D70 blurry images help

Discussion in 'Digital Cameras' started by ade, Aug 31, 2004.

  1. ade

    ade Guest

    I am wondering if someone can help me here. Being quite new to DSLR's having
    previously used the fuji s602 zoom. I upgraded to the D70 and a nikkor AF
    70 -300 mm lens. I know it is not the best lens..but was the best affordable
    at the time. My problem is this....even when using the tripod my shots are
    all blurred. They were better on the fuji with a 2X converter.
     
    ade, Aug 31, 2004
    #1
    1. Advertisements

  2. ade

    BobS Guest

    If you're zoomed all the way out, that lens is effectively a 450mm tele when
    it's on the D70. As I recall, the D70 has the same size sensor as my Pentax
    *ist and means you have a 1.5x multiplier factor. The least bit of touching
    will cause motion blur. I've ordered the electronic cable release to
    overcome that problem, you may have to do the same.

    Bob S.
     
    BobS, Aug 31, 2004
    #2
    1. Advertisements

  3. ade

    Guy Scharf Guest

    I recommend you post a message on the D70 forum on www.dpreview.com and
    ask for help there. Be sure to include some images. It's difficult to
    offer any advice without seeing images and assessing the nature of the
    blur.

    Guy
     
    Guy Scharf, Aug 31, 2004
    #3
  4. ade

    John S Guest

    I have this lens and the d70 and it is reasonably sharp. Works best with
    plenty of light, f/8 is the sweet spot focus-wise. Remember the 1/lens
    length rule for handheld shooting (shutter of 1/300 min, 1/250 works OK on
    this lense since it is pretty light weight).

    On a tripod, use the self-timer or get a remote to trigger the shutter if
    you are going for slow shutter speed. A rickey tripod isn't any better then
    handheld. Prefocus once by hand after framing, even if you are using a
    timed/remote release as the lense won't need to move much, if at all. Boost
    ISO if you can trade a little noise for shaper focus. Make sure it's
    actually focusing on the desired point (I keep mine in center focus mode)
    and also make sure you've not got a really narrow DOF because of a wide-open
    lens - unless that's what you're going for. If you are, obviously making
    sure it's focusing exactly where you want is critical. And do swing by
    dpreview.com's d70 forum :)
     
    John S, Aug 31, 2004
    #4
  5. ade

    Jimmy Smith Guest

    Is the picture in focus to begin with? Are you using a flimsy tripod? Are
    the pictures ever in focus? What if you try different distance photos? Do
    any of them work?
     
    Jimmy Smith, Aug 31, 2004
    #5
  6. ade

    Dick Muldoon Guest

    I had similar problems with the AF 80-200 (and a Tamron 70-300)
    when I tried shooting handheld in evening/morning light. The immediate fix
    was manually setting ISO to 800 or higher (or using ISO Auto). It might
    help
    you if the problem is low light/wide open aperture/hand-induced motion
    when you press the release.

    If you're getting poor focus on tripod shots of simple subjects, try using
    the self-timer for shutter release. Could be you're "poking" at the shutter
    release,
    not "persuading" it.

    Could also be you're shooting things that confuse the AF system.
    Try changing AF modes, or pick out some very simple, isolated,
    high-contrast subjects and see if that works ...

    If you still have the problem in bright light, using a tripod and the self
    timer,
    on very simple subjects, then something ain't right ...

    Dick
     
    Dick Muldoon, Sep 1, 2004
    #6
  7. ade

    Jimmy G Guest

    I noticed the same thing with the same setup.

    Since my 18-70 is just fine, I'm convinced that it's a combination of the
    long focal length being used with less than optimum shutter speeds, AND the
    mediocre quality of the lens.

    I'm ready to switch to a better zoom, however I was quickly reminded of how
    dearly one pays for quality in Nikor lenses.
     
    Jimmy G, Sep 1, 2004
    #7
  8. ade

    Andy-J Guest

    No. A 300mm lens is NOT a 450mm lens. The sensor is smaller than a 35mm,
    so the focal length angle of view is different. It is a crop, not a
    multiplier. 300mm is 300mm. An 80mm lens on a 6x6 negative has the angle of
    view of a 50mm lens on a 35mm negative. This does not make an 80mm lens a
    50mm lens. It is STILL an 80mm lens. This doesn't have a thing to do you
    your question, but this misinformation about multipliers that some people
    spread around without an ounce of thought should have been laid to rest long
    ago.

    As for blurry images, before drawing any conclusions or going to a lot of
    effort, just turn off the autofocus and focus manually. Coming from manual
    focus film cameras, I have noticed that folks who were introduced to cameras
    with auto-eveything seem to have a reluctance to turn stuff off. That
    automation works wonderfully in MOST situations. Your brain works great in
    almost all of them. I have found that if you are not careful, the camera is
    looking at something you aren't, and foucsing on that.
     
