Beginner Help with nikkor 400mm sharpness

M

Mo.Hassan

Messages
24
Name
Mo.Hassan
Edit My Images
Yes
I am very glad that I stumbled over this forum. I have no one to ask for advice. But now I do.

I bought an old 1970s nikkor 400mm f5.6 ED manual telephoto lens. I thought I won't be shooting birds fast moving creatures in the wild, So I thought I would buy the good old lens without worrying about it being slow. But recently I developed a keen interest in shooting flying birds. So I attended Birds of Pray event and took the lens for a ride. It was an overcast. I could not get any sharpness in the images. Here are the conditions
1. Shooting handheld, following best practices for keep hand shakes to a minimum
2. ISO set on Auto, around 6400 at f5.6, shutter speed around 1/500 afternoon - 1/1000 morning.
3. Panning, continuous shutter release while re-focusing when needed.
4. Shots taken with Nikon D5100, I now own D500- not used it yet.

I consider myself good at focusing, I have been shooting for 1 year with Nikkor macro 105mm, f2.8 ED, VR and 20mm f1.8 ED VR using both manual and autofocus for macro. I also used reverse lens for macro shots of insects.

I developed an obsession about getting sharp picture with 400mm lens. Again in an overcast day, I was practicing photographing pigeons using the above settings, and for the life of me cannot get that sharpness that I see with other telephoto or zoom lenses. I took shots yesterday for pigeons standing on a chimney and had to push sharpness to full throttle in photoshop to get a below par image.

I looked at photos taken by others on instagram fo the same lens, all images were taken in a bright shinny day and looked ok. I could just about match their quality if I used the lens on a tripod. It made me realise that it is possible that even with other f5.6 telephoto/zoom (e.g. nikkor 200-500 mm f5.6) I won't get that sharpness when the light condition are overcast skies. I have no experience in shooting with zoom/telephoto, I wonder if you guys can shed some light on whether I should burn a deep hole in my pocket and aim for the nikkor f5.6 200-500mm ED VR or worse still the 300mm f4 nikkor prime lens costing around £1500. Just cannot put my mind to rest on which?
 
Lots of things it could be but the first thing i would do is try it on your D500 tripod mounted with stationary subjects, then show us the results. You could be having back or front focusing problems that you could not fix on your D5100 but you can on your D500.
Show us the results after testing.
 
Welcome to the forum :)

The first thing to note is 1/500 is no where near enough to catch birds in flight, you may just about getaway with 1/1000 if you panning the bird as it flies or it a larger slower bird like a heron for example.

Ideally you want nice light as this will keep the ISO lower and allow better shutter speeds anywhere between 1600-2500 a good starting point

You have already realised that light is the key and trying in dull conditions especially when practising just going to be frustrating to say the least, I would try again on a nice sunny day if we ever get one again?
 
Mo.Hassan said:
I developed an obsession about getting sharp picture with 400mm lens. Again in an overcast day, I was practicing photographing pigeons using the above settings, and for the life of me cannot get that sharpness that I see with other telephoto or zoom lenses. I took shots yesterday for pigeons standing on a chimney and had to push sharpness to full throttle in photoshop to get a below par image.
Click to expand...

You may be aware that they race pigeons !! They are not the best subject for practicing on - pick something larger & slower - Herons, or Swans come to mind
 
Thank you all for the replies, the three answers above are all distinct.

I hear that D500 + Nikkor 200-500mm f5.6 ED VR zoom is a good marriage. Not sure if it will work under similar condition e.g. overcast weather? Is it better to go for the Nikkor f4E 300mm PF ED to work in low light but shame the focal length not as long. Either way, I need to decide which one to buy?

I shall try the 400mm on a good sunny day and will post the results here. Below are two photos, both shot today(overcast), in the same area, handheld. The photo of the bird was heavily sharpened + noise reduction etc.. while the second photo was treated with just a touch of sharpening.
_DSC0243-2.jpg



_DSC0263.jpg
 
you might find this link helpful.

