Is it possible that older MF lenses, even good quality ones are not sharp enough for digital capture? Or, is it possible that digital sensors are more sensitive to slight vibrations. Maybe common vibrations at certain frequencies or something that affect's the image sharpness on digital captures more so than with film??!!
For almost two years now I've been chasing down sharpness & focus gremlins in my digital images and too be honest I am at my absolute wits end. I will try to include as much pertinent information as I can concerning the problem and my efforts to solve it, (so this may be a long post)
I have a 18 year old Nikon 300mm f2.8 ED/IF lens and an even older 200mm f4 IF micro. I have always "babied" these lenses. They've never been dropped or mistreated. The 300mm still looks new! I always use these lenses while mounted on a tripod (again, a 20 yr old gitzo metal tripod. I do not remember the model No. but its a step down from the old 410. Mid sized, not the big monster but still plenty sturdy) Since I began using these lenses on digital bodies, I have had a DEVIL of a time getting consistently sharp images. (and I don't mean "soft" because I haven't applied USM to the images.) I mean that while previewing the image in whatever software, Nikon View, PS, Capture One LE, etc., when compared side by side, RAW, uncompressed NEF files from the same shoot, on the same cf card, shot minutes or even seconds apart, without any USM applied. These images can show a dramatic differences in sharpness & detail resolution or actual focal point placement. Of course, I am not tripping the shutter until the subject appears to me, to be in sharp focus in the viewfinder.
I have tried everything I can think of to isolate & correct the problem without any luck. To make matters worse, the problem seems to be a moving target. By that I mean that sometimes the focus appears soft all over the frame, suggesting camera shake or some such. This is occurring even when using a cable release and/or shutter speeds that "should" be sufficient for sharp images even if I was hand holding the lens, (i.e. 1/1000 or much faster.) Then later in the same shoot, I'll get a tack sharp image while I was using a shutter speed of 1/160th sec. and no cable release while the ball movements weren't locked completely tight.
At other times during the same session, it appears I'm regularly missing focus. In these images the focus appears to be well in front (inches or even a foot) of the actual point that I was focussing on, even though the focus indicator in the viewfinder indicated I was locked on to the subject.
Since I was getting a few shots that were razor sharp, I thought it HAD to be my technique. But, after trying to eliminate technique as the culprit I still get inconsistent results. I've got a good Arca ball head, Gitzo tripod with short column, I'll use it with the tripod legs retracted, and my position low . I've tried techniques I've read about to add my body mass to the camera/lens shooting combo. You know, hand resting on lens, face pressed into camera. I've also tried completely "Hands Off" techniques such as with and without mirror lockup and/or cable release. Fast or slow shutter speeds, and still I can't depend on when I'll get a sharp image. Also, I almost never use the lenses stopped down past f11, usually around f5.6 or 8.
I've used the 200mm micro indoors for some set up shots with leaves & flowers and had similar inconsistent sharpness results. The 200 isn't an ED lens and some of the shots were made using f16 or smaller, but sweet spot F stop or no,.. I can't seem to predict which shots will be sharper.
I've tried testing these lenses and the results were inconclusive! With the 300 and it's 10ft. min. focussing distance, I had to perform the tests outdoors and try as I might, on ea. of these occasions I couldn't completely, absolutely, rule out wind movement on my subject. I'm pretty sure it wasn't a factor, but there were intermittent breezes & I suppose they could have been a factor. With the 200mm, as I mentioned above. I've set up shots indoors, no breeze, cable release used, subject still, shutter & f-stop varied,.. still inconclusive, inconsistent results.
I had pretty much decided it was the camera!! Has to be right?? So I bag my D70 and purchase a new D200 and once more,.. I apparently cannot RELIABLY focus a camera to save my life!! All of the above mentioned problems are occurring with the new D200!
Only 3 common factors (that I can identify) involved here;
Me,.. I wear glasses for a very slight astigmatism, and my distance vision is worse than my close up vision, but this focus problem doesn't go away or become more or less frequent regardless of whether or not I'm wearing my glasses while shooting. I get sharp images without my glasses, I get soft images with my glasses and vise versa!! No discernable pattern either way.
Digital cameras,.. Thought for sure it was the D70, but the same problem on 2 different model cameras, purchased over 2 years apart?!! Seems highly unlikely! Also, when you read the details below under lenses. My film cameras do not seem to be afflicted with the same trouble!!
