| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
hellboy80
Joined: 29 Dec 2017
Posts: 6
|
 Posted: Fri Dec 29, 2017 5:39 pm Post subject: Lens I bought that should be very sharp is very soft. Why? |
 |
|
hellboy80 wrote:
Hi. I just bought Nikon 55mm f/2.8 AF MICRO-NIKKOR. Ken Rockwell says its probably Nikon's sharpest lens (http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/55af.htm) and the sample images I saw on the internet are extremely sharp. However, the lens I bought is extremely soft. Its actually the less sharpest lens I had (even my cheap kit lens is much sharper). I have Nikon D3300. Where could be the problem? Do you think there is something wrong about this lens or am I doing something wrong? (Of course, I am focusing manually)
I try to upload some images tommorrow. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Lucse
Joined: 22 Jul 2015
Posts: 166
Location: EU
|
| Posted: Fri Dec 29, 2017 8:12 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Lucse wrote:
This lens should be very sharp indeed.
Just a few questions: do you have experience with manual lenses (or AF-lenses that you use manually)? Do you have other ones and are you familiar with working with them on you camera?
If the answer to those questons is yes: do you see any signs on the lens or do you have any indications that it could have been opened?
(Scratches around the screws on the back for example or parts with slack on them? etcetera..)
As I am thinking that a possible reason could be that the lens been taken apart (for whatever reason) and put together in a wrong way.
So, all possible information you can give about this lens regarding the functioning and even the appearance could be helpfull. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
newst
Joined: 21 Oct 2014
Posts: 617
Location: Troy, MI USA
|
| Posted: Fri Dec 29, 2017 8:48 pm Post subject: |
|
|
newst wrote:
| Lucse wrote: |
This lens should be very sharp indeed.
Just a few questions: do you have experience with manual lenses (or AF-lenses that you use manually)? Do you have other ones and are you familiar with working with them on you camera?
If the answer to those questons is yes: do you see any signs on the lens or do you have any indications that it could have been opened?
(Scratches around the screws on the back for example or parts with slack on them? etcetera..)
As I am thinking that a possible reason could be that the lens been taken apart (for whatever reason) and put together in a wrong way.
So, all possible information you can give about this lens regarding the functioning and even the appearance could be helpfull. |
Based on what little we know this would be my guess.
Another possibility would be a haze on an internal element. Shine a bright light through it and look for a hazed element. The bright light is critical as often you can't detect the haze in normal daylight.
_________________
Steve
Just an armadillo on the shoulder of the information superhighway. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
hellboy80
Joined: 29 Dec 2017
Posts: 6
|
| Posted: Fri Dec 29, 2017 10:13 pm Post subject: |
|
|
hellboy80 wrote:
The lens looks ok outside, but the image looks hazy. I am not sure if I can recognize the haze on the lens, but I tried the flashlight test and didnt see anything weird (only little bit of dust).
Here are some images I shot today:
1/160, f4, ISO 100, tripod, manual focus with zoomed in live view, 100% crop
1/200, f8, ISO 100, tripod, manual focus with zoomed in live view, shutter release, 100% crop:
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
hellboy80
Joined: 29 Dec 2017
Posts: 6
|
| Posted: Fri Dec 29, 2017 10:28 pm Post subject: |
|
|
hellboy80 wrote:
I manual focus all the time, so I have some experience with it. This is my first vintage AF lens. I locked the lens aperture ring at minimum aperture and I controled the aperture in camera. It works ok. But that probably is not the problem. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bychance
Joined: 24 Apr 2013
Posts: 345
Location: Kent, England
|
| Posted: Fri Dec 29, 2017 10:56 pm Post subject: |
|
|
bychance wrote:
See how it performs in auto focus...
_________________
I got where I am by avoiding where I was going.
Now where was I? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
hellboy80
Joined: 29 Dec 2017
Posts: 6
|
| Posted: Fri Dec 29, 2017 11:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
hellboy80 wrote:
I have Nikon D3300 which doesnt have built-in focus motor, so I cant try AF. The focus throw is extremely short, maybe AF it could perform better? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
hellboy80
Joined: 29 Dec 2017
Posts: 6
|
| Posted: Fri Dec 29, 2017 11:44 pm Post subject: |
|
|
hellboy80 wrote:
I tried different apertures (f/8 is rather ok, but still worse than my kit lens, f/3.5 is just out of focus, even when from a bigger distance).