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5cHhrWF-pqM


the target I use is called SpyderlensCal

it is on this link

https://www.amazon.co.uk/s?k=SpyderlensCal&ref=nb_sb_noss

to give some Idea of my settings ,depending on conditions
Best place to practise is at a bird of prey flying display

3H7VwcJ.jpg


Nikon D800 - lens 24-70 f2.8 @f10 ISO 500 at 70mm shutter speed 1/1000sec
 
Last edited:
Tracking a fast moving object with a manual focus lens = Good luck with that , nigh on impossible I would say
 
D500 + 200-500 f5.6 i a very good combination.
A manual lens will always be challenging for moving subjects, there are many photgraphers who find it difficult to capture BIF images with good AF lenses but a manual lens is very hard. Personally I think you are expecting too much ... static or near static birds, or birds flying to a predicted point (and pre-focus) will be fine but otherwise you are setting yourself a very hard task.

realspeed said:
you might find this link helpful.
Click to expand...

I doubt it, he's using a manual focus lens!
 
F1.2 said:
Tracking a fast moving object with a manual focus lens = Good luck with that , nigh on impossible I would say
Click to expand...
It's doable but it isn't easy. Takes a lot of practice, a lot of patience, plenty of failures and a vast quantity of luck. If the subject is flying parallel to you, it's much easier. It's also a lot easier if the subject is a fair distance away as you have more depth of field to play with and you don't need as much of a turn to the focus ring to maintain focus.

Taken with an old nikon 300mm f2.8 ED - Not quite sharp due to motion blur even at 1/1000s but it is in focus.


same 300mm lens. An easier subject as it's much bigger in the frame and further away. Fast moving though.


The trouble with wildlife is that it's not easily predictable so the usual prefocus technique is not always possible. Also note that these old lenses were sharp wide open for their time. They aren't really that sharp by modern standards when used wide open. The low contrast "glow" you get when wide open makes focusing the lens harder. I bought the eyepiece magnifier for my D810 (DK-17M) which made life significantly easier using manual lenses and it's much nicer all round. (AF or MF) It's so good in fact, it's ruined the experience with cameras that have smaller finders. (my little fuji X-E3 finder is like looking down a long dark tunnel by comparison)

It might be worth testing the lens out on a tripod shooting some static objects to see how sharp it can be and what it's optimum aperture is. (usually 1 stop down, so in your case probably f8)
 
Thank you all for the input. Indeed it is a manual lens so I cannot use AF. I originally bought for static subjects in mind. So I set up a challange to try it with moving objects and developed a keen interest in wild life photography. I tried few shots this sunny morning, I get a far better sharpness within 8-10m, ISO 1600, f5.6, 1/4000 shutter, 400mm nikor manual, Nikon D5100
_DSC0328.jpg

than 50m+
_DSC0332.jpg
 
@Kei Reading through your reply is very much what I experience right now with the lens. Due to lack of experience with telephotos/zooms, I keep jumping when I see a close up photo of birds in flight, sharp and beautiful on Flikr etc.. So I am not sure what focal length and quality lens requirted to reach that level without spending 10k+ on f2.8 etc.. I am setting up a budget for a new lens and not sure whether I go for Nikkor 200-500mm AF f5.6 (reach) or the 300mm f4E (wider aperture sharper telephoto). Both cost above 1K each.
 
@realspeed Thanks for your reply. Indeed I did use my D500 with 50mm AF lens to track birds flying display as a practice. But I want to use a long zoom/telephoto for when I travel abroad.
 
Mo.Hassan said:
@Kei Reading through your reply is very much what I experience right now with the lens. Due to lack of experience with telephotos/zooms, I keep jumping when I see a close up photo of birds in flight, sharp and beautiful on Flikr etc.. So I am not sure what focal length and quality lens requirted to reach that level without spending 10k+ on f2.8 etc.. I am setting up a budget for a new lens and not sure whether I go for Nikkor 200-500mm AF f5.6 (reach) or the 300mm f4E (wider aperture sharper telephoto). Both cost above 1K each.
Click to expand...
300mm is not really long enough for birds in flight unless you are really close or they are huge. 500-600 can just about do it, some would advocate the need for using a teleconverter or an 800mm lens. I gave up long ago on achieving anything meaningful with respect to bird photography as my longest lens is the 300mm f2.8 which can do the job but as said, you need to be within 10m to stand any chance of getting a decent shot. Personally, I want the 500mm f5.6 PF. For a long time, I kept my eyes peeled for an old 500mm f4 Ai-P on the cheap but their prices have remained very high. The new PF lens stands out to me as it's really compact and light. (for what it is at least)

Your 50m+ shot shows the signs of having just missed focus by a small margin. I've found that liveview can be a very effective tool for achieving good focus as you have a sufficiently large screen that it's easier to see when it's sharp. The thing to look out for is mild aliasing and shimmering to finely detailed objects. I've been using manual focus lenses on DSLRs for nearly 15 years so I've gotten used to the process of focusing quite quickly. The little rangefinder markings in the bottom left of the viewfinder display are very useful if you are using a nikon lens as they tell you which way to turn the focus ring.
 