Lenses,.. I went back to a subject I was having lots of trouble with obtaining any critically sharp images,.. a Red bellied Woodpecker at it's nest, and using the same 300mm lens on my Nikon F3 and Velvia and KodakE100 film shot the same woodpecker with a much higher ratio of sharp to soft images (at generally slower shutter speeds I might add, since the digital captures were made using ISO 200 and the film images weren't pushed to match the digital ISO.) Of the ones that weren't sharp. The majority seemed to be OBVIOUS subject movement or I missed focus on a relatively fast moving subject. ("missing focus" still happened fairly regularly using film & this particular subject, but not near as often as when I was using the digital camera on a "relatively" slower moving & often stationary subject [Sandhill Cranes])
During this years recent shoot with the Sandhill Cranes, I asked another photographer, A Semi Professional, meaning he isn't full time but makes a fair portion of his income with his cameras and has been widely published,.. I asked if I I could mount my D200 on his 200-400 f4 ED/IF VR. and large gitzo carbon fiber tripod setup!! He did, for 1 image only which HE shot using AF. Now,.. listen closely because this is why I've become concerned for my sanity,... I have images shot that day, with my 300 f2.8 that are far sharper (pre processed) than the one he shot using this brand new, top of the line AF/VR lens. Go figure!!! (of course a series of images would have made for a better comparison, but I got the feeling he may have been annoyed by my request, so I didn't push it)
I have begun to suspect that maybe digital (maybe the sensor) is being affected by vibrations that wouldn't render film images soft. Mostly because I took my D70, and attached the only AF lens I own, (a 18 to 75G f4.6-5 DX zoomed to 75mm) and set it on full auto program AF, matrix metered, HAND HELD, with normal sharpening set in camera and used it for some grab shots of cranes in full sun. Guess what,.. they are far sharper than most of my ED telephoto/tripod images. So,.. I guess the D70's OK!!??? (The few "Really Sharp" ED telephoto images I get, are superbly sharp. I just can't reliably or predictably reproduce those results)
Whew!!,.. what a mess. Now that I've got this written down & can read it over,.. I think I sound just about as "CRAZY" as this whole mess has made me feel!!! You can see why I've been tempted to throw in the towel. Since I have a relatively low paying "paycheck job", I am in hock up to my neck for my digital purchases and don't yet have the money to get the lenses a full check up and or fix if needed. Also the 300mm may be a gray market lens, (bought it back before I even knew what gray market was) so I could have trouble getting it fixed if it is faulty!
If I am in fact insane can anyone PLEEEEEAZZE recommend a good therapist???!!!
I have had literally hundreds of what would have otherwise been fabulous shots ruined due to this problem and I'm tired of feeling so depressed & ready to give up each time this happens!! I will be grateful for any insight that could help me solve this issue!!! I really am at a loss at this point!
Craig, I hate to say this but it sounds like you eliminated all factors other than manual focusing. It's possible that vision problems combined with the inherently darker viewfinder on ASP-C cameras mean that you're not accurately judging critical focus on the ground glass. My best suggestion would be to move to AF lenses.
Another option is to get a viewfinder magnifier if one is available for your camera and see if it helps with manual focusing.
The lenses themselves are both very sharp and should perform as well or better than any modern optic.
Thanks for responding. I have considered the eyesight angle. You wouldn't happen to know whether or not just having the diopters set wrong could account for consistant missed focus in front of the subject? I had another fellow photographer adjust my diopter so that the grid in the viewfinder looked good to him, and I couldn't focus the camera at all with that setting. The image in the viewfinder was just too blurry for me to tell when it was even close to sharp. So it wouldn't seem to make sense that having the diopter a little off wouldn't account for such a large miss in focal point. I would've thought something like that would result in inconsistant missed focus front or back? but again I know nothing about such matters and couldn't say for certain.
This fellow photographer doesn't wear glasses, he's been a pro for many years (different fellow than the one I mentioned earlier) so I know he knows what he's doing, but my eyes aren't that bad. I don't need glasses up close, and my distance vison is only slightly improved by glasses. (I can read street signs a little further away than I can without my glasses) I don't know what, if any diopter correction is being made with my current rx and generally I never wear my glasses unless I'm photographing. That's how slight my vison problem is.
Now having said that,.. I have noticed that if I spend a great deal of time at the computer or reading, I have more trouble with my distance vision for a period after, but that hasn't been a factor in any of the photography sessions I've been referring to.
I have the prescription I have now because I was having this problem and figured It was far cheaper to check & fix my eyes than it would have been to check the cameras & lenses. I asked the opthamologist about the situation & she was less than helpfull. Apparently knowing about corrective lenses doesn't mean knowing about lenses in general.
I am very discouraged by all this. Making a move to all AF lenses probably means I'll have to live with this frustrating situation for a while until I can afford a couple of good lenses. Especially since prices for used MF lenses have crashed in recent years and I couldn't expect to get much for mine regardless of condition.
Anyways, I was hoping that that wouldn't be the case.
That diopter adjustment is extremely important. If you never see a clear image through the viewfinder how can you ever achieve accurate focus? Not only will it affect how sharply you can focus but, also, how sharply you can focus at different distances. I find it easiest to set the diopter adjustment by aiming at a blank part of the sky, throw the lens out of focus, and then turn the diopter adjustment until the little squares that denote autofocus sensors are sharpest in the viewfinder. If you normally photograph while wearing glasses make sure you are wearing your glasses when you adjust the diopter setting. If you don't normally wear glasses when out photographing things, set the diopter adjustment to your uncorrected eyes and don't wear the glasses when you are shooting. Setting the diopter adjustment has got to help you increase your "keeper" rate.
BTW, your eyes not adjusting quickly to distance focus after working on the computer is pretty normal as we get older. When we get older, the lens in our eye becomes less elastic and takes longer to readjust for changes in near to far focus.
