Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Computing > Digital Photography > Re: Photo Opportunity

Reply
Thread Tools

Re: Photo Opportunity

 
 
David Dyer-Bennet
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-02-2012
Eric Stevens <(E-Mail Removed)> writes:

> Since Saturday's effort I have made arrangements to take the camera
> and lens back to the service centre to try and get to the bottom of
> the problem. If necessary, they will send the lens back to the
> factory.


Good luck! I've got that one (70-200/2.8 VR, I see I cut the quote a
bit drastically), and it's quite good for me even on a D700 (where I
actually use the corners of the image). But of course there's *always*
some sample variation in manufacturing, and things happen after it
leaves the factory.

Couple of things -- don't use VR on a tripod with that lens. Probably
don't use VR at very high shutter speeds (which might mean faster than
1/1500 or so). The tripod problem is monumental and obvious, though,
you wouldn't think it just wasn't quite as sharp as you had hoped if you
were seeing the same things my test showed when I used VR on a tripod.

And while that lens is quite good a f/2.8, it seems very weird to me to
be using f/3.3 in bright daylight with shutter speeds up north of 1/5000
of a second. Stopping down will get you some improvement, AND will help
the AF too (more DOF means it doesn't have to focus as accurately to
look good).

But with luck there's just something wrong with your lens or body; then
somebody else can fix it for you .
--
Googleproofaddress(account:dd-b provider:dd-b domain:net)
Snapshots: http://dd-b.net/dd-b/SnapshotAlbum/data/
Photos: http://dd-b.net/photography/gallery/
Dragaera: http://dragaera.info
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Rob
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-02-2012
On 2/10/2012 10:31 AM, David Dyer-Bennet wrote:
> Eric Stevens <(E-Mail Removed)> writes:
>
>> Since Saturday's effort I have made arrangements to take the camera
>> and lens back to the service centre to try and get to the bottom of
>> the problem. If necessary, they will send the lens back to the
>> factory.

>
> Good luck! I've got that one (70-200/2.8 VR, I see I cut the quote a
> bit drastically), and it's quite good for me even on a D700 (where I
> actually use the corners of the image). But of course there's *always*
> some sample variation in manufacturing, and things happen after it
> leaves the factory.
>
> Couple of things -- don't use VR on a tripod with that lens. Probably
> don't use VR at very high shutter speeds (which might mean faster than
> 1/1500 or so). The tripod problem is monumental and obvious, though,
> you wouldn't think it just wasn't quite as sharp as you had hoped if you
> were seeing the same things my test showed when I used VR on a tripod.
>
> And while that lens is quite good a f/2.8, it seems very weird to me to
> be using f/3.3 in bright daylight with shutter speeds up north of 1/5000
> of a second. Stopping down will get you some improvement, AND will help
> the AF too (more DOF means it doesn't have to focus as accurately to
> look good).
>
> But with luck there's just something wrong with your lens or body; then
> somebody else can fix it for you .
>


I don't think that moving aircraft images should be shot at 1/5000 it
makes the image look too static with a rendered background. I use slower
speeds to show prop movement.

Aerial photos of land/buildings should be shot at least, the ground
speed of the aircraft. (200kts - 1/200th - focus does not matter its
greater than infinity)

Would agree you don't use VR on a tripod does funny things like blur the
image whilst its chugging around.

 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
David Dyer-Bennet
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-02-2012
Eric Stevens <(E-Mail Removed)> writes:

> On Mon, 01 Oct 2012 19:31:25 -0500, David Dyer-Bennet <(E-Mail Removed)>
> wrote:
>
>>Eric Stevens <(E-Mail Removed)> writes:
>>
>>> Since Saturday's effort I have made arrangements to take the camera
>>> and lens back to the service centre to try and get to the bottom of
>>> the problem. If necessary, they will send the lens back to the
>>> factory.

>>
>>Good luck! I've got that one (70-200/2.8 VR, I see I cut the quote a
>>bit drastically), and it's quite good for me even on a D700 (where I
>>actually use the corners of the image). But of course there's *always*
>>some sample variation in manufacturing, and things happen after it
>>leaves the factory.
>>
>>Couple of things -- don't use VR on a tripod with that lens. Probably
>>don't use VR at very high shutter speeds (which might mean faster than
>>1/1500 or so). The tripod problem is monumental and obvious, though,
>>you wouldn't think it just wasn't quite as sharp as you had hoped if you
>>were seeing the same things my test showed when I used VR on a tripod.
>>
>>And while that lens is quite good a f/2.8, it seems very weird to me to
>>be using f/3.3 in bright daylight with shutter speeds up north of 1/5000
>>of a second. Stopping down will get you some improvement, AND will help
>>the AF too (more DOF means it doesn't have to focus as accurately to
>>look good).

