot with your wife. Let that person take some shots and then let your wife take some shots at exactly the same shooting variables (focal length, ISO, aperture, shutter speed). Then, upload both sets of images to a computer and review for sharpness. If both sets of images are unsharp, you have a defective lens--possibly because of one or more decentered elements.
     
  41. The first image the camera is trying to focus on the rope cable in front of the fence.
    The second image you need to set camera off the auto mode and use A mode or M, set the aperture to about f4, put the focus to continuous and if you do not have a fast shutter speed up the iso untill you get no less than 15000 sec, track the dog with your shutter button half pressed when the dog fills more of the frame press shutter all the way down and hold it there while tracking the dog, this will take quite a few shots but you can then choose the best afterwards.
    It is not a lens fault.
    Terry.
     
  42. I have been looking for one of these lenses, I am willing to give it a shot if you do not want to send it back to Tamron
     
  43. Terry, can you dublicate that insane uneven radial blur by shaking your camera or misfocusing?
    Btw: Exif indicates no auto mode was used.
     
  44. Apparently we are in agreement, although you might just try what Paul B. suggests above: move the focus ring a bit prior to shooting to see if that corrects the problem. I cannot believe that that is going to work, but I suppose that it is worth a try before you send it back. The idea that there might be some "push-pull clutch AF activation mechanism" (in the words of Paul B.) seems unlikely to me. Even if there is such a mechanism, it is hard to see how that would cause this particular kind of problem.
    Still, I guess that it is worth a try before you send it back: before you shoot the picture, "just grab the focus ring and pull it 2mm.," as Paul B. says.
    Why am I not optimistic that that is going to solve the problem? If you try it, in any case, push or pull it more than 2 mm.
    --Lannie
    ---
    What he is talking about is that if you push/pull on the focus ring, it turns auto focus on and off.
    We know about that ring, she has autofocus turned on.
     
  45. You can try that, but since the center is focused, I really don t see how this is a focusing problem.
    Unless she was playing with the zoom ring while shooting (as already mentioned), the lens must be a bad copy.
    I also don t see how it is an aperture issue... stopping it down might fix the image a bit, but it is supposed to work wide open as well. The images depict extreme distortion that resembles movement of some kind, not out of focus blur or normal quality reduction on the edges.
    In case you still have doubts about how the lens is supposed to perform, you can see proper samples taken with it using the link below, but my suggestion would be to go to the store right away... and you probably postponed that too much already...
    http://www.pbase.com/cameras/tamron/sp_af_70-200mm_f28_di_ld_if_macro
     
  46. The top image looks like a Lensbaby photo, not the appropriate output. My guess is you have an element significantly out of alignment. No, it is not "how the lens is supposed to work"...
     
  47. Ive seen this before on re-cleaned legacy glass where reassemble was done incorrectly and an element was reversed.
     
  48. I think you need to send it back, there is something wrong with it. I checked the exif info and they should be sharp photos at those shutter speeds. You might make sure that you have it set to autofocus, other than that sometimes taking a photo of a dog running you should use continous focus setting to the AF will track the dog. Unless your shaking that camera pretty bad while shooting, it's hard to not get a sharp photo at 1/1000 shutter speed. I would get it replaced, if you bought it new they will replace it no problems.
     
  49. Terry, can you dublicate that insane uneven radial blur by shaking your camera or misfocusing?
    Btw: Exif indicates no auto mode was used.
    Kari i did not use auto mode i never do.
    The first image looks as though the camera was trying to focus on the rope in front of the fence, also 1/1000 sec would not be fast enough if there was camera movement, if this was shot at 200mm (310mm on this camera) common practice states twice the focal lenth for minimum shutter speed (310mm = 620 sec min shutter speed for still subjects) but if the camera was not held steady you will get blur. If you look at the second image the dog is in near focus and the rest of the image is out of focus as should be at f2.8, if the shutter was faster and continous focus was used the dog would be much sharper but the rest of the image would still look the same (out of focus at f2.8)
    I would try some more images with the camera set up right first, or let someone more experienced use the camera and lens before sending the lens back, i still think it is user error and not the lens.
     