I think you're onto something. As I moved into my 50's I virtually had to relearn how to focus. Now I pay very little attention to how focus "looks" on the GG, rather I watch the focus indicator in the viewfinder of cameras equipped with them.
Another factor to keep in mind- Eye fatigue. My eyes see differently late in the day than in the morning. Also bright light versus overcast. I reset the variable diopters in cameras several times a day, as well as with major lighting changes. I do the same with the loupe I use in LF.
First, if you do not have the rubber eye shield, get one to help eliminate glare which can interfere with your focusing. They only cost about $9.95.
Then second, always shoot with your glasses. With the previously mentioned rubber eye shield, the glasses may get smugged, but they you should be more consistent.
Third, find a nice brick wall or some other flat surface like a newspaper on which you can focus. Use the indicators to manually focus while being perpendicular to the wall. Once focused, adjust the diopter setting on the viewfinder so that you have the sharpest image of the brick wall/newspaper.
In addition to adjusting the diopter, take a few shots to see if you are getting sharp images from the camera. Also, try refocusing between shots to see if the images remain good.
Finally, mark a vertical line on the brick wall subject and move to a position which puts you at about a 45 degree angle to that mark. Focus on the mark and take several shots, refocusing occasionally. At a 45 degree angle, you should have some of the wall or newspaper in sharp focus, either on the mark or before or after the mark. If the focus is on the line, then you are good. If it is before or after, then you have a technique problem. If there is no sharp area in the image, then you have a mechanical problem which is most likely vibration.
If your problem is focusing before or after the line, then you can practice focusing until you are dead on. If it is vibration, then you can practice your long lens technique until the problem has been eliminated.
I hope this suggestion solves your problem, or at least lets you diagnose it.
I am still a bit confused about proper diopter adjustments.
I have adjusted the diopters on both cameras so that the grid looks sharp to me. I've done this with & without my glasses to find out if any difference exists. Neither setting seems to improve my sharp image ratio.
I mentioned that there is a difference between my distance & near vision, my near vision being the better of the two even with the slight astigmatism and I don't wear corrective lenses for near focus. My glasses are for my distance vision, corrected for that & the astigmatism. With my glasses on, I have trouble focussing on anything inside of about 4-5 ft. If I wear them into a store for instance, I have to remove them to clearly & easily see an item on a shelf in front of me.
The grid & focus indicators in my viewfinder are only an inch or two from my eye and would fall within my near vision. So wouldn't adjusting for their sharpness, with or without my glasses mean that the diopter setting is wrong for subjects outside my near vision clarity? Wouldn't that setting mean my focus on distant objects would be off? Could that possible difference in near to far diopter adjustment, result in the missed focus in front of the subject?
Guy said that improper diopter setting could result in that type of focusing discrepancy. Could it be that I need two different diopter settings depending on how near or far the subject is from me?
If so, since my distance vision is different than my near, If I adjust the diiopter & grid to for my distance vision needs, would it (the viewfinder) look out of focus to my near vision?
During all of this trouble & testing the viewfinder & subject has always been adjusted to be as sharp as I can make it. At least to my eyes. So, the viewfinder & grid would look sharp to my near vision, but I'm focusing on the subject using my far vision. Is that causing the missed focus?
Is my thinking on this correct or am I mistaken about how diopters & these adjustments work? I want to be as clear as I can be concerning this issue when I next see the opthamologist. I want to be certain I'm trying to fix the right problem!
Craig, in this situation your eyes need to focus on the ground glass, not on the objects seen through the lens. The lens focusing mechanism is used to bring objects into sharp focus, not your eye.
One thing you can try is to find a subject with very good contrast and detail, set the camera on a tripod, and use an AF lens to bring it into focus. This will ensure that the object is sharply focused on the ground glass. Now use the diopter adjustment to find a setting where the object appears sharp to your eye. This will make sure your eye can accurately focus on the ground glass.
Still, even a small variation can lead to consistently unsharp images so the use of a magnifier may still allow you to judge critical focus more accurately.
... your eyes need to focus on the ground glass, not on the objects seen through the lens. The lens focusing mechanism is used to bring objects into sharp focus, not your eye.
So if I understand you correctly, regardless of the state of my far vision or how far away the subject may be. I'm using my near vision to focus, because my eyes are focusing on the subject as it appears in the ground glass?
Hank,
Do you see a difference in focusing accuracy on near versus far subjects after you adjust the diopter?
Now that you mention it, it does seem that with my 300mm, focused on subjects inside about 20ft. More of them are sharp and focused where I want. Not all, but more. BUT!!,.. and another reason why I've been driving myself crazy trying to nail down the trouble in this whole mess!! A good many of my macro images shot with the 200mm micro are soft. (using all the sharpness techniques I've listed earlier in this post) These would be focused using my near vision and if I'm missing focus, the DOF is too narow tho tell. (I don't shoot many macro shots with things in the foreground)
I admit, there are likely multiple variables in this equation and even when I do all I can to completely eliminate 2 or 3 of these in any given situation, It seems there's always a 4th that I can't "WITH ABSOLUTE CERTAINTY" rule out. Best I can say is "I'm pretty sure" it didn't come into play. Like with shutter speed or camera shake, subject movement, glasses on or off at the time, or a possible momentary lapse in "best technique" during the excitement of the moment.
