bokeh problem with nikon af-s 35mm 1.8g lens

[alok_k]

<p>I bought a new 35 mm 1.8g lens for my D5000 but have been getting horrible bokeh (like motion blur). The picture I have attached was taken with the 'flower' mode in D5000 but I have seen similar problems in other pictures. Is this a problem with the lens or am I doing something wrong.<br>

<table ><br>

<a href="https://picasaweb.google.com/lh/photo/fmjY_Zuy_CmyqF6yaN3MLZYGmuRfct-bla2NF02mMU0?feat=embedwebsite"><img src="https://lh4.googleusercontent.com/-sk35nuvoAxo/T0DZpf1iBTI/AAAAAAAACpw/ZnjlQHhC_Nk/s144/DSC_0331.JPG" alt="" width="144" height="96" /></a><td >From Misc<br>

<br /> https://picasaweb.google.com/lh/photo/fmjY_Zuy_CmyqF6yaN3MLZYGmuRfct-bla2NF02mMU0?feat=directlink<br>

<br /> Thanks,<br /> Alok</p>

[jean_yves_mead]

That's not bokeh, but rather multiple exposures. Are you using an in-camera HDR setting or similar?

[leslie_cheung]

<p>Walk the walk before you talk the talk... </p>

[leslie_cheung]

<p>Looks like simple camera shake to me at 1/60 sec. Not sure what HDR or ME have do with anything...</p>

[simon_hickie1]

<p>I'm not convinced it's motion blur or a double exposure problem. The central flower is relatively sharp. I'd recommend reshooting with the camera on a tripod and similar camera to subject distance and aperture to see what happens.</p>

[Peter_in_PA]

<p>I think it's kinda cool (you should say you did it in purpose...</p>

[rodeo_joe1]

<p>That's not normal, nor does it look like camera shake since the central flower is unaffected. The only time I've seen anything similar to this is when there's been some opaque obstruction on the lens. Alok, check your lens for a thread or something similar across the front or back element or inside it. If there's no apparent contamination of the lens then you should take it or send it back to where you bought it. As I said, that's definitely not normal.</p>

<p>A thought occurs. You've not got one of those lens caps that's hung on with black string have you? Make sure the string isn't going across the lens.</p>

[ShunCheung]

<p>Outdoor flowers from a close distance is always difficult to shoot. When there is a little breeze, the flowers would be vibrating and if you use a slower shutter speed, you'll get this kind of effect. Tripods, vibration reduction, etc. will not help much since they cannot stop subject movement.</p>

<p>One thing to keep in mind is that when you have multiple flowers in the image, they do not necessarily move in a synchronized manner. I have seen situations that one particular flower does not move much in the breeze while other flowers move a lot more. Or one flower could have reached its maximum motion, stopped briefly before swinging back, while other flowers could be moving, and you happened to catch that moment. Again, just to point out the obvious, these flowers and leaves are not a large solid subject that vibrates together; they move individually.</p>

<p>Essentially you need to be patient to wait for the wind to die down or use a high shutter speed. If I am shooting only one flower, I may try to catch the little pauses during its motion, but that is not easy either.</p>

[daverhaas]

<p>I call af problems along with an aperture of f8.0 - you're not going to get good bokeah with f8.0 </p>

<p>What it looks like to me is that the photo was taken while the AF was hunting for something to lock onto. The central flower is kind of in focus - but not really. The blur that looks like motion is the blur caused by the AF hunting. </p>

<p>Add to the the F8 aperture - which increased the chances of the center object being in focus and there you go. </p>

<p>It is not HDR, Bracketing or a Multiple Exposure. </p>

 

[burkhart]

