advice on lens sharpness

ejm

Messages
190
Edit My Images
Yes
Hi

I've noticed just recently that my standard nikon kit lens dx 18-55 just doesn't seem to cut it sharpness wise.
I'm sure it was fine before, or maybe because my 50mm prime is just so sharp it's making the 18-55 look naff?
I've cleaned it, checked and altered vr and focus lock, messed around with using light and flashguns and still the quality just seems p*** poor :(
It's annoying because I have nothing other than a fisheye that goes as wide so I really need to fathom what's gone on, all help seriously appreciated!!
 
Hi

It's your 50 prime that is at fault, it's just so much sharper than the cheap kit lens, you will have to spend quite a bit to get a zoom that performs better than a prime. Simple lens designs like the 50 are much easier to make than complicated designs like zooms. That unfortunately has how it's always been.

Welcome to the expensive world of sharp lenses.

Paul
 
  • Like
Reactions: ejm
What's happened is you've been sucked into the camera enthusiast world where sharpness and 'image quality' are all important. Put your money away and leave now, while you have the chance! :D
 
You have to assess if your lens is gone wrong by comparing recent shot with older ones you took and you thought were sharp at the time. Or maybe it is your perception of sharpness which has changed. In good light condition a kit lens should be pretty sharp too.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ejm
Nothing worse than spending alot of time on TP looking at other peoples shots, making your kit look worse and worse.
 
Thanks for everyone's replies!
If there is no obvious fault I've overlooked on the kit lens then it's definitely a case of me realising how much better my prime is. I've read how much better primes were but until recently hadn't noticed how much better (I'd been using my prime to shoot my son as the low f stop was fab for his baby portraits) just recently tho using it to photograph cars it really shows up how cack the zoom lens is lol!
I'm only using the zoom lens on 18mm as my 50mm prime is not always suitable due to locations so I think I'll be saving for a 20mm prime as my 10mm fisheye isn't really appropriate as a full time option.
Thanks all for clarifying this :D
 
Are you using a filter?
To be fair I am, but I'm using the same brand uv filter on Both lenses.
I toy with the idea of removing it but I'm so paranoid on scratches, I've never even had a phone without a screen protector lol :D
 
To be fair I am, but I'm using the same brand uv filter on Both lenses.
I toy with the idea of removing it but I'm so paranoid on scratches, I've never even had a phone without a screen protector lol :D

How many scratches have you had on your filters?
 
None lol I'm being sad aren't I haha I can't help myself I'm paranoid :p
 
To be fair I am, but I'm using the same brand uv filter on Both lenses.
I toy with the idea of removing it but I'm so paranoid on scratches, I've never even had a phone without a screen protector lol :D
Get rid of the UV filters would be my advice for starters!
 
Nikon have spent so much money in r&d making lenses what they are, and toughening front elements that it seems a shame to ruin that with cheap UV filters!
 
Thanks all I appreciate all your advice.
The filters will be coming off, you make a valid point with all the work that nikon put into the lenses it is pretty daft to put a filter over it. I'll remove them all . Will still do a comparison between old and new shots though as well.
 
cheap UV filters!

to be precise that means £3 horrible no name window glass in aluminium ring from your favourite auction site. There is nothing wrong with premium quality filters.
 
to be precise that means £3 horrible no name window glass in aluminium ring from your favourite auction site. There is nothing wrong with premium quality filters.

I like your avatar but tend not to use filters unless for an optical effect be that graduation of the sky, polarisation etc. Lens cap keeps the lens safe...

The real issue here is the performance of one lens over the other.
 
I like your avatar but tend not to use filters unless for an optical effect be that graduation of the sky, polarisation etc. Lens cap keeps the lens safe...

It's a personal choice. I didn't enjoy using my lens w/o filters in Tenerife with sand blowing around. I don't enjoy it here when it starts drizzling and wetting the front element. It would have been pretty bad with the food fight in the wedding. Filter is replaceable consumable, lens - not so much. It's lens protector keeping it safe when in action.

P.S. Do you think that non-coated polycarbonate (the same stuff found in bus shelters :)) Lee filters have less effect on IQ than pro-grade multi-coated optical glass? I don't think so. Since you are happy with the former there is nothing wrong with the latter.
 
to be precise that means £3 horrible no name window glass in aluminium ring from your favourite auction site. There is nothing wrong with premium quality filters.
Lol defo not cheap, not imo anyway, I knew better than to put some Chinese tat on I paid around £30 each for the filters
 
Swap your 18-55 for the tamron 17-50 2.8. Sharp little bugger it is :)
Interesting, just reading the reviews on amazon. I was toying with the idea of selling that and the 50mm for a 20mm prime but maybe this would be better...
 
Had one on DX, was a cracking lens and has a big following here at TP!
 
  • Like
Reactions: ejm
Don't look over the older version without their version of VR (VC) it's noticeably sharper and a lot cheaper - you will only really notice the lack of VC at 1/80 or slower so it depends on what speeds you normally shoot at.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ejm
fyi 28mm is a good length on crop

depending on what you need then consider a sigma dp, goodluck getting soft pictures with that :D
 
  • Like
Reactions: ejm
Don't look over the older version without their version of VR (VC) it's noticeably sharper and a lot cheaper - you will only really notice the lack of VC at 1/80 or slower so it depends on what speeds you normally shoot at.
Vr isn't something that would worry me too much as I tend to use a tripod for most my slower stuff so that's good to know it's even sharper.
 
fyi 28mm is a good length on crop

depending on what you need then consider a sigma dp, goodluck getting soft pictures with that :D
Any links?
I was only looking at 20mm as I know I do most my shots at 18 on the 18-55.
 
@ejm fun/nerdy fact: 28mm on a crop sensor set at F/8 is exactly what your eyes see in normal daylight
 
  • Like
Reactions: ejm
@ejm fun/nerdy fact: 28mm on a crop sensor set at F/8 is exactly what your eyes see in normal daylight

BS. if you have 2 eyes you see 12-14mm FF equiv. but the sweetspot is equivalent to a longish telephoto... and that is pretty irrelevant to conveying the scene in the best / the most artistic way.
 
Any links?
I was only looking at 20mm as I know I do most my shots at 18 on the 18-55.

28mm is about the diagonal of the apsc sensor, so you get very little distortion or something, makes it a true "normal" lens too
but buy what will suit your needs best
 
  • Like
Reactions: ejm
@ejm fun/nerdy fact: 28mm on a crop sensor set at F/8 is exactly what your eyes see in normal daylight
Lol f/8 indeed! You know the only area in focus of the mk1 eyeball is the area you are looking at?
 
:( I liked that fact, there were charts and everything. Now it's a sad not true thingie.
You do get some vignetting as you get older though...
 
Back
Top