Nikon D100 with Tokina 19-35mm Not Sharp. Why?

[dan_kim1]

Hello,

As you know, the Nikon D100 ccd sensor has a 1.5x magnification

factor as a result of its size, so the focal length of all of my

lenses become multiplied by 1.5x. Therefore, to get a ~35-70mm lens,

I bought the recent Tokina 19-35mm wide angle. I've taken quite a few

pictures with this setup (D100/Tokina 19-35), but have found my

images to not be very sharp (even with the D100's auto sharpening

function). The D100 is very sharp with a prime macro lens (like the

85mm Nikkor Macro or the Sigma 105mm Macro), but on the Tokina wide

angle, my sharpness suffers. Sharpness also suffers on my Tamron

telephoto (that's expected though), but I can't figure out why this

is so on my wide angle. Any thoughts?

 

Thanks,

 

Dan

[carl smith]

Probably because the 19-35 Tokina isn't that sharp in the center, or anywhere. What did you expect? I have worked at a store that sells promaster (yech) lenses. The Promaster 19-35 is the Tokina lens you speak of and I don't find it to be particularly good.

[hal_bissinger]

What do you expect from a garbage lens? I'm even surprised you are happy with that Sigma. I always recommend against third party lenses. Even though Nikon makes some low end stuff, the rest is much better than third party. It may cost a few dollars more but you get what you pay for and you are assured that it will work.

[carl smith]

3rd party lenses can be hit or miss. As can lower end name brand lenses. The sigma 105mm macro is fairly well regarded. So is their 70-200 2.8. It flip flops with the Nikon and Canon at certain focal lengths for overall sharpness although generally I'll admit I find the Nikon and Canon 70/80-200 2.8s are better.

 

You have to take third party lenses on a case by case basis. Some are fine, some are crummy. As I responded in your e-mail Dan, the Sigma 15-30 has had some good reviews. I have never used it though so i suggest you check in to it. But for a wide angle zoom that goes so wide, it's worth checking out if you're already in the market to replace. Another option is the Nikon 18-35 I believe. Optically better than the Sigma and far better than the Tokina. But also more expensive than the Sigma and it isn't as wide. It's all up to you.

[al_kaplan1]

Firt, you're using a third rate lens. Second, you're only using the center of the image, greatly enlarged. Third, zooms are never as sharp and contrasty as single focal length lenses. Finally, the "sharpening" function only works on major demarcations of color and/or contrast while turning extremely fine detail (if it's there) into mush. You've bought into advertising hype. Try a real film camera if you want quality photographs.

[ky2]

<p>Dan, you've just learned an important lesson in life- You get what you pay for. There aren't ANY zooms out there that can rival a prime (not only in sharpness, but also in perspective correction). And even more, a $140 zoom would not even begin to stress your D100's max resolution.</p>

 

<p>I own both a DSLR (Fuji S2Pro), and a medium format camera. If you want to see what your camera is capable of, better start with the cheap Nikkor 50/1.8D; for less than 100$, it will provide you with images that can rival 645 scans. Another good selection would be the 85/1.8D, or the 35/2, all Nikkors. If you are interested in zooms, try the Nikkor 28-105D; it's not as fast, but it is very capable for its price (And it can also do Macro upto 1:2 ratio). Stick to Nikkors- not only they would normally give you superior performance, they also are forward compatible, and would retain much of their value through time.</p>

 

<p>If you require wide shots, get either the Nikkor 20/2.8D, or the Nikkor 18-35D, priced the same (around $450).</p>

 

<p>And Al, <i>"Try a real film camera if you want quality photographs"</i>, I dont really believe this remark assists Dan in any possible way... Or perhaps you're implying that he should sell his D100 and get a Leica?</p>

[berg_na]

It's rather interesting that the one who claims to have all the answers also has it all wrong. The magnification factor is really a cropping factor, and there's no such thing as using a 'greatly enlarged' section of the image. As to the advertising hype, isn't the Leica superiority pure unadulterated hype?

 

Dan - I use the Nikon 18-35 lens with my D100 and I have no complaints about its image sharpness, so you may want to consider replacing the Tokina with this lens if the image quality of the Tokina is totally unacceptable.

[steve_bingham]

After painfully researching everything I could find for three weeks I finally settled on a Sigma 15mm-30mm. Normally I can't stand Sigma lenses, but they got lucky on this one. The Nikon mentioned above also is a very nice lens. I have made some 12x18 inch prints with this lens which aren't bad. I was amazed. As B&H has a fine return policy, I was fully prepared to send it back (as I have others). To get maximum sharpness with your D-100 consider shooting in raw format. The on-board sharpening leaves a lot to be desired - and is somewhat soft.

 

I use the Fuji S-2 along with the 50mm f1.8 and Tamron 90mm f2.8 macro (a legend in sharpness), along with the above mentioned Sigma. As a side note, the Sigma does get a little soft in the corners when used full frame. When used at 1.5 it appears very sharp.

[steve_bingham]

Oh yeah, and I couldn't agree with Yaron more. Use the inexpensive Nikon 50mm f1.8, shoot in raw, use a tripod - and be AMAZED.