<p>Well problem #1 is you're using "flower mode." While it's easy to just roll the dial to these auto settings, I highly suggest to start using those scary MASP letters on the dial. A book that I've found to be GREAT on using those settings is called Understand Exposure by Bryan Peterson. Easy to read and understand and you'll learn a lot from it! <br /> Problem #2 is caused by problem #1. It was said in another comment, F8.0 is not what you want when it comes to getting good Bokeh (or any real bokeh for that matter) I dunno why the flower mode chose F8.0 for such a shot, but there ya go. <br /> #3 is a possibility, but I doubt it. Lens malfunction. If your camera is doing this kinda thing on a lot of other photos as well, it might be an issue. If this was a one time occurrence, then it's not a mechanical malfunction and nothing to worry about. I doubt this is an HDR or Multiple Exposure issue. I'm not sure about HDR since my camera doesnt have that function, but if it's anything like my D90, switching to Multiple Exposures isnt something you can't do "accidentally." <br /> Just my $0.02</p>

<p>UPDATE: Just noticed a couple things. First, you said this has happened on other images before. Could indicate a problem. Like someone said earlier.. make sure there's nothing contaminating each end of the lens... as well as the sensor inside the camera. Also I highly doubt this is motion blur. the picture was taken at 1/60... there should be little to no blur at that speed. So my suggestion is to first check the lens for contamination, as well as the sensor. If it appears clean, take it back to the store ya bought it from, if you can, and exchanging it. If you get these same kinds of images from a new lens, then at least we narrowed down the issue. </p>

[rodeo_joe1]

<p>C'mon guys! There's no way that the entire background of this picture could shift by several millimetres in 1/60th of a second while the foreground stayed put. If camera shake really was the culprit the entire picture would show a double image, and I'm not convinced by wind induced movement either. That would take a freaky panning of the camera along with the foreground wind-blown flower to get the effect shown.</p>

<p>EXIF data has been stripped, so we're only going by the exposure figures given by the OP on the Picasa site. Even allowing for the double image, that degree of background blur doesn't look consistent with a 35mm lens at f/8 on a DX body, and nor does the "quality" of blur look right either. Zoom in and you'll see that the double-image appears to suddenly start at the base of the foreground flower stalk and the amount of blur then doesn't change much with distance.</p>

<p>Call me over-suspicious, but I'm inclined to think that the image has been deliberately manipulated and that we're being trolled. Perhaps Alok (or is it Loki?) could get back to us and reassure us that that's not the case?</p>

[ShunCheung]

<p>Here is a link to a larger version of the OP's image:</p>

<center><img src="https://lh4.googleusercontent.com/-sk35nuvoAxo/T0DZpf1iBTI/AAAAAAAACpw/ZnjlQHhC_Nk/s720/DSC_0331.JPG" alt="" /></center>

<p>To me, it is clearly motion blur with the double edges from the flower to the right and most of the leaves. Based on this one image, there is no evidence for me to believe that there is any problem with the lens.</P>

<P>

Judging from the size of the flowers, this image was captured from a close distance, perhaps not quite macro but approaching that category. In that case 1/60 sec is quite slow a shutter speed unless your subject is completely still. I would say learn to get away from the Scene Modes first; try to control the depth of field and shutter speed yourself. IMO bringing the lens in for exchanges or repair is merely wasting everybody's time.

</p>

<P>

While it is possible that the center flower happend to be reasonably still while everything else was moving, the center flower does look a bit out of place and appears to be from a different capture.

</P>

[purplealien]

<p>35mm f/1.8G at:<br>

F/8<br>

1/60s<br>

ISO 400<br>

+ similar subject?</p><div></div>

[purplealien]

<p>35mm f/1.8G at:<br />F/1.8<br />1/500s<br />ISO 400<br />+ similar subject?</p><div></div>

[eric_arnold]

<p>maybe it's all for the best. the 35/1.8's bokeh can be distracting, as in Chris W.'s second shot. yeah, there's bokeh there at f/1.8, but you dont really want to look at it for too long. it gets a bit nervous and you can see some CA. f/8 is a much better shot (although f/4 or 5.6 might be even better from a DoF standpoint).</p>

