Nikon 12-24 f4 on D90 not sharp

asiona

Hello all,

I have been reading all fantastic reviews and threads on this forum but this is my first post.

I got a used Nikon 12-24 f4 from bhphotovideo rate as 9. Price was great and no sign of wear at all, happy with this.

Have tried it on my D90 both indoors and outdoors but just found too much noise in the photo and not sharp