Excited about my new 17/55 2.8 Lens

[louise_robinson]

Yes, I was excited to get this new lens, but when using it I find that alot of my pictures are blurry...........I also have

the 18/200 lens and take better pictures with this lens..........I am a beginner in the dsl world, but I do love some of

the pictures I have taken, I am using the D80..........Could anyone give me some pointers on this new lens. I have

taken a beginner course in dsl cameras and for sure need to take more, but I would in the mean time like to be able

to use this lens......I take mostly portrait and landscape pictures.........

 

Any help would be appreciated!

 

Thanks

Louise

[justin_ngo]

Louise,

 

The reason is the 17-55 does have VR while your 18-200 does. VR helps a lot when you shoot in low light condition without tripods, when your camera set the shutter speed longer to get enough light, then hand shake makes blurring. However, when you shoot in direct sunlight, set larger perture open ( ex. A mode at 2.8), the S become very fast, then reduce the hand shake issue. I have no problem with hand shake if speed is faster than 1/200s. With 18-200 VR, I can slower S to even at 1/30s !! VR does work!

You may also want to read some techniques of handling a heavy lenses like 17-55, and get a good tripod!

I have 18-200 , and 17-55 is in my dream list! Enjoy your lens.

[justin_ngo]

Sorry, I would correct my above input: 17-55 does NOT have VR.

[justin_ngo]

VR = vibration reduction

[william_landon]

(Yes, I was excited to get this new lens, but when using it I find that alot of my pictures are blurry.)

 

Make sure you have auto ISO set to ON. Custom menu setting #7 so that as the shutter speed slows down below a point you specify (I

use 1/30th of a sec) it will increase the ISO to a maximum you specify, (I let it go to 1600 ISO) to maintain that minimum shutter speed.

I own the same lens and it is razor sharp and is on my camera always.

Best Regards

Bill

[liljuddakalilknyttphotogra]

Louise,

 

it's a heavier lens & it's a lot different to shoot with it than with the 18-200VR. The VR is part of the reason, the weight of the lens is another.

 

You'll need to check a few things. One is - how long are your shutter speeds? Depending upon length of time - you may actually be doing a slight shake to the heavier lens.

 

Posting a shot with EXIFs information (all the camera information) intact may shed some light on what's going on.

 

Also, how are you holding the camera? Are you supporting the lens? Are you working off a tripod?

 

It's probably a question of you leaning to support a heavier lens, but we can't be sure until we get more information.

 

Lil :-)

[ShunCheung]

First of all, if you shoot landscape, are you using a tripod?

[louise_robinson]

Thanks to everyone who responded, I am supporting the lens, and yes it is heavy, I have mostly been taking portrait shots......I will play with the shutter speed and see if I can correct the problem.......

[ddexter]

Hi Louise,

 

I've found that focusing at f2.8 is a bit harder than focusing at even f3.5 (especially since my contact prescription is getting old). Are you using auto focus or focusing manually?

[justin_ngo]

Louise,

 

Do you have a flash like SB-600 or 800 ?

A flash will free the subjects, a tripod will free your hand, and a high shutter speed will free both but you are not always can get it !

The best: a flash +a tripod !!

[eric_arnold]

blurry pics are often the result of user error (i.e. camera shake) and/or using too slow of a shutter speed.

if you are used to using VR with your 18-200, not having it means an adjustment. using a heavier lens also takes some getting used to, since if you're not on a tripod you need good handholding technique.

 

i never have this problem with my tamron 17-50, since it's a lot lighter than the 17-55. if the lens is simply too heavy for you, i'd sell it, buy a 17-50 and use the leftover cash for a tokina 11-16. you won't notice much of a difference in IQ, but you may see less-blurry pics!

 

if you don't want to sell your new lens, use a tripod for both posed portraits and landscape still-lifes. a cable release should also be on your list.

 

as justin said, a flash is also a good idea.

and as lil said, posting a pic or two would help others identify what you're talking about and give useful suggestions.

 

but we also don't know what mode you're shooting in; since you are a beginner i would guess it's not Manual. i'd stay away from scene modes and try to get into the P/A/S/M part of the dial, with P used for quick shots where you dont have time to fiddle with settings. for landscapes you generally want to be in A mode to control depth of field; for portraits, S mode will allow you to set the shutter speed while the camera sets the aperture. Use M mode when you know what aperture and shutter you want, or when you're not getting a high enough/low enough shutter in A mode or the aperture you want in S mode. Auto-ISO is also a good idea until you can recognize what ISOs work at different settings, although with the d80, you'll start to see some noise at above 800. 1600 should really only be used sparingly, and 1250 is usually much cleaner.

[pat_warner]

Now also with 17-55 and D80. I have maybe a 1000 pix with said combo.

Pix quality is very subjective, dependent on many things whether expessed as a print or on the screen.

Notwithstanding , I get quality ranging from perfect to unacceptable.

As such there are many things I don't understand nor can I predict no matter what the settings.

To be sure I shoot from a tripod, often at F5.6 - 11, ISO 100 and over the full zoom range.

What to do to make better pix: shoot everyday under many conditions. This masterpiece of glass work does not a shooter make, it's you shooting as often as possible .

[Two23]

Get a one foot square piece of newspaper, tape it flat to a wall. Put camera on a tripod, make sure lens is perpendicular to the wall (i.e. not tilted up or down, or side to side.) Take some photos of the newspaper at f2.8, f4, f8, f16. Change ISO so shutter speed is always 1/500 or higher. They should all be sharp. If not, might have a bad lens.

 

 

Kent in SD

[eric_arnold]

"If not, might have a bad lens. "

 

easy kent, that's sacrilege. nikon has never suffered from ANY sample variation, particularly not with the 17-55. why, one would think you owned a sigma or tokina lens, from the way you're talking.

[dks]

I purchased the 17-55 for my D80, and now it is glued to my D300. This is my "walk around" lens. For my purposes, it has performed beyond my expectations. I recently purchased the 70-200 but really do not use it, as I suspected. I like to walk up to subjects. I don't have any trouble-shooting tips for your problem, but I do vouch for this lens. When I venture out, I feel there is no thinking or fussing with this set up, D300, MD10 grip, 17-55 f2.8, that's all I need. And I just keep on smiling...

 

Btw, I want to thank this forum for providing so much useful information from so many talented photographers, whether pro or enthusiast. This has become my destination site.

[ilkka_nissila]

You need to use higher shutter speeds and focus carefully. I would start by setting the camera on shutter priority at 1/200s. With the D80 you should be able to get nice results between ISO 100 and 400, and 800-1600 for black and white. The 17-55 is a nice lens, but at f/2.8 you'll have to get the focus just right. You might be used to the wide depth of field of your 18-200.

[steve_hovland]

I routinely shoot D80 at ISO 800 color and the pictures are just fine.

 

If you are wide open you could also be having trouble with focus. Shoot at f4 or 5.6.

[steve_hovland]

If you are letting the camera select the focus point you could also be off even if multiple points are selected. Do you know how to focus on a desired sharp point and then recompose?

[dave wyman]

>Excited about my new 17/55 2.8 Lens<

 

Louis, a more honest title for your subject would have been, from my view, more appropriate than "Exited about my new 17/55 2.8 Lens".

 

"Need help with my 17/55 2.8F Lens" or "Disappointed with my 17/55 2.F8" would have been more descriptive and possibly garnered more views and ideas for you.

 

I've stopped reading posts whose subject titles don't say what the post is about. For those posts I read, I prefer the subject title match up with the words in the post itself, which wasn't quite the case here.