Like I said,.. "the problem seems to be a moving target!!"
I plan on making an appointment to another opthamologist, and I intend to make a pest out of myself during this visit to get some concrete answers. Maybe I need a rx with only correction for the slight astigmatism. Forget near or far correction. (especially since my near vision seems to be what's used in focusing)
I appreciate the responses from everyone, I truely do. I'm a bit worried that by this time you may feel like you're flogging a dead horse. I just want you to understand how bad this situation has had me tied up in knots. I really am living paycheck to paycheck, and when I've maxed out "special offer" credit cards to aquire new equipment and then can't seem to reliably get sharp images. Well,.. I'm not kidding when I say I've thought of giving up photography entirely!!
Often I'll think about going out to shoot & find myself thinking,.. "whats the use,.. even if the compositiion's good, it'll be out of focus, or the best poses will suffer from camera shake or missed focus." I've gotten to where I can't take the disappointment when I start reviewing the images.
So please don't feel as though I'm ignoring or discounting your advice here. I'm going to try all these suggestions as soon as I can, but as you can tell from everything I've already outlined here,.. I am not entirely optomistic.
The grid & focus indicators in my viewfinder are only an inch or two from my eye and would fall within my near vision. So wouldn't adjusting for their sharpness, with or without my glasses mean that the diopter setting is wrong for subjects outside my near vision clarity? Wouldn't that setting mean my focus on distant objects would be off? Could that possible difference in near to far diopter adjustment, result in the missed focus in front of the subject?
No. You are not actually looking through the camera lens. The image you see in the viewfinder is an image that is focused by the lens on a focusing screen that sits beneath the viewfinder's pentaprism. Optical elements between the focusing screen and the eyepiece in the viewfinder adjust the focus of the image projected onto the focusing screen such that your eyes are focusing on the viewfinder image as if the viewfinder image were 20' away so that you are always using your far vision with your eyes. It does not matter if the subject is 6" away or 600' away from the camera/lens, the image you see in the viewfinder will always be presented as if the viewfinder image were 20' away from your eyes. You will always be adjusting the diopter for your best vision at 20'. It is no coincidence that 20' just happens to be the distance used to judge eyesight with a standard eyesight target used by your optometrist.
Hank is right. As we get older our eyes have more trouble adjusting from near to far focus, and vice versa. It is not uncommon to have to adjust the focus through the viewfinder using the diopter adjustment several times in a day's shooting. I have barely controllable diabetes. This can also change my eyesight from day to day depending on the levels of sugar in my blood and how it affects the internal pressures in my eyeballs which causes my eyesight to change almost daily. Being over...ahem!...55...and getting close to 60...I am constantly checking and adjusting the diopter adjustments on my cameras.
If you are shooting manual focus and your viewfinder diopter adjustments are correct you have something else that is causing your focus problems. It is quite possible that the image sensor is not at the proper distance from the front of the lens mount. In film days this was known as "lens flange to film plane distance". This distance wasn't changeable in film cameras, however, the new digital cameras have adjustable sensor to lens flange distances. You may have to send your camera bodies and lenses to Nikon to have them calibrated so that the image sensor lies in the correct plane of focus. Just a thought.
Edit...Here's another thought. Make sure that there are no loose components in the viewfinders on your cameras. A loose or mis-aligned focusing screen and/or a loose or mis-aligned prism can cause some of the same focusing issues you are having.
As we get older our eyes have more trouble adjusting... It is not uncommon to have to adjust the focus through the viewfinder using the diopter adjustment several times in a day's shooting.
Hank Pennington,
... Eye fatigue. My eyes see differently late in the day than in the morning. Also bright light versus overcast. I reset the variable diopters in cameras several times a day, as well as with major lighting changes.
I absolutely did NOT know that!! I did notice that if I spent a long time sitting & looking through the lens, that I had trouble focusing on the LCD between shots.
I will certainly pay more attention to checking & readjusting the diopter during a shoot. I've just been setting it & leaving it!!
Hank, I went back through my Sandhill images from earlier this month, and I definately have more sharp images from closer compositions using the 300mm. Of the ones shot outside of about 30-40 ft., I have many fewer critically sharp images. I still have plenty of soft images either way, (I deleted well over half of more than 8,000 images just for focus issues, not comp or exposure) but a majority of bad ones do seem to occur with the images shot farther away.
Guy and Tom, I believe you have both made a major mistake about where the image is focused. The SLR camera does not have an images focused on either "ground glass" as stated by Guy nor a "focus screen" as stated by Tom. Consequently, you are NOT focusing on a near object!
Think of the situation similar to that when using glasses or contacts. One still focuses on the distant object, not the lens just in front of the eye.