  50. Well, if the AF is on, it seems that you have an unique Tamron-Lensbaby which may worth a fortune someday. You should contact Tamron because this lens need internal elements (or bayonet) realignement. Good luck !


    Thanks R.K. for expanding my theory(supposition).
     
  51. [[common practice states twice the focal lenth for minimum shutter speed (310mm = 620 sec min shutter speed for still subjects)]]
    I have never heard anyone say this. Common practice is shutter speed ~= field of view.
     
  52. I am not sure there is anything is wrong with this lens. One cannot tell very well from these images. Especially without the exif information being supplied for focus protocol, etc. Was it single servo, continuous, predictive, etc.?
    The wide aperture, especially wide open, on a telephoto will give a very narrow depth of focus. Often we want that to isolate a portion of the image.
    1st picture is of a subject and environment where nearly any camera's autofocus would be challenged. Where is it supposed to choose to put the focus, the grass in foreground, the wire, the fence, the cow's body or the cow's head? I have a D70s, and one of the things that interferes with autofocus from time to time is the large size of the five focus areas available. If there are more than one object within the focus area selected by the photographer (BTW, which focus protocol was being used?), then the autofocus has to choose between portions of the image within the autofocus area. What it will do on some occasions is just split the difference with the result that nothing is in focus. Image one is definitely a manual focus subject. For more than the cow's face (and maybe more than one of them), stopping down the aperture is called for to increase depth of field.
    The 2nd image, the running dog, on a curved field of grass, is something again that this camera (or any camera) may not be able to cope with either. At least not in the mode selected. The dog is a moving target. The curved grass field offers iteself as a focusing target as well. Predictive focus might have been able to predict the focus change on the moving dog between the time the shutter control was first pressed and focus measued and the lag time when the shutter actually operated. Single servo would likely be off, and not the best choice. Predictive is good, but not perfect. And, again, the autofocus areas on the D70 are large. (One of the reasons I upgraded after a couple of years even though the camera can make stunning images.) So, how much of this distant dog filled the focus area selected and how much of it was some portion of the grass? Another issue is the focusing speed of this lens? Is it screwdriver or does it have an internal focusing motor as a corollary to Nikon's AFS or Sigma HSM? I am not that familiar with Tamron's alphabet soup lens specs. If screwdrive, or even AFS imitator, the dog could have moved between focus measurement and shutter activation. Screwdrive lens are not noted for fast autofocus nor for the ability to follow a moving subject.
    I would not send the lens back until it is tested on targets within the camera's ability to automatically focus, with subjects that fill the focus area, and with the focus protocol that is appropriate to the subject, e.g., single servo, continuous, predictive, etc.
    Let us know, and perhaps supply full data. Just my $.02.
     
  53. "Thanks L.K. ( not R.K.)" Sorry Landrum Kelly , just a typo...
     
  54. BTW, my apologies if exif data are available in the images. I am not at my computer with editing software that can read the exif, and so must deal with the visible image and my knowledge of the operation of the D70/70s. Focus mode could very well be an issue here.
     
  55. "If there are more than one object within the focus area selected by the photographer (BTW, which focus protocol was being used?), then the autofocus has to choose between portions of the image within the autofocus area. What it will do on some occasions is just split the difference with the result that nothing is in focus. Image one is definitely a manual focus subject. For more than the cow's face (and maybe more than one of them), stopping down the aperture is called for to increase depth of field."
    this occurred to me as well. it looks like the camera got confused by the wire and focused on the rope. also the DoF here is very shallow, which is why the cow is OoF.
    "Another issue is the focusing speed of this lens? Is it screwdriver or does it have an internal focusing motor as a corollary to Nikon's AFS or Sigma HSM? I am not that familiar with Tamron's alphabet soup lens specs. If screwdrive, or even AFS imitator, the dog could have moved between focus measurement and shutter activation. Screwdrive lens are not noted for fast autofocus nor for the ability to follow a moving subject."
    AFAIK, the tamron has a micromotor. DP review notes its AF is slow, so it would not be the best choice for action, especially on a D70, which doesnt have the fastest AF speed. that is not the fault of the lens or the camera per se, but rather a corollary of their limitations. for still life and portraits, that 70-200 is supposed to be pretty good.
    i would second david's opinion to do further testing of this lens under more optimal conditions, before chucking it up as a lemon.
     