Is this ok?
f/8
f/5.6
f/4.5
f/3.5
 [/url] |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jamaeolus
Joined: 19 Mar 2014
Posts: 2927
Location: Eugene
Expire: 2015-08-20
|
| Posted: Sat Dec 30, 2017 12:58 am Post subject: |
|
|
jamaeolus wrote:
I'm guessing that lens should be way sharper than that even wide open (I don't own that particular lens). Do you have a rail? I like to focus as close as possible with the focus ring then zoom in as far as possible on the focus point and use the rail for micro adjustments. If you can't get a good sharp image that way the lens is definitely flawed in some way.
_________________
photos are moments frozen in time |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
luisalegria
Joined: 07 Mar 2008
Posts: 6627
Location: San Francisco, USA
Expire: 2018-01-18
|
| Posted: Sat Dec 30, 2017 2:58 am Post subject: |
|
|
luisalegria wrote:
Any decent modern lens should be sharper than that wide open.
I suspect a problem with element spacing or suchlike.
One good test for spacing issues, etc. is whether infinity is correct.
See if you can get infinity as marked.
Another test, to remove the possibility of missed focus, is to shoot a detailed surface (such as a tape measure or meter stick) at an angle to capture the whole DOF, from foreground to background. If nothing at all is sharp then you have a defective lens.
If some unexpected zone actually is sharp you may have a focus calibration problem with your camera body.
_________________
I like Pentax DSLR's, Exaktas, M42 bodies of all kinds, strange and cheap Japanese lenses, and am dabbling in medium format/Speed Graphic work. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
visualopsins
Joined: 05 Mar 2009
Posts: 10529
Location: California
Expire: 2025-04-11
|
| Posted: Sat Dec 30, 2017 3:00 am Post subject: |
|
|
visualopsins wrote:
Should be sharper than that. Rattle? Some internal adjustment needed?
_________________
☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮ like attracts like! ☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮
Cameras: Sony ILCE-7RM2, Spotmatics II, F, and ESII, Nikon P4
Lenses:
M42 Asahi Optical Co., Takumar 1:4 f=35mm, 1:2 f=58mm (Sonnar), 1:2.4 f=58mm (Heliar), 1:2.2 f=55mm (Gaussian), 1:2.8 f=105mm (Model I), 1:2.8/105 (Model II), 1:5.6/200, Tele-Takumar 1:5.6/200, 1:6.3/300, Macro-Takumar 1:4/50, Auto-Takumar 1:2.3 f=35, 1:1.8 f=55mm, 1:2.2 f=55mm, Super-TAKUMAR 1:3.5/28 (fat), 1:2/35 (Fat), 1:1.4/50 (8-element), Super-Multi-Coated Fisheye-TAKUMAR 1:4/17, Super-Multi-Coated TAKUMAR 1:4.5/20, 1:3.5/24, 1:3.5/28, 1:2/35, 1:3.5/35, 1:1.8/85, 1:1.9/85 1:2.8/105, 1:3.5/135, 1:2.5/135 (II), 1:4/150, 1:4/200, 1:4/300, 1:4.5/500, Super-Multi-Coated Macro-TAKUMAR 1:4/50, 1:4/100, Super-Multi-Coated Bellows-TAKUMAR 1:4/100, SMC TAKUMAR 1:1.4/50, 1:1.8/55
M42 Carl Zeiss Jena Flektogon 2.4/35
Contax Carl Zeiss Vario-Sonnar T* 28-70mm F3.5-4.5
Pentax K-mount SMC PENTAX ZOOM 1:3.5 35~105mm, SMC PENTAX ZOOM 1:4 45~125mm
Nikon Micro-NIKKOR-P-C Auto 1:3.5 f=55mm, NIKKOR-P Auto 105mm f/2.5 Pre-AI (Sonnar), Micro-NIKKOR 105mm 1:4 AI, NIKKOR AI-S 35-135mm f/3,5-4,5
Tamron SP 17mm f/3.5 (51B), Tamron SP 17mm f/3.5 (51BB), SP 500mm f/8 (55BB), SP 70-210mm f/3.5 (19AH)
Vivitar 100mm 1:2.8 MC 1:1 Macro Telephoto (Kiron)
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
hellboy80
Joined: 29 Dec 2017
Posts: 6
|
| Posted: Sat Dec 30, 2017 11:41 am Post subject: |
|
|
hellboy80 wrote:
| luisalegria wrote: |
Any decent modern lens should be sharper than that wide open.