    Andy-J, Sep 1, 2004
    #8
  9. ade

    Tom Scales Guest

    Oh please.

    While your explanation is technically correct, the explanation is a
    comparison to a common 'standard', the 35mm camera.

    The multiplier is a simple, and accurate, explanation.

    Tom
     
    Tom Scales, Sep 1, 2004
    #9
  10. ade

    Andy-J Guest

    The multiplier is a simple and incorrect explanation. A multiplier is a
    magnification factor. There is no magnification here. It is simply a crop.
    While the difference may make no difference in SOME explanations, it makes a
    world of differnece in others. And it is simply ignorant, so why use it?
    It is an equipment group, and it is a simple concept. Get it right and move
    on. I see more people who read something like this who have no clue but to
    believe the writer knows what they are talking about, and rely on it in
    OTHER contexts.
     
    Andy-J, Sep 1, 2004
    #10
  11. ade

    Tom Scales Guest

    The scientific explanation is not always the best. I'm reminded of a comment
    that Nancy Reagan once made about Ronald Reagan. "When asked what time it
    is, he will explain how the watch works".

    The 1.5x multiplier is a useful analogy to explain the phenonmenon. It's
    not wrong. It's a different way to explain the situation by using a
    reference to an existing source of knowledge.

    Tom
     
    Tom Scales, Sep 1, 2004
    #11
  12. ade

    Tom Scales Guest

    Fine. You do it your way, I'll do it mine.


     
    Tom Scales, Sep 1, 2004
    #12
  13. ade

    ade Guest

    Thank you all for your input. I am going to try all the various advice given
    and am sure the images will improve. I tokk the advice to stop by the
    dpreview forum....thank you for that also. This group really does contain a
    lot of helpful people and is a valuable source for beginners like myself to
    improve :)
     
    ade, Sep 1, 2004
    #13
  14. ade

    BobS Guest

    It would appear that the manufactures disagree with you in describing the
    effective focal length of lenses on DSLRs when using other than full sized
    sensors. They use the multiplier factor in explaining it and I can
    reference you to several manufacturers that do so (Pentax, Cannon, Nikon).
    Please provide your reference.

    I would have replied directly to the original post but I have that
    individual in my kill file and didn't see it.

    Bob S.
     
    BobS, Sep 1, 2004
    #14
  15. ade

    Skip M Guest

    Of course they disagree, that is their way of making a negative a positive.
    Marketing over accuracy.
     
    Skip M, Sep 1, 2004
    #15
  16. If an unexperienced person was told that his or her new DSLR crops the
    picture I bet he or she would ask why they STILL can see the whole
    picture in the end since it was cropped?

    But before you say anything, _I do_ understand all the technical stuff
    and I agree with you that a "crop" is the correct word to use since that
    is what it is, no more, no less. But to understand the implications of
    this crop you have to get quite technical.

    /Per
     
    Per Andersson, Sep 2, 2004
    #16
  17. ade

    Bruce Murphy Guest

    unless you care about depth-of-field whereupon things get rather more
    complicated.

    B>
     
    Bruce Murphy, Sep 3, 2004
    #17
  18. ade

    Bruce Murphy Guest

    Of course, but just thinking in terms of field of view isn't all that
    helpful, because you'll need focal length too (to work out absolute
    size of aperture).

    B>
     
    Bruce Murphy, Sep 3, 2004
    #18
  19. ade

    BobS Guest

    Well, so far all I've read is your opinion - no facts. How about explaining
    this then (better than the manufacturers) so we can understand why you think
    this is bogus.

    Bob S.
     
    BobS, Sep 3, 2004
    #19
  20. ade

    Tom Scales Guest

    Not bogus for me. It is a natural reference. Let's use an analogy. Let's
    say the US converts to the metric system. When someone tells me that the
    drive I am about to make is 100 kilometers, I'm going to convert in my head
    to 62.5 miles and know it is about an hours drive.

    My using the convenience of miles, just like my using the convenience of a
    multiplier factor, is not WRONG, it is just different then your approach.

    Let's try another test. Find 20 of your friends. Tell them the FOV of a
    standard 50mm lens.

    Ask them "what would that focal length be for a 35mm camera" and "Is that a
    normal, wide angle, or telephoto".

    Bet very few could get it right, as FOV is NOT a measure that they use
    regularly.

    Sometimes being 'right' is immaterial.

    Tom
     
    Tom Scales, Sep 6, 2004
    #20
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.