  56. Could you guys provide specific examples of tests we could do? She's more than happy to take pictures and post them here for your opinion.
     
  57. I think maybe you should do what the others have suggested, Mr.noneofyourbeeswax and do some test shots and post them or just take the dam thing back already!
     
  58. "Could you guys provide specific examples of tests we could do?"
    try a static subject (test charts, brick wall, fence post, flowers, stop signs) with a tripod in aperture-priority mode at apertures from f/2.8-f/16. stick to base ISO. if you can replicate your results above under controlled conditions, you may have an issue with the lens. otherwise, it's most likely UE (user error).
    you may also want to bracket exposures with different AF and metering settings under varying conditions to see how that affects lens performance. in general, AF-S (single) results in better sharpness than AF-C (continuous), since the camera wont fire without a focus dot confirmation.
    good luck!
     
  59. I would say it's bad.
    In the first shot, the wire fence is nearly parallel to the plane of focus. It doesn't look like "zoom effect" to me, as it's not consistent enough, nor truly radial around the center. Look at the wooden post at left and the fence wire at both left and right, along with the parts of the cattle not at center. The "blur" appears to go lower left/upper right. The tree in the background appears to be blurred in a somewhat perpendicular direction. Also the weeds in the foreground are blurred more to the left side than the right. This is also seen in the second shot; sort of an off-center zoom effect.
     
  60. subjects are moving, the dog for sure, so she might be zooming in (or out) and might have depressed the shutter while doing that. shutter finger too quick for the zooming to be settled.
     
  61. Are you holding just the camera? You should be holding the camera body with one hand while the other hand supports the lense, especially with a longer lense. I notice a lot of people who hold a long lensed camera by holding only the body and no support on the lense, then they wonder why the image isn't sharp, even at 1/800 - 1/1000 it won't be fast enough to give a sharp image. Would you hold a rifle by only the stock and expect to hit the target?
     
  62. Sorry, guys.. but there is no way this can be a motion blur or focus problem. Be cause the blur is not consistent within the frame. They seem to be ok in one spot, but the rest of the photo shows blurring which is impossible to produce with out of focus or blurred shots (even zooming). The lower part shows a kind of blur that MIGHT look like some zooming during shutter release.. But the movement is NOT radial, and the upper part has no signs of those "comas". The upper part might seem out of focus, but the distance is the same as the points which are in focus.
    And then.... misaligned elements. Have the lens replaced. Full stop.
    That is, unless you like this "creative" output: it's not bad for some kind of images! ;-)
     
  63. Terry Foster : Kari i did not use auto mode i never do.​
    I meant that OP's image was shot in aperture priority, not in auto as stated in his post.
    You didn't mention how you can dublicate that kind of sharp center + uneven blur with a normal working lens. It's so bad it looks like home made tilt-lens.
     
  64. The pictures are not merely blurred but distorted as one moves outward from the center.
    This is a bad lens, period.
    --Lannie
     
  65. I'm not technical expert, but when I first looked at those images it looked like it could have been taken with a wide angle lens because of the distortion. But because it's clearly not a wide angle lens, something definitely isn't right. I have many shots using the 70-200 2.8 nikon lens for my equine gallery and none of them look like that. Have a look at my gallery if you like. I know it's a nikon lens and is most likely better optically but yours really shouldn't be THAT different.
    http://www.photo.net/photodb/folder?folder_id=863401
    I know I took some at 2.8, I'm just not sure how to pull up the exif data, or if those images at 2.8 are in my gallery... I did all mine hand held. Anyways you should really just send it to the manufacturers and have them give it a good tune up. Unfortunately I don't think you will have any luck taking it back to the store considering how long you have had it already. It's not the stores fault, it just happens from time to time with camera equipment. Every now and then someone will get one that isn't working exactly as it should and manufacturers expect that to happen. It should be covered under warranty and you'll get it back working flawlessly.
     
