D90 images - not sharp... what am I doing wrong?!

[JJ!]

So I took a bunch of pics with the D90 and 16-85mm lens at a horse show. Nearly all pics came out looking like the one below.

All around F6 and shutter speeds of 1/1000 - 1/1600.

For me, the quality just does not cut it. Could be down to my chosen settings (3d tracking being one of them), but just not sure.

Also below, is pics I took of the same horse at a previous event, using more or less the same shutter speeds etc, but using an Olympus E-620 which is meant to be a not so good camera. This was also with the standard 40-150mm lens.

There is more noise in the Oly pic, but its overall sharpness and quality just look better.

So whats peoples thoughts? User error, body set up or just a poor lens.

Cheers!

Nikon D90 picture

100% crop

Olympus picture

100% crop

 

[Feirny]

I hope that's not her sex face.

On topic, I have no idea, sorry.

 

[Jonny1*2]

I think it's sun direction that's affected them. Its a good pic, buy i know what you mean. Were you using continual focus?

 

[JJ!]

Yeah, C-AF on both pics. Guess I just expected that the Nikon would more than match the Olympus!

 

[unofficialPete]

Could be sun direction, focus or the the Olympus could be far more aggressive with its in camera sharpening. Only real way to compare would be posting RAW files with the same conversion.

 

[guysy]

The ISO was at 400, if i was shooting in the day id be at ISO 100 and tbh id be lazy and leave it in program.

 

[Andy.]

The Olympus shot looks like it has been over sharpened (either in PP or by the camera).

If you were tracking the horse, it could be that the focal point was caught by the flag in the foreground and shifted? Is there another point in the image which is sharper or were you not panning?

 

[JJ!]

No its pretty much the same over the frame with the horse being the best in focus. Having said that, having read reviews of the 16-85, a lot of people are saying the images are a little soft and even the 18-105 is sharper.

The Oly would have sharpened in camera - there has been no processing in photoshop etc on either image.

 

[Luke.]

I have this same problem with my Sigma 24-70mm F2.8 producing soft focus images and its at the stage now where I never use it anymore. I will be getting it sent off to be checked over. But with every other lens it's perfect.

 

[JJ!]

Will borrow another lens and see what results I get!

 

[unofficialPete]

Its rather boring but set up the camera and do a controlled test vs another lens. Stick it on a tripod, Manual focus & self timed etc.

 

[TheEvilGiraffe]

What's the full exif run down for both ?

I'd guess the ISO was higher in the sharper image due to the noise...

 

[bozothenutter]

what bluePete said....try some static objects first, from a tripod

 

[JJ!]

Cheers guys. Not really too keen on the lens anyway so no big deal if it is the lens. On a side note. 35 or 50mm prime? Can only afford the one at the min.

 

[bozothenutter]

D90 is not full frame right?
so a 35 will be a 52, and a 50 will be a 75.
basically the choice is a 'standard' or a short tele......
what type of photography do you do the most?

 

[Tigger]

had you any filters on either lenses JJ?

I would go for the 35mm prime - I have the 50mm 1.8 and as much as I love it - it's too dam long lol. Sometimes I actually can't move further back from something I want to shoot with it

 

[JJ!]

No filters Tigger. Think I am going to revert back to the standard 18-105 and play with sharpness levels. For a £400+ lens the 16-85 just isn't worth it IMO and I should get my money back on what I paid for it anyway. This will leave me enough to get the 18-105 back + the 35mm F1.8 AF-S or the new 50mm F1.8 AF-S. Both meant to be bloody good lenses!

 

[ukaskew]

3D Tracking is useless in my opinion, AFC with manual focus point selection all the way for moving objects.

You will probably also find that the Olympus is quite agressive in its JPEG processing 'out of the box'. My Pen is the same, sharpness and noise reduction have been dialled down to -2 on mine to get a cleaner original file.

 

[JJ!]

Had a look at the primes this afternoon.. the new 50mm f1.8 does look rather nice. Would say build is better than the 35mm and pics are very nice. Reviews have it sharper than the f1.4 version which is twice the price.

 

[bozothenutter]

max opening have nothing to do with sharpness or image quality, the manufacturer might even have to compromise image quality to get the required max opening.

 

[JJ!]

Right, after lookig at some images taken with the 18-105, its clear that the 16-85 is very soft at the long end. The 18-105 being sharper at 85 through to 105. The build is obviously not so good, but I managed to sell the lens and order myself a 18-105 and 50mm f1.8

 

[Scott™]

You will not be disappointed with the prime. Epic lens.

 

[Y7 ADW]

Are all the images soft or is it just that particular lens? Also are you shooting JPEG or RAW? And is it set to normal image quality?

I bought a D90 last week and so far I am so pleased with it. When using it with the 70-200 F2.8 you could cut yourself on the images it produces they are that sharp lol.

 

[JJ!]

Was the lens TBH, the 18-105 whilst not great, is good for a kit lens. So looking forward to getting the 50!

 

[JMR]

I have the Nikon 35mm f1.8 prime lens and its a cracker for sharpness, particularly between f2 - f4

This is a cheapish lens at only £180 but there are some red/green chromatic abberations in front and beyond the point of focus which can detract from the image at times.

Very lightweight and the 50mm is based on this design if its the AF-S silent wave autofocus model you have picked.

 

[amnesia]

The D90 and 50mm f1.8 is a cracking combo... if only I could afford the 35mm f1.4G

 

[JJ!]

50mm f1.8 AF-S has arrived!

 

[Tigger]

Nicely - I'm looking at a 30mm f1.4 at the moment

My 24-70mm f2.8 isn't producing images as sharp as I'd like them to be sometimes. Has some dust on the inside but that wouldn't have a massive effect would it?

 

[Tigger]

Little bump here but it looks like I'm having the same trouble, with "normal" shots - portrait/still life/landscape in Aperture or Program mode :S

Even tried a few in "Landscape" setting and some looked awesome on the rear screen but very soft when loaded onto the laptop

I'm shooting with the D90 in Standard shooting mode, Active D-Lighting on Normal or Auto. (Sometimes try Vivid mode)
Glass - Nikon 24-70mm f2.8 & Nikon 70-200mm VRII f2.8 - so getting soft results is mind boggling!

 

[TheEvilGiraffe]

Have you tried a focus test ? Newspaper page on a table will do. Pick a word to focus on take a pic and see if it's in focus ?!

If you want more technical help or test ideas, google it.. :rasp:

 

[capturedbyjames]

Does it happen in manual focus? As above, try a manual focus on a word through the viewfinder, then see what its like on big screen.

 

[Brazo]

Ok

Mount camera on tripod
Turn off VR
Set to manual focus and focus
10 second timer or IR remote

Take a picture and if its sharp start adding ion some of the variables above until you have nailed where the issue lies.

 

[Tigger]

Took a few shots around the apartment - seems ok

Landscape shots (handheld) appear a bit soft on screen sometimes

 

[Martin!]

Personally I would step the lens down to f/9-11....I wouldn't expect it to be tack sharp at f/6, especially if it's at 85mm as it's almost wide open....

 

[Tigger]

Program mode & fill in flash set at TTL/BL (-0.7) seemed to keep me happy today in regards to sharpness - some shots were taken at f22!
Better results than I was getting in Aperture priority :S

That was for "street" shots at a festival today in strong sunlight - rolling with the D90 + 24-70 2.8 combo with the SB900 on top

The other body that the 70-200 glued to it - also in Program mode