I would not even consider trying to photograph something like birds in flight with a manual lens, for me it would be a complete waste of time and effort. You really have to splash the cash on a decent lens .

I actually prefer to video them instead. A half decent camcorder will give reach and an good video editing suite will allow a frame to be lifted from it

example

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e-Frx8eLW-E
 
Last edited:
These are with my D500 and 200-500 hand held.....I would normally use a tripod, or monopod with a gimbal, but not practical on this occasion.

I'm only a keen amateur, but since upgrading my gear, the shots have improved immensely!

1/3200, f5.6, ISO640
DSC_3773 (3) by Glynn Hobbs, on Flickr

1/4000. F5.6, ISO360
DSC_3447 (2) by Glynn Hobbs, on Flickr
 
@Kei I finally took the plung and ordered the 200-500mm f5.6, burning big hole in my pocket. I spent too much time with manual 400mm telephoto. The experience matches every negative description you mentioned , halo around far objects, I even shot photos of a Cessna flying by, I see some megenta coloured halo around the plane's frame. The focus ring is so soft that you could easily knock it out of focus. I did use the screen on the liveview to focus, the view of the plane on the screen was pants and hard to do a sharp focus especially when it slow focus.
I also considered the fact that I am going to use my D500 and really would need an autofocus lens.
I am a fan of old lenses for the 1uality and the build, I still use manual focus on my autofocus macro purely because it does not work very well in Macro. I do produce sharp images with my Nikkor 105mm Macro f2.8. Thank God my wife is not interested in photography so she cannot not tell the difference between D5100 and D500, in fact if she knows how much I am spending she will dis-own me right away.
 
@realspeed and @Vintage Racer, well I am joining the club of 200-500mm, I saw enough sharpness in images here and on flickr to convince me to splash money from my savings. My only question is how good it will perform in an overcast weather, very reluctant to push my ISO too high? I guess it is f5.6 so it will be hard to get good shots at these conditions
 
Mo.Hassan said:
@realspeed and @Vintage Racer, well I am joining the club of 200-500mm, I saw enough sharpness in images here and on flickr to convince me to splash money from my savings. My only question is how good it will perform in an overcast weather, very reluctant to push my ISO too high? I guess it is f5.6 so it will be hard to get good shots at these conditions
Click to expand...

@sk66 uses a D500 to excellent effect at high ISO IIRC - you should get truly excellent noise handling with that camera - pretty much among the very best in APS-C.
 
Welcome to the GAS club .. I dread to think how much I have recently spent on new gear . But the results count and I think you have moved in the right direction .. just give yourself time to get used to the camera ,lens combo .....it’s o.k buying new stuff but we tend to forget it becomes more complex when we do
 
sk66 said:
I might well have commented on the topic, but I've never owned a D500.
Click to expand...

same here or the 200-500 lens mentioned. But I do own the AFS 80-400mm f4.5 .5.6G lens. with such a mm range the only way I find is best to fine tune it is to do it at the range one uses most, ie 400mm. Seems to work for me anyway

MxF7HRJ.jpg


It is quite a beast weight wise and would not like to hand hold it for too long
 
Last edited:
realspeed said:
I would not even consider trying to photograph something like birds in flight with a manual lens, for me it would be a complete waste of time and effort
Click to expand...

I agree - your low success rate if any will likely be down fluke trying to nail focus on a BIF manually
 
Mo.Hassan said:
@realspeed and @Vintage Racer, well I am joining the club of 200-500mm, I saw enough sharpness in images here and on flickr to convince me to splash money from my savings. My only question is how good it will perform in an overcast weather, very reluctant to push my ISO too high? I guess it is f5.6 so it will be hard to get good shots at these conditions
Click to expand...

Good choice Mo, you will not regret it. Low light performance is good, but of course, everything is a compromise. - I'm really happy with the 200-500 and it also gives me the option of zooming out when neccessary. Having said all that, I still dream of owning a 600 f4 prime! :runaway:
 
Thanks @Vintage Racer I am looking no further than the 200-500mm, I hope to keep the novelity alive and do not want to write a big fat check for a long time. lol
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top