>
> First, I have always had shaky hands (essential tremor) and camera
> shake has always been a problem for me. Second, my tremor has
> increased with increasing age (7 and I worry about camera shake more
> than I used to. Third, the flight display path was close to where I
> was standing (almost right overhead) and at 300 knots things came and
> went very quickly. All of this pointed to my use of a high shutter
> speed. Further, I understand that this lens works best at or near full
> aperture. Also the light was threatening to become dim (but it never
> seemed to actually do it). So I started off at wide open and after
> checking what I could see on the screen I concluded the images were
> sharp etc and the histogram was OK. I must admit I laughed slightly
> hysterically at 1/6400 and 1/8000 of a second.


Ah, I'd forgotten the essential tremor problem, though I now remember
having seen you post about it before.

These exceptionally high shutter speeds really are something of a
game-changer, in carefully selected games. I've frozen a cannonball in
flight using just the camera shutter.

> Knowing what I know now, if I had to do it again, I would probably
> stop down to f/5.6 and +1 exposure compensation. That would still have
> the shutter speed insanely high by my old standards.


And might well freeze the props further than is really desirable.

>>But with luck there's just something wrong with your lens or body; then
>>somebody else can fix it for you .

>
> If they find nothing, I will have to assume it's me. I'm already
> working on that.


Test on tripod with VR off and you can eliminate both your tremor and VR
interaction possibilities, and see more of just what the lens does. For
testing, use Live View to focus, because that eliminates any error
between the phase-detect AF system and the actual sensor plane, another
possible source of error. Also, go for similar distances, close limits
are sometimes somewhat compromised opitcally.

--
Googleproofaddress(account:dd-b provider:dd-b domain:net)
Snapshots: http://dd-b.net/dd-b/SnapshotAlbum/data/
Photos: http://dd-b.net/photography/gallery/
Dragaera: http://dragaera.info
 
Reply With Quote
 
David Dyer-Bennet
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-02-2012
Rob <(E-Mail Removed)> writes:

> Would agree you don't use VR on a tripod does funny things like blur
> the image whilst its chugging around.


That's definitely true for the Nikon 70-200/2.8 VR first version, both
as given in the manual and as shown in my tests.

This is an area where you need to read the manual for the specific lens,
because even in the Nikon line they don't all say the same thing, and
the manual seems to be generally right.
--
Googleproofaddress(account:dd-b provider:dd-b domain:net)
Snapshots: http://dd-b.net/dd-b/SnapshotAlbum/data/
Photos: http://dd-b.net/photography/gallery/
Dragaera: http://dragaera.info
 
Reply With Quote
 
Bruce
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-02-2012
David Dyer-Bennet <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>Eric Stevens <(E-Mail Removed)> writes:
>>
>> First, I have always had shaky hands (essential tremor) and camera
>> shake has always been a problem for me. Second, my tremor has
>> increased with increasing age (7 and I worry about camera shake more
>> than I used to. Third, the flight display path was close to where I
>> was standing (almost right overhead) and at 300 knots things came and
>> went very quickly. All of this pointed to my use of a high shutter
>> speed. Further, I understand that this lens works best at or near full
>> aperture. Also the light was threatening to become dim (but it never
>> seemed to actually do it). So I started off at wide open and after
>> checking what I could see on the screen I concluded the images were
>> sharp etc and the histogram was OK. I must admit I laughed slightly
>> hysterically at 1/6400 and 1/8000 of a second.

>
>Ah, I'd forgotten the essential tremor problem, though I now remember
>having seen you post about it before.



I'm twenty years younger than Eric but I also have essential tremor
and have had it for most of my life. It unfortunately affected the
anti-shake systems in several lenses. I have had to sell these lenses
because there is no way they can deliver sharp results in my hands.

They include:
Nikkor 70-300mm f/4-5.6 AF-G VR
Panasonic 45-200mm f/4-5.6 Mega OIS

It seemed strange that I was getting better results with VR or OIS
turned off.


