Af 70-300 1:4-5.6d

I

Ironwood

Senior Member
I got this lens off Ebay for $95, it looks like new, the zoom and focus are smooth, and have no play. So I am happy with that side of things.
But, I was hoping for sharper photos out of this thing.
I only picked it up from the post office this morning, but have taken a few shots to see how it goes. It is manual focus on my D3100, so I may not be spot on with my focusing, but cropping at 100% and looking at various spots in the photo I should be able to find something that is in focus surely.
Most of my shots were at 300mm, so that probably doesnt help things, but I did take a couple at shorter focal lengths, I dont think they are much better.
I am not ruling out my technique and settings, but I dont think I am too far off the mark.

Any advice or observations will be appreciated.

Here is one shot. Using a tripod and cable release. At about 10 metres/30 feet.
300mm @ f8, iso 100, 1/250th sec.

orig.jpg


This has been cropped at about 100% ( I think )
DSC_0001.jpg


Here are some Magpie Geese taken at a waterhole beside the road on my way back from the post office, I didn't have a tripod with me, so they were handheld, but I had pretty good shutter speeds.

300mm @ f8, iso 200, 1/640th sec.

DSC_0002.jpg


155mm @ f10, iso 200, 1/250th sec.

DSC_0005.jpg


100mm @ f10, iso 200, 1/400th sec.

DSC_0007.jpg


Should this lens be able to do better, or am I expecting too much ?
 
I

Ironwood

Senior Member
Hi Geoff, I see you have a 75-300, I take it that one performs better.
There was one of those on Ebay as well a little while ago, I stopped bidding at $125, the other guy got it for about $130. I stopped bidding because I wasnt sure what the lens was like, the reviews that i could find online seemed to be about the same as the 70-300D which I ended up getting.

Spose if I dont like it , I will sell it to someone else, should be able to get my money back.
 
P

pedroj

Senior Member
Where is your focal point

How long is the frond/leaf that has the fly on it...I assume it to be as long as the ones on the right so realistically
At a couple of feet you wouldn't expect it to be in focus..
 
I

Ironwood

Senior Member
I Tried to focus on the lighter coloured leaf that is just top right of centre. It looks pretty soft if zoomed in.
I have been all over and the yellow leaf with the brown spots seems to be about the sharpest part ( looking through my poor eyes anyhow )

t2.jpg


Edit; I have only taken about 15 photos with this lens so far, so its early days yet. I will give it a good workout on the weekend and see if I can get some better results.
 
Last edited:
S

slowpoke

Senior Member
Ironwood,I was told to up my shutter speeds F/1250 on my 50-500mm(Bigma).It sure helped me get sharper images.Maybe,give this a try?All the Best
 
R

Ruidoso Bill

Senior Member
Things to try to get sharper photos from this lens is back off from the 300 mm focal length. These lenses are not as sharp at either extreme. How heavy is your tripod? Mirror slap can cause some blur also so if your camera supports it try mirror lock up. Use as fast of shutter speed as possible. Don't forget it's a $95 lens.
 
I

Ironwood

Senior Member
WJYPhoto said:
Things to try to get sharper photos from this lens is back off from the 300 mm focal length. These lenses are not as sharp at either extreme. How heavy is your tripod? Mirror slap can cause some blur also so if your camera supports it try mirror lock up. Use as fast of shutter speed as possible. Don't forget it's a $95 lens.
Click to expand...

Thanks Bill, I nearly always use my camera in silent mode, I think that locks the mirror up.

Yeah, for $95 I shouldnt expect too much I guess. Will see how it goes.
 
I

Ironwood

Senior Member
Tried a couple of test shots in bright sunlight to get the shutter speed up, still needed iso800 though.

Heres a shot of a water tap at 200mm , f8, 1so800, 1/1000 sec. Tripod and cable release used.

tap-2.jpg



Same photo, just cropped.
tap-1.jpg


I think its pretty sharp.
Its not very practical for me though, I think iso800 is about at the useable limit for my D3100, you can see there is noise starting in the out of focus background, and I don't always want to shoot in bright sunlight .

I will keep this lens for a while, but I think I will end up selling it once I find something I want to replace it with.
Is the newer model G lens with VR much better than this one ?
 
I

Ironwood

Senior Member
madcapmagishion said:
That's very sharp, but just out of curiosity how far from the faucet was the lens?
Click to expand...

I should have taken more notice of that at the time, but it was approximately 15 feet.

Have you had a chance to try out yours yet, or are you still waiting for your D90 to arrive ?
I was planning to upgrade in a year or so, possibly to a D600, but lately I have been thinking about going down the same route as you have, selling the D3100, and picking up a used D90, or D300.
There is a local guy selling a D700, but its a bit above my budget at the moment.
 
G

Geoffc

Senior Member
Ironwood said:
Hi Geoff, I see you have a 75-300, I take it that one performs better.
There was one of those on Ebay as well a little while ago, I stopped bidding at $125, the other guy got it for about $130. I stopped bidding because I wasnt sure what the lens was like, the reviews that i could find online seemed to be about the same as the 70-300D which I ended up getting.

Spose if I dont like it , I will sell it to someone else, should be able to get my money back.
Click to expand...

You are correct I do have the 75-300 which belonged to my late father. It is head and shoulders better than the 70-300 that you have, however it's not the one I would recommend. I now use my 70-200 2.8 instead of the 75-300 because even though I have to crop I get a better image. However that is a very expensive lens so not my recommendation.

My wife has the 70-300 VR lens which is the modern equivalent of the 75-300. With enough light it takes images comparable to my 70-200 and it's only a 1/4 of the price. It's also a lot lighter than the 70-200. I would be very happy with one of those in my bag on all but the darker days.

Have a look here and see what it can do

http://www.flickr.com/groups/nikkor_70-300mm_vr/
 
I

Ironwood

Senior Member
Thanks for that link Geoff.
So it seems there are 2 different 70-300 VR lenses, the newer and better being the VR11. Which one does your wife have ?
 
Pierro

Pierro

Senior Member
IMO, i think taking into account a cheap lens, and the fact that nothing really looks amazing at 100% view, ( some lenses are better than others of course ) but who leaves their files at their original 100% size ?

Once you've reduced them to useable real world sizes and processed properly, they'll look fine

Also, zooms dont always look their best at either extreme of their range. The very fact that they're zooms means some compromises have been made, so back off a tad at each end, and dont shoot wide open at either end
 
M

madcapmagishion

Banned
Ironwood said:
I should have taken more notice of that at the time, but it was approximately 15 feet.

Have you had a chance to try out yours yet, or are you still waiting for your D90 to arrive ?
I was planning to upgrade in a year or so, possibly to a D600, but lately I have been thinking about going down the same route as you have, selling the D3100, and picking up a used D90, or D300.
There is a local guy selling a D700, but its a bit above my budget at the moment.
Click to expand...

I'm supposed to get my D90 later today in the mail, and my 70-300 isn't getting here until 06-Nov-2012 (my youngest son's 22nd b-day) I'd seriously consider the D-90 as it seems to come out on top in most head to head comparisons. While the D300 is a nice camera, the D90 is a year and 1/2 newer which in the camera world is a whole lifetime+.

D90 vs. D300 Snapshot;
http://snapsort.com/compare/Nikon_D300-vs-Nikon_D90
 
Pierro

Pierro

Senior Member
Shutter speed / ISO / Aperture is good, so it looks like you may have either mis-focused, or its camera shake, or as said before, at 300mm the lens is soft
 
Top