<p>to the OP: 'flower mode' doesnt guarantee all shots taken of flowers with this mode will be perfect. i second Peterson's book and getting out of scene modes. on your shot, looks like motion blur from a too-slow shutter or bad handholding technique, but are you sure you got AF confirmation before you shot? if you tried to shoot from too close a range, you're not going to nail the focus...</p>

[mike_halliwell]

<p>I wonder if the near flower is in the lee of the wind (caused by the OP, the lee, not the wind..:-)) that's trashing the rest of the foliage?</p>

[mark_stephan2]

<p>The flower icon or mode on every digital point and shoot I've ever owned, owned or used meant macro or close up mode. The OP should use this mode with a real macro lens like the Nikon 40 f/2.8 micro. He should also learn about the MASP settings and he'll become a better photographer.</p>

[aleksej_panic2]

<p>This could indicate a serious lens problem. Possibly one of lens elements is inverted.</p>

[mickey_anderson]

<p>I don't respond too much to these posts, but I couldn't help notice that "blame" has been attributed from a number of reasons based on speculations. Any attempt for me to diagnose the reason(s) why the OP's picture turned out the way it did, would be the same. (Speculation) I took this photo with a similar camera (D5100), on a windy day, with a 50mm 1.8, and the camera set to "flower" scene. I was holding the stem of the flowers in one hand and the camera in the other. I rarely shoot in this mode, but was experimenting. The camera choose the f8 setting and the exposure. <br>

I believe we can rule out the f8 setting or the "flower" mode! </p><div></div>

[ShunCheung]

<p>The motioin blur in the OP's image is quite obvious; that is not speculation at all. The problem with the flower scene mode, or for that matter any scene mode, is that you yield full control of the ISO, aperture, and shutter speed to some predetermined program on the camera. For beginners, that may be better than nothing, however, the flower scene mode has no idea that your particular flower may be vibrating seriously and require a faster shutter speed or you prefer more or less depth of field. That is why a lot of us think that one is better off advancing beyond the scene mode stage as soon as practical.</p>

[funkag]

<p>I've had something similar happen in macro work, but not anything as bad as what the OP is seeing. Here's a sample, this time from a Canon and Tamron 90mm.</p><div></div>

[alok_k]

<p>Thanks for all the responses and the advice to get into 'MASP' modes. I am trying to do that.<br>

Just to clarify this is not a manipulated image.<br>

This image was taken from pretty close but I have seen similar problems even when I am shooting long (like a monument). I will try to add some of those pictures as well. If any other info. will help in diagnosis, please let me know.</p>

[richard_barron]

<p>"...suggest (you) start using those MASP letters on the dial."<br /> That's the first thing I tell my students about exposure control. <br /> This image looks a lot like flash plus ghosting, thus the sharp flower and movement of the background.<br>

By the way, my wife has the 35/1.8, and we think it's an incredible lens.</p>

[alok_k]

<p>Here is another picture. In this the problem is not so bad but it is still there. And here there is no more wind etc. to confuse the issue. This is at 1/125 and f/5.6.</p><div></div>

[alok_k]

<p>Here is an smaller inline image of the picture in the link in previous comment.</p>

<p><table ><tr><td><a href="https://picasaweb.google.com/lh/photo/V_Zwqr43_AaiiQuWFinhoMxbl0XR-cGX1_nfMv8bN8c?feat=embedwebsite"><img src="https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-xqZrtDvNU80/T0HvIHCBY_I/AAAAAAAACts/pEPSfwqiKAk/s144/DSC_0066.JPG" height="96" width="144" /></a></td></tr><tr><td >From <a href="https://picasaweb.google.com/kuchlous/Mahabalipuram?authuser=0&authkey=Gv1sRgCKaLo4_Io_KCTg&feat=embedwebsite">Mahabalipuram</a></td></tr></table></p>