For the most part, looking through the view finder of a camera will require focusing at a long distance. I believe this is true even when using a macro lens on a subject just a few inches in front of the lens. The path of light exiting the lens and the viewfinder has been bent and is really complicated. I use separate glasses for up close viewing, i.e. less than 6 inches. But, when viewing a close subject with a macro lens, the close up glasses really distort the image while my long distance glasses are perfect.
The only time one really sees a close up image is when a camera has the image projected on ground glass or on a focus assist prism in the viewfinder. In the latter case, one is looking at the prism, not the image.
Guy and Tom, I believe you have both made a major mistake about where the image is focused. The SLR camera does not have an images focused on either "ground glass" as stated by Guy nor a "focus screen" as stated by Tom. Consequently, you are NOT focusing on a near object!
With all due respect, you are incorrect. All you have to do to validate Guy's and my information is to take out the focusing screen from the camera and see what is left. You'll not see an image. It is analogous to taking off the groundglass on a large format camera. The image is projected onto the groundglass otherwise you will only see the lens diaphragm and a distorted view of the scene you are trying to photograph. Also, large format photographers use a loupe to check focus, to aid the eye in seeing the image on the groundglass. This is almost analogous to the optics in the dSLR and 35mm viewfinder that allows you to focus the image properly.
Edit...Added Info...All the prism does in the viewfinder is to take the upside-down and backwards image projected by the lens onto the focusing screen and turn it right side up and correct left-to-right.
Tom, I am NOT incorrect. The focus screen may be part of the optics which will cause the image to be blurred. But, one is NOT focusing on the screen just as one does not focus on the glass of eye glasses or the interior of a contact lens. The image is projected through an eye glass, contact lens or focus screen.
Discussion
15 repliesFor almost two years now I've been chasing down sharpness & focus gremlins in my digital images and too be honest I am at my absolute wits end. I will try to include as much pertinent information as I can concerning the problem and my efforts to solve it, (so this may be a long post)
I have a 18 year old Nikon 300mm f2.8 ED/IF lens and an even older 200mm f4 IF micro. I have always "babied" these lenses. They've never been dropped or mistreated. The 300mm still looks new! I always use these lenses while mounted on a tripod (again, a 20 yr old gitzo metal tripod. I do not remember the model No. but its a step down from the old 410. Mid sized, not the big monster but still plenty sturdy) Since I began using these lenses on digital bodies, I have had a DEVIL of a time getting consistently sharp images. (and I don't mean "soft" because I haven't applied USM to the images.) I mean that while previewing the image in whatever software, Nikon View, PS, Capture One LE, etc., when compared side by side, RAW, uncompressed NEF files from the same shoot, on the same cf card, shot minutes or even seconds apart, without any USM applied. These images can show a dramatic differences in sharpness & detail resolution or actual focal point placement. Of course, I am not tripping the shutter until the subject appears to me, to be in sharp focus in the viewfinder.
I have tried everything I can think of to isolate & correct the problem without any luck. To make matters worse, the problem seems to be a moving target. By that I mean that sometimes the focus appears soft all over the frame, suggesting camera shake or some such. This is occurring even when using a cable release and/or shutter speeds that "should" be sufficient for sharp images even if I was hand holding the lens, (i.e. 1/1000 or much faster.) Then later in the same shoot, I'll get a tack sharp image while I was using a shutter speed of 1/160th sec. and no cable release while the ball movements weren't locked completely tight.
At other times during the same session, it appears I'm regularly missing focus. In these images the focus appears to be well in front (inches or even a foot) of the actual point that I was focussing on, even though the focus indicator in the viewfinder indicated I was locked on to the subject.
Since I was getting a few shots that were razor sharp, I thought it HAD to be my technique. But, after trying to eliminate technique as the culprit I still get inconsistent results. I've got a good Arca ball head, Gitzo tripod with short column, I'll use it with the tripod legs retracted, and my position low . I've tried techniques I've read about to add my body mass to the camera/lens shooting combo. You know, hand resting on lens, face pressed into camera. I've also tried completely "Hands Off" techniques such as with and without mirror lockup and/or cable release. Fast or slow shutter speeds, and still I can't depend on when I'll get a sharp image. Also, I almost never use the lenses stopped down past f11, usually around f5.6 or 8.
I've used the 200mm micro indoors for some set up shots with leaves & flowers and had similar inconsistent sharpness results. The 200 isn't an ED lens and some of the shots were made using f16 or smaller, but sweet spot F stop or no,.. I can't seem to predict which shots will be sharper.
I've tried testing these lenses and the results were inconclusive! With the 300 and it's 10ft. min. focussing distance, I had to perform the tests outdoors and try as I might, on ea. of these occasions I couldn't completely, absolutely, rule out wind movement on my subject. I'm pretty sure it wasn't a factor, but there were intermittent breezes & I suppose they could have been a factor. With the 200mm, as I mentioned above. I've set up shots indoors, no breeze, cable release used, subject still, shutter & f-stop varied,.. still inconclusive, inconsistent results.
I had pretty much decided it was the camera!! Has to be right?? So I bag my D70 and purchase a new D200 and once more,.. I apparently cannot RELIABLY focus a camera to save my life!! All of the above mentioned problems are occurring with the new D200!