I suspect a problem with element spacing or suchlike.
One good test for spacing issues, etc. is whether infinity is correct.
See if you can get infinity as marked.
Another test, to remove the possibility of missed focus, is to shoot a detailed surface (such as a tape measure or meter stick) at an angle to capture the whole DOF, from foreground to background. If nothing at all is sharp then you have a defective lens.
If some unexpected zone actually is sharp you may have a focus calibration problem with your camera body. |
f/5.6
f/3.5
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
luisalegria
Joined: 07 Mar 2008
Posts: 6627
Location: San Francisco, USA
Expire: 2018-01-18
|
| Posted: Sat Dec 30, 2017 1:57 pm Post subject: |
|
|
luisalegria wrote:
Yeah, its defective.
_________________
I like Pentax DSLR's, Exaktas, M42 bodies of all kinds, strange and cheap Japanese lenses, and am dabbling in medium format/Speed Graphic work. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Kei
Joined: 08 Jan 2015
Posts: 142
Location: S. Wales UK
|
| Posted: Sat Dec 30, 2017 9:27 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Kei wrote:
It's a superb optic in a rather rattly plastic beer can. The older MF version is vastly superior in construction, but gives up the AF ability and the 1:1 magnification. The AF model is actually pretty rare as they were only made for a couple of years in the mid 80's before being replaced by the 60mm version. I'd say that yours has probably taken a knock or has been poorly reassembled at some stage as it should not be anything like that.
I can attest to the sharpness on a good sample, it's extreme at any distance.
_________________
Contax Zeiss Distagon 35mm f1.4, Zeiss Planar 85mm f1.4, Zeiss Vario-sonnar 35-70mm f3.4
Mamiya RB/RZ67 RZ67 Pro II, 65mm f4 L-A, 75mm f4.5 Shift, 127mm f3.5 K/L
Mamiya m645 645 1000S, 645J, 645AFD M 35mm f3.5 C, 55mm f2.8 AF, 80mm f1.9 N, 80mm f2.8 C, 120mm f4 macro, 150mm f2.8 A, 210mm f4 ULD, 210mm f4 C
Tamron Primes 17mm f3.5, 24mm f2.5, 90mm f2.8, 135mm f2.5, 180mm f2.5, 300mm f5.6
Tamron Zooms 24-48mm f3.5-3.8, 28-80 f3.5-4.2, 35-80 f2.8-3.8, 70-210mm f3.5, 75-250mm f3.5-5.6
Olympus OM Zuiko 24mm f2.8, Zuiko 28mm f2.8, Zuiko 50mm f1.8, Sigma 600mm f8
Nikon MF 24mm f2.8 N.C, 28mm f2 AI-s, 35mm f1.4 AI-s, 50mm f1.2 AI-s, 50mm f1.8 AI-s, 135mm f2.8 AI, 300mm f2.8 AI-s
Nikon AF F5, D810 16mm f2.8 AF-D, 20mm f1.8 AF-S, 55mm f2.8 AF micro, Tokina 100mm f2.8 macro, 80-200mm f2.8 AF-D
Canon FD T90, T50, AT-1, 50mm f1.8, 135mm f3.5
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Lightshow
Joined: 04 Nov 2011
Posts: 3669
Location: Calgary
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 31, 2017 6:30 am Post subject: |
|
|
Lightshow wrote:
| hellboy80 wrote: |
f/5.6
f/3.5
|
Yeah, there is something very wrong with the optics, the center of the DOF should be razor sharp in both pictures, and at the very least, it should improve as it's stopped down, and it's not... at all.
You could send it to a lens tech to check that the elements are seated properly.
_________________
A Manual Focus Junky...
One photographers junk lens is an artists favorite tool.
My lens list
http://www.flickr.com/photos/lightshow-photography/ |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
crouu
Joined: 02 Jan 2018
Posts: 12
|
| Posted: Tue Jan 02, 2018 3:53 am Post subject: |
|
|
crouu wrote:
The manual focus and AF on your reflex camera are separate mechanisms. The AF uses small secondary mirror under the main one. But manual focussing doesn't. Your pictures of the typeface look like back/front focus misalignment of the mirror or screen. Your camera might be set up OK for AF but need adjustment for manual. Usually a hex key slight turn. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
Search
Memberlist
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