  66. I think it has been very well established by now that SOMETHING is wrong. From the images provided it isn't possible to tell much - could be a de-adjusted lens, zooming during exposure, kicking of the tripod, unsteady camera holding. Unless some images under controlled conditions - as suggested above - are provided, all is just mere speculation.
     
  67. no wait! It's the camera, it's taking bad photos! It's has to be, right since you're only using a d70, you should get the d3x, they take the best photos in the world, period.
    Sorry, just had to... you all know the whole "hey, nice photo. You must have a good camera eh?" deal... :p
    Anyways Beeswax, I first though your wife was zooming as she took the photo, but reading the threads it seems the shutter speed is too fast... I think try out against a flat object at different apertures like suggested to see if it is the lens, which I think so as well. Not the first, nor the last time, a bad lens has come out of a factory...
     
  68. So many post...OMG.. Ok here's my "best guess" opinion based on this limited information.
    1) in the first picture the camera tried to focus on the rope in front of the fence because your wife has it in auto mode and all the AF points are active. "You never know what your gonna get" Since you are zoomed in too close, the effective focus distance is out to far. In other words the rope is too close to be focused on at this zoom range. On the wide end this lens has a minimum focus distance of 3' zoomed in, I'm sure it's out farther than that. I bet she was standing less than 3' from the rope right?
    2) in the second picture the AF system chose the grass in the middle of the shot to focus on.
    3) At F2.8 the DOF is too shallow for these shots.
    4) There appears to be one lens element or group out of allignment resulting in the bottom left corner and top right corners skewing perspective and focus.
    Testing:
    This is very simple. You tape a page from the newspaper to the wall. Set the camera on a tripod. Use flash, or direct window light, or high iso to get a fast shutter speed over 1/500th. Set aperture to F11. Focus on the newsprint and shoot. Then repeat with progressively larger apertures, F8, F5.6 and adjust ISO accordingly to maintain the 1/500th shutter (or use auto flash). Look at the shot's and read the newsprint. Repeat all these steps at various focal lengths (zoom distances). Make sure the news paper always fills the page.
    Advice:
    1) if any of the test shots come out nice and sharp that proves the problem is technique. But in this case I think it's a bit of both the lens problem and technique.
    2) Send the lens back to Tameron for repair if it cannot be returned. It should have a 6 year warranty.
    3) get her a book on photography before buying any more $700 lenses. I get fantastic shots with several Tamron lenses costing half that. Using Auto modes and multiple AF points creates a lot of exposure/focus errors. It's best to learn the craft and the equipment and make choices for hte camera instead of letting the camera make the decisions.
     
  69. I think Rob is right. I have always heard that shutter speed should be the reciprical of the focal length. I am inclined to think there is probably nothing wrong with the lens. Crank up the ISO, stop down and fire away. I think you will get the results you want.
    You are also making the mistake of shooting pictures of cows and that should be left to professionals. It is much like weddings. Unless you are asked to do it as a favor to a friend (sure you were) you should not as you are bound to have a problem. By the way. Does your wife go by Mrs. Beeswax or does she hyphenate?
     
  70. She is using a D70. Could it be that the small viewfinder on the D70 is causing part of the off-focus problem?
     
  71. The lens is very obviously terribly out of alignment. Send it to Tamron for repair.
     
  72. I will PERSONALLY give 100 bucks to anybody who can duplicate that effect with a good lens.... Man, it's impossible! No shutter speed, no focus, no damned Nikon X-rays-photonic-devastating-starship will solve the problem. The rest is just chatter.
    ;-)
     

Share This Page