Only 3 common factors (that I can identify) involved here;
Me,.. I wear glasses for a very slight astigmatism, and my distance vision is worse than my close up vision, but this focus problem doesn't go away or become more or less frequent regardless of whether or not I'm wearing my glasses while shooting. I get sharp images without my glasses, I get soft images with my glasses and vise versa!! No discernable pattern either way.
Digital cameras,.. Thought for sure it was the D70, but the same problem on 2 different model cameras, purchased over 2 years apart?!! Seems highly unlikely! Also, when you read the details below under lenses. My film cameras do not seem to be afflicted with the same trouble!!
Lenses,.. I went back to a subject I was having lots of trouble with obtaining any critically sharp images,.. a Red bellied Woodpecker at it's nest, and using the same 300mm lens on my Nikon F3 and Velvia and KodakE100 film shot the same woodpecker with a much higher ratio of sharp to soft images (at generally slower shutter speeds I might add, since the digital captures were made using ISO 200 and the film images weren't pushed to match the digital ISO.) Of the ones that weren't sharp. The majority seemed to be OBVIOUS subject movement or I missed focus on a relatively fast moving subject. ("missing focus" still happened fairly regularly using film & this particular subject, but not near as often as when I was using the digital camera on a "relatively" slower moving & often stationary subject [Sandhill Cranes])
During this years recent shoot with the Sandhill Cranes, I asked another photographer, A Semi Professional, meaning he isn't full time but makes a fair portion of his income with his cameras and has been widely published,.. I asked if I I could mount my D200 on his 200-400 f4 ED/IF VR. and large gitzo carbon fiber tripod setup!! He did, for 1 image only which HE shot using AF. Now,.. listen closely because this is why I've become concerned for my sanity,... I have images shot that day, with my 300 f2.8 that are far sharper (pre processed) than the one he shot using this brand new, top of the line AF/VR lens. Go figure!!! (of course a series of images would have made for a better comparison, but I got the feeling he may have been annoyed by my request, so I didn't push it)
I have begun to suspect that maybe digital (maybe the sensor) is being affected by vibrations that wouldn't render film images soft. Mostly because I took my D70, and attached the only AF lens I own, (a 18 to 75G f4.6-5 DX zoomed to 75mm) and set it on full auto program AF, matrix metered, HAND HELD, with normal sharpening set in camera and used it for some grab shots of cranes in full sun. Guess what,.. they are far sharper than most of my ED telephoto/tripod images. So,.. I guess the D70's OK!!??? (The few "Really Sharp" ED telephoto images I get, are superbly sharp. I just can't reliably or predictably reproduce those results)
Whew!!,.. what a mess. Now that I've got this written down & can read it over,.. I think I sound just about as "CRAZY" as this whole mess has made me feel!!! You can see why I've been tempted to throw in the towel. Since I have a relatively low paying "paycheck job", I am in hock up to my neck for my digital purchases and don't yet have the money to get the lenses a full check up and or fix if needed. Also the 300mm may be a gray market lens, (bought it back before I even knew what gray market was) so I could have trouble getting it fixed if it is faulty!
If I am in fact insane
I have had literally hundreds of what would have otherwise been fabulous shots ruined due to this problem and I'm tired of feeling so depressed & ready to give up each time this happens!!
TIA, Craig
Another option is to get a viewfinder magnifier if one is available for your camera and see if it helps with manual focusing.
The lenses themselves are both very sharp and should perform as well or better than any modern optic.
Guy
Thanks for responding. I have considered the eyesight angle. You wouldn't happen to know whether or not just having the diopters set wrong could account for consistant missed focus in front of the subject? I had another fellow photographer adjust my diopter so that the grid in the viewfinder looked good to him, and I couldn't focus the camera at all with that setting. The image in the viewfinder was just too blurry for me to tell when it was even close to sharp. So it wouldn't seem to make sense that having the diopter a little off wouldn't account for such a large miss in focal point. I would've thought something like that would result in inconsistant missed focus front or back? but again I know nothing about such matters and couldn't say for certain.
This fellow photographer doesn't wear glasses, he's been a pro for many years (different fellow than the one I mentioned earlier) so I know he knows what he's doing, but my eyes aren't that bad. I don't need glasses up close, and my distance vison is only slightly improved by glasses. (I can read street signs a little further away than I can without my glasses) I don't know what, if any diopter correction is being made with my current rx and generally I never wear my glasses unless I'm photographing. That's how slight my vison problem is.
Now having said that,.. I have noticed that if I spend a great deal of time at the computer or reading, I have more trouble with my distance vision for a period after, but that hasn't been a factor in any of the photography sessions I've been referring to.
I have the prescription I have now because I was having this problem and figured It was far cheaper to check & fix my eyes than it would have been to check the cameras & lenses.
I am very discouraged by all this. Making a move to all AF lenses probably means I'll have to live with this frustrating situation for a while until I can afford a couple of good lenses. Especially since prices for used MF lenses have crashed in recent years and I couldn't expect to get much for mine regardless of condition.
Anyways, I was hoping that that wouldn't be the case.