 
Reply With Quote
 
David Dyer-Bennet
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-03-2012
Eric Stevens <(E-Mail Removed)> writes:

> On Tue, 02 Oct 2012 21:34:22 +0100, Bruce <(E-Mail Removed)>
> wrote:
>
>>David Dyer-Bennet <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>>>Eric Stevens <(E-Mail Removed)> writes:
>>>>
>>>> First, I have always had shaky hands (essential tremor) and camera
>>>> shake has always been a problem for me. Second, my tremor has
>>>> increased with increasing age (7 and I worry about camera shake more
>>>> than I used to. Third, the flight display path was close to where I
>>>> was standing (almost right overhead) and at 300 knots things came and
>>>> went very quickly. All of this pointed to my use of a high shutter
>>>> speed. Further, I understand that this lens works best at or near full
>>>> aperture. Also the light was threatening to become dim (but it never
>>>> seemed to actually do it). So I started off at wide open and after
>>>> checking what I could see on the screen I concluded the images were
>>>> sharp etc and the histogram was OK. I must admit I laughed slightly
>>>> hysterically at 1/6400 and 1/8000 of a second.
>>>
>>>Ah, I'd forgotten the essential tremor problem, though I now remember
>>>having seen you post about it before.

>>
>>
>>I'm twenty years younger than Eric but I also have essential tremor
>>and have had it for most of my life. It unfortunately affected the
>>anti-shake systems in several lenses. I have had to sell these lenses
>>because there is no way they can deliver sharp results in my hands.
>>
>>They include:
>>Nikkor 70-300mm f/4-5.6 AF-G VR
>>Panasonic 45-200mm f/4-5.6 Mega OIS
>>
>>It seemed strange that I was getting better results with VR or OIS
>>turned off.
>>

> That's interesting. I'm beginning to suspect that VR may not be the
> friend I thought it was.


Maybe the "active" setting (for moving cars) would work better? Depends
how your tremor matches the two models the Nikon VR 70-200 supports.
--
Googleproofaddress(account:dd-b provider:dd-b domain:net)
Snapshots: http://dd-b.net/dd-b/SnapshotAlbum/data/
Photos: http://dd-b.net/photography/gallery/
Dragaera: http://dragaera.info
 
Reply With Quote
 
David Dyer-Bennet
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-03-2012
Eric Stevens <(E-Mail Removed)> writes:

> On Tue, 02 Oct 2012 14:57:45 -0500, David Dyer-Bennet <(E-Mail Removed)>
> wrote:
>
>>Eric Stevens <(E-Mail Removed)> writes:
>>
>>> On Mon, 01 Oct 2012 19:31:25 -0500, David Dyer-Bennet <(E-Mail Removed)>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>>Eric Stevens <(E-Mail Removed)> writes:
>>>>
>>>>> Since Saturday's effort I have made arrangements to take the camera
>>>>> and lens back to the service centre to try and get to the bottom of
>>>>> the problem. If necessary, they will send the lens back to the
>>>>> factory.
>>>>
>>>>Good luck! I've got that one (70-200/2.8 VR, I see I cut the quote a
>>>>bit drastically), and it's quite good for me even on a D700 (where I
>>>>actually use the corners of the image). But of course there's *always*
>>>>some sample variation in manufacturing, and things happen after it
>>>>leaves the factory.
>>>>
>>>>Couple of things -- don't use VR on a tripod with that lens. Probably
>>>>don't use VR at very high shutter speeds (which might mean faster than
>>>>1/1500 or so). The tripod problem is monumental and obvious, though,
>>>>you wouldn't think it just wasn't quite as sharp as you had hoped if you
>>>>were seeing the same things my test showed when I used VR on a tripod.
>>>>
>>>>And while that lens is quite good a f/2.8, it seems very weird to me to
>>>>be using f/3.3 in bright daylight with shutter speeds up north of 1/5000
>>>>of a second. Stopping down will get you some improvement, AND will help
>>>>the AF too (more DOF means it doesn't have to focus as accurately to
>>>>look good).
>>>
>>> First, I have always had shaky hands (essential tremor) and camera
>>> shake has always been a problem for me. Second, my tremor has
>>> increased with increasing age (7 and I worry about camera shake more
>>> than I used to. Third, the flight display path was close to where I
>>> was standing (almost right overhead) and at 300 knots things came and
>>> went very quickly. All of this pointed to my use of a high shutter
>>> speed. Further, I understand that this lens works best at or near full
>>> aperture. Also the light was threatening to become dim (but it never
>>> seemed to actually do it). So I started off at wide open and after
>>> checking what I could see on the screen I concluded the images were
>>> sharp etc and the histogram was OK. I must admit I laughed slightly
>>> hysterically at 1/6400 and 1/8000 of a second.

>>
>>Ah, I'd forgotten the essential tremor problem, though I now remember
>>having seen you post about it before.
>>
>>These exceptionally high shutter speeds really are something of a
>>game-changer, in carefully selected games. I've frozen a cannonball in
>>flight using just the camera shutter.
>>
>>> Knowing what I know now, if I had to do it again, I would probably
>>> stop down to f/5.6 and +1 exposure compensation. That would still have
>>> the shutter speed insanely high by my old standards.

