Is something wrong with detail/quality?

G

Gazza732

Messages
8
Edit My Images
No
Ok so I've recently visited Wales and was taking many photographs, however, going through them I fear something may be wrong. Bare in mind the gear I am using and the quality it should yield which is a Nikon D810 paired with a Nikon 70-200mm f/2.8E AF-S FL ED VR. I think that the quality and detail I should have got is not in the photos and I suspect it could be one of three reasons (I won't say as to not influence any responses). Here is an example photo (It is a bad photo but just serves to demonstrate the point): https://ibb.co/g6hKn5
Then once zoomed in (4:1) in lightroom, you can see there is lack of detail as shown here:
View attachment 106559

The photo was shot at 200mm, f/5.0, 1/1250, ISO 100. It was handheld with VR set to 'Normal'. The photo was RAW (NEF), however, converted to JPEG using Lightroom for the purposes of this post.

Hadn't taken photos for a while but surely should be increased detail. Think I've put everything needed in post but just let me know if not.
Hopefully someone could help.
 
The subject looks under-exposed to me, which is typical for shots like this of birds and aircraft against the sky. Usually worth shifting the exposure a stop or two over to get it right for the target or use spot metering.
 
Apart from being under-exposed the bird is so small in the frame (your full upload) that your expectations are unrealistic.
 
I recently shot something similar with my 5D3 and 400 f5.6L and 100-400L f5.6 IS mk 1 with the same results, I sent my camera body and both lenses into Canon for an Af check and service so they could ensure Af on both lenses matched as well as could be created. On receipt of the kit I asked if they had found anything wrong and was told that everything was working fine, nothing out of adjustment, body sensor lining up well, Af spot on and IS as it should be.
So I took some more test shots with exactly the same results, 100% zoom delivering much as you have above, although my exposure was better ( I had dialled in +2 stops over exposure), so as far as I am concerned the kit (yours and mine) is doing the best job it can and it's either too great an expectation on my part or my technique is rubbish.
Shame as I really wanted to blame the camera :)
Matt
 
As above the gear is fine apart from 200mm is obviously not enough at that range and exposure is off.. it's just too small to get that much out of it. Having said that you could recover a lot more from the highlights and shadows.
 
Were you panning? If so I believe that VR should either be off or set to active (or similar).
 
Looking at that Nikon have not moved on as much as many think.

This is the 12mp D700 with a 50mm 1.8g.

4:1 screenshot on LR.

View attachment 106561
 
Do you have any examples of a subject filling the frame. You are expecting far too much when zooming in on the file that far. If you had exposed about +2/3 you would have seen more detail in the shadows, but it would more likely be plumage patterns as opposed to actual feather detail.
 
Thanks for everyone answers. The general consensus is one of my three possibilities where I was just expecting too much. I knew that 200mm was too short but it is the best I had so was just trying to get what I could when approached with the spur of the moment opportunity. I'm extremely glad it's not the equipment honestly as it is kept in great condition. I'm probably a bit too overprotective with it. Thank you everyone.
 
sk66 said:
Well, it shows that exposure/settings/technique can result in equally poor images irregardless of the equipment used... ;)
Click to expand...

Show us oh master your superior 4:1 cropped photography. Words are cheap
 
GTG said:
Show us oh master your superior 4:1 cropped photography. Words are cheap
Click to expand...
4:1 is pretty dumb, but ok.
Screen Shot 2017-07-20 at 1.02.58 PM.jpg

And that's not even close to the best the camera could do... (I would guess maybe 8-10 MP actually recorded out of 36MP theoretically possible w/ the D810, quite possibly even less)
 
Last edited:
Your zoomed in at 400%. What are you expecting.

A 200mm lens is simply not long enough to shoot red kite in flight. I live in wales and they fly above our house regularly and often very close. Even then some cropping may be required with a 600mm lens.

You've also underexposed the image. Because the camera is metering for the scene as a whole the bright sky is fooling the camera. Either set spot focus or use exposures compensation to increase exposure.
 
Last edited:
For all those that have mentioned it being under exposed, metered incorrectly etc. you are right, however, I knew those points myself hence why I added this sentence prior to the picture: "It is a bad photo but just serves to demonstrate the point". So they added no benefit to the post unfortunately. I much appreciate the helpful replies though so thank you kindly.
 
Gazza732 said:
For all those that have mentioned it being under exposed, metered incorrectly etc. you are right, however, I knew those points myself hence why I added this sentence prior to the picture: "It is a bad photo but just serves to demonstrate the point". So they added no benefit to the post unfortunately. I much appreciate the helpful replies though so thank you kindly.
Click to expand...

Then you should also know that an underexposed image is going to introduce noise and grain into the underexposed areas all if which you're making worse the more you zoom in to the image.

Therefore it probably wasn't the best photo to demonstrate your point, whatever that was.
 
Last edited:
ecoleman said:
A 200mm lens is simply not long enough to shoot red kite in flight. I live in wales and they fly above our house regularly and often very close. Even then some cropping may be required with a 600mm lens.
Click to expand...

I think it might be, I've managed it at 214mm quite easily
 
shutter speed and VR !!!!! The clue is there.

1250th and VR aint gonna work well. VR on doesn't like above 250th, soetimes you can get away with it at 320th but by the time you get to 400.....this is the kind of result. YOU took a perfectly sharp shot with the 1250th shutter speed, the VR has softened it.

Unless you are going below 250th on 200mm do not turn the VR on. It isn't needed. Panning like that, smooth panning, I would be on the 300mm and NOT USING VR down to 200th - 100th for motorbikes provided they're not V-twins (too much engine vibrartion).

This VR thing - it only works at SLOW SHUTTER SPEEDS.
 
Lensflare said:
shutter speed and VR !!!!! The clue is there.

1250th and VR aint gonna work well. VR on doesn't like above 250th, soetimes you can get away with it at 320th but by the time you get to 400.....this is the kind of result. YOU took a perfectly sharp shot with the 1250th shutter speed, the VR has softened it.

Unless you are going below 250th on 200mm do not turn the VR on. It isn't needed. Panning like that, smooth panning, I would be on the 300mm and NOT USING VR down to 200th - 100th for motorbikes provided they're not V-twins (too much engine vibrartion).

This VR thing - it only works at SLOW SHUTTER SPEEDS.
Click to expand...

That is actually really quite helpful. Thank you very much, didn't really consider that so will always bare in mind. Thanks again :D
 
Gazza732 said:
That is actually really quite helpful. Thank you very much, didn't really consider that so will always bare in mind. Thanks again :D
Click to expand...


I have to say, that isn't my experience of VR systems, nowadays they just work. The older lenses had some occasional issues but I never experienced them. Your image isn't softened at all, the problem is simply you are looking at 4:1.
 
Nawty said:
I have to say, that isn't my experience of VR systems, nowadays they just work. The older lenses had some occasional issues but I never experienced them. Your image isn't softened at all, the problem is simply you are looking at 4:1.
Click to expand...

Yep, can go either way depending on the lens. Very easy to test in the garden. Nice fast shutter, 1/1000+, take some shots VR on, some VR off. Compare.
 
Yes that's fair enough. I was just too naive thinking there should be more quality as I hadn't shot my D810 in a while and when I was shooting with it daily I was always filling the frame and not needing to crop so was just expecting the same quality which was clearly unrealistic.
 
What you can see though is that the lens is resolving very well, the edges are still distinct edges which on lesser lenses they wouldn't be, that also tells you it isn't a VR issue.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top