Thanks again,
Craig
Yes, it can! That's definitely something worth checking.
Guy
BTW, your eyes not adjusting quickly to distance focus after working on the computer is pretty normal as we get older. When we get older, the lens in our eye becomes less elastic and takes longer to readjust for changes in near to far focus.
Another factor to keep in mind- Eye fatigue. My eyes see differently late in the day than in the morning. Also bright light versus overcast. I reset the variable diopters in cameras several times a day, as well as with major lighting changes. I do the same with the loupe I use in LF.
First, if you do not have the rubber eye shield, get one to help eliminate glare which can interfere with your focusing. They only cost about $9.95.
Then second, always shoot with your glasses. With the previously mentioned rubber eye shield, the glasses may get smugged, but they you should be more consistent.
Third, find a nice brick wall or some other flat surface like a newspaper on which you can focus. Use the indicators to manually focus while being perpendicular to the wall. Once focused, adjust the diopter setting on the viewfinder so that you have the sharpest image of the brick wall/newspaper.
In addition to adjusting the diopter, take a few shots to see if you are getting sharp images from the camera. Also, try refocusing between shots to see if the images remain good.
Finally, mark a vertical line on the brick wall subject and move to a position which puts you at about a 45 degree angle to that mark. Focus on the mark and take several shots, refocusing occasionally. At a 45 degree angle, you should have some of the wall or newspaper in sharp focus, either on the mark or before or after the mark. If the focus is on the line, then you are good. If it is before or after, then you have a technique problem. If there is no sharp area in the image, then you have a mechanical problem which is most likely vibration.
If your problem is focusing before or after the line, then you can practice focusing until you are dead on. If it is vibration, then you can practice your long lens technique until the problem has been eliminated.
I hope this suggestion solves your problem, or at least lets you diagnose it.
I am still a bit confused about proper diopter adjustments.
I have adjusted the diopters on both cameras so that the grid looks sharp to me. I've done this with & without my glasses to find out if any difference exists. Neither setting seems to improve my sharp image ratio.
I mentioned that there is a difference between my distance & near vision, my near vision being the better of the two even with the slight astigmatism and I don't wear corrective lenses for near focus. My glasses are for my distance vision, corrected for that & the astigmatism. With my glasses on, I have trouble focussing on anything inside of about 4-5 ft. If I wear them into a store for instance, I have to remove them to clearly & easily see an item on a shelf in front of me.
The grid & focus indicators in my viewfinder are only an inch or two from my eye and would fall within my near vision. So wouldn't adjusting for their sharpness, with or without my glasses mean that the diopter setting is wrong for subjects outside my near vision clarity? Wouldn't that setting mean my focus on distant objects would be off? Could that possible difference in near to far diopter adjustment, result in the missed focus in front of the subject?
Guy said that improper diopter setting could result in that type of focusing discrepancy. Could it be that I need two different diopter settings depending on how near or far the subject is from me?
If so, since my distance vision is different than my near, If I adjust the diiopter & grid to for my distance vision needs, would it (the viewfinder) look out of focus to my near vision?
During all of this trouble & testing the viewfinder & subject has always been adjusted to be as sharp as I can make it. At least to my eyes. So, the viewfinder & grid would look sharp to my near vision, but I'm focusing on the subject using my far vision. Is that causing the missed focus?
Is my thinking on this correct or am I mistaken about how diopters & these adjustments work? I want to be as clear as I can be concerning this issue when I next see the opthamologist. I want to be certain I'm trying to fix the right problem!
Thanks again to all,
Craig
One thing you can try is to find a subject with very good contrast and detail, set the camera on a tripod, and use an AF lens to bring it into focus. This will ensure that the object is sharply focused on the ground glass. Now use the diopter adjustment to find a setting where the object appears sharp to your eye. This will make sure your eye can accurately focus on the ground glass.
Still, even a small variation can lead to consistently unsharp images so the use of a magnifier may still allow you to judge critical focus more accurately.
Guy
Guy
Do you see a difference in focusing accuracy on near versus far subjects after you adjust the diopter?
Guy,
So if I understand you correctly, regardless of the state of my far vision or how far away the subject may be. I'm using my near vision to focus, because my eyes are focusing on the subject as it appears in the ground glass?
Hank,
Now that you mention it, it does seem that with my 300mm, focused on subjects inside about 20ft. More of them are sharp and focused where I want. Not all, but more. BUT!!,.. and another reason why I've been driving myself crazy trying to nail down the trouble in this whole mess!! A good many of my macro images shot with the 200mm micro are soft. (using all the sharpness techniques I've listed earlier in this post) These would be focused using my near vision and if I'm missing focus, the DOF is too narow tho tell. (I don't shoot many macro shots with things in the foreground)
I admit, there are likely multiple variables in this equation and even when I do all I can to completely eliminate 2 or 3 of these in any given situation, It seems there's always a 4th that I can't "WITH ABSOLUTE CERTAINTY" rule out. Best I can say is "I'm pretty sure" it didn't come into play. Like with shutter speed or camera shake, subject movement, glasses on or off at the time, or a possible momentary lapse in "best technique" during the excitement of the moment.