>>
>>And might well freeze the props further than is really desirable.
>>
>>>>But with luck there's just something wrong with your lens or body; then
>>>>somebody else can fix it for you .
>>>
>>> If they find nothing, I will have to assume it's me. I'm already
>>> working on that.

>>
>>Test on tripod with VR off and you can eliminate both your tremor and VR
>>interaction possibilities, and see more of just what the lens does.

>
> I did that two or three years ago. The lens was only as good as an 18
> year old 70~200 Tokina in which I was slightly disappointed.
>
>> For
>>testing, use Live View to focus, because that eliminates any error
>>between the phase-detect AF system and the actual sensor plane, another
>>possible source of error. Also, go for similar distances, close limits
>>are sometimes somewhat compromised opitcally.

>
> I've done all that. I've never thought the lens was as good as it
> should be.


Okay, you're ahead of me. Does sound like a lens problem -- I upgraded
from a 70-200/2.8 Tokina to mine and found it an optical improvement and
a huge AF improvement.
--
Googleproofaddress(account:dd-b provider:dd-b domain:net)
Snapshots: http://dd-b.net/dd-b/SnapshotAlbum/data/
Photos: http://dd-b.net/photography/gallery/
Dragaera: http://dragaera.info
 
Reply With Quote
 
Bruce
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-03-2012
Eric Stevens <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>On Tue, 02 Oct 2012 21:34:22 +0100, Bruce <(E-Mail Removed)>
>wrote:
>
>>David Dyer-Bennet <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>>>Eric Stevens <(E-Mail Removed)> writes:
>>>>
>>>> First, I have always had shaky hands (essential tremor) and camera
>>>> shake has always been a problem for me. Second, my tremor has
>>>> increased with increasing age (7 and I worry about camera shake more
>>>> than I used to. Third, the flight display path was close to where I
>>>> was standing (almost right overhead) and at 300 knots things came and
>>>> went very quickly. All of this pointed to my use of a high shutter
>>>> speed. Further, I understand that this lens works best at or near full
>>>> aperture. Also the light was threatening to become dim (but it never
>>>> seemed to actually do it). So I started off at wide open and after
>>>> checking what I could see on the screen I concluded the images were
>>>> sharp etc and the histogram was OK. I must admit I laughed slightly
>>>> hysterically at 1/6400 and 1/8000 of a second.
>>>
>>>Ah, I'd forgotten the essential tremor problem, though I now remember
>>>having seen you post about it before.

>>
>>
>>I'm twenty years younger than Eric but I also have essential tremor
>>and have had it for most of my life. It unfortunately affected the
>>anti-shake systems in several lenses. I have had to sell these lenses
>>because there is no way they can deliver sharp results in my hands.
>>
>>They include:
>>Nikkor 70-300mm f/4-5.6 AF-G VR
>>Panasonic 45-200mm f/4-5.6 Mega OIS
>>
>>It seemed strange that I was getting better results with VR or OIS
>>turned off.
>>

>That's interesting.



I first noticed it with an 80-400mm VR Nikkor I was testing for a
review. I just couldn't get sharp images with it unless I stuck to
the shutter speed = 1/focal length "rule".

Of course part of the problem was that the 80-400mm VR Nikkor isn't
especially sharp to start with. But I found the same problem with the
70-200mm VR Nikkor and later with the VR II version.

The effect is at its worst with the two lenses I listed:
Nikkor 70-300mm f/4-5.6 AF-G VR
Panasonic 45-200mm f/4-5.6 Mega OIS

Panasonic has had other, unrelated problems with its 45-175mm Z lens
where the OIS (VR type) system is completely thrown off within a
certain range of shutter speeds. There is also a 14-42mm Z lens which
produces poor results but I don't know whether that is also a problem
with the OIS system.


>I'm beginning to suspect that VR may not be the friend I thought it was.



Yes, that's how it looks.

At least I now know why I have experienced significant problems in the
past. Apparently I have probably had this since childhood. It's too
late to worry about it now.
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Re: Photo Opportunity tony cooper Digital Photography 0 09-22-2012 04:10 AM
Re: Photo opportunity coming up tony cooper Digital Photography 0 07-15-2012 05:37 AM
I have opportunity to enter photo contest. Richard Bornstein Digital Photography 1 09-22-2006 06:15 AM
photo opportunity dav01@excite.com Digital Photography 16 07-11-2005 10:39 AM
Photo Opportunity Forums? Pete Digital Photography 1 03-14-2005 12:14 AM



Advertisments