Like I said,.. "the problem seems to be a moving target!!"
I plan on making an appointment to another opthamologist, and I intend to make a pest out of myself during this visit to get some concrete answers. Maybe I need a rx with only correction for the slight astigmatism. Forget near or far correction. (especially since my near vision seems to be what's used in focusing)
I appreciate the responses from everyone, I truely do. I'm a bit worried that by this time you may feel like you're flogging a dead horse. I just want you to understand how bad this situation has had me tied up in knots. I really am living paycheck to paycheck, and when I've maxed out "special offer" credit cards to aquire new equipment and then can't seem to reliably get sharp images. Well,.. I'm not kidding when I say I've thought of giving up photography entirely!!
Often I'll think about going out to shoot & find myself thinking,.. "whats the use,.. even if the compositiion's good, it'll be out of focus, or the best poses will suffer from camera shake or missed focus." I've gotten to where I can't take the disappointment when I start reviewing the images.
So please don't feel as though I'm ignoring or discounting your advice here. I'm going to try all these suggestions as soon as I can, but as you can tell from everything I've already outlined here,.. I am not entirely optomistic.
Thanks for your help,
Craig
No. You are not actually looking through the camera lens. The image you see in the viewfinder is an image that is focused by the lens on a focusing screen that sits beneath the viewfinder's pentaprism. Optical elements between the focusing screen and the eyepiece in the viewfinder adjust the focus of the image projected onto the focusing screen such that your eyes are focusing on the viewfinder image as if the viewfinder image were 20' away so that you are always using your far vision with your eyes. It does not matter if the subject is 6" away or 600' away from the camera/lens, the image you see in the viewfinder will always be presented as if the viewfinder image were 20' away from your eyes. You will always be adjusting the diopter for your best vision at 20'. It is no coincidence that 20' just happens to be the distance used to judge eyesight with a standard eyesight target used by your optometrist.
Hank is right. As we get older our eyes have more trouble adjusting from near to far focus, and vice versa. It is not uncommon to have to adjust the focus through the viewfinder using the diopter adjustment several times in a day's shooting. I have barely controllable diabetes. This can also change my eyesight from day to day depending on the levels of sugar in my blood and how it affects the internal pressures in my eyeballs which causes my eyesight to change almost daily. Being over...ahem!...55...and getting close to 60...I am constantly checking and adjusting the diopter adjustments on my cameras.
If you are shooting manual focus and your viewfinder diopter adjustments are correct you have something else that is causing your focus problems. It is quite possible that the image sensor is not at the proper distance from the front of the lens mount. In film days this was known as "lens flange to film plane distance". This distance wasn't changeable in film cameras, however, the new digital cameras have adjustable sensor to lens flange distances. You may have to send your camera bodies and lenses to Nikon to have them calibrated so that the image sensor lies in the correct plane of focus. Just a thought.
Edit...Here's another thought. Make sure that there are no loose components in the viewfinders on your cameras. A loose or mis-aligned focusing screen and/or a loose or mis-aligned prism can cause some of the same focusing issues you are having.
Hank Pennington,
I absolutely did NOT know that!! I did notice that if I spent a long time sitting & looking through the lens, that I had trouble focusing on the LCD between shots.
I will certainly pay more attention to checking & readjusting the diopter during a shoot. I've just been setting it & leaving it!!
Hank, I went back through my Sandhill images from earlier this month, and I definately have more sharp images from closer compositions using the 300mm. Of the ones shot outside of about 30-40 ft., I have many fewer critically sharp images. I still have plenty of soft images either way, (I deleted well over half of more than 8,000 images just for focus issues, not comp or exposure) but a majority of bad ones do seem to occur with the images shot farther away.
I appreciate all the help,
Craig
Think of the situation similar to that when using glasses or contacts. One still focuses on the distant object, not the lens just in front of the eye.
For the most part, looking through the view finder of a camera will require focusing at a long distance. I believe this is true even when using a macro lens on a subject just a few inches in front of the lens. The path of light exiting the lens and the viewfinder has been bent and is really complicated. I use separate glasses for up close viewing, i.e. less than 6 inches. But, when viewing a close subject with a macro lens, the close up glasses really distort the image while my long distance glasses are perfect.
The only time one really sees a close up image is when a camera has the image projected on ground glass or on a focus assist prism in the viewfinder. In the latter case, one is looking at the prism, not the image.
With all due respect, you are incorrect. All you have to do to validate Guy's and my information is to take out the focusing screen from the camera and see what is left. You'll not see an image. It is analogous to taking off the groundglass on a large format camera. The image is projected onto the groundglass otherwise you will only see the lens diaphragm and a distorted view of the scene you are trying to photograph. Also, large format photographers use a loupe to check focus, to aid the eye in seeing the image on the groundglass. This is almost analogous to the optics in the dSLR and 35mm viewfinder that allows you to focus the image properly.
Edit...Added Info...All the prism does in the viewfinder is to take the upside-down and backwards image projected by the lens onto the focusing screen and turn it right side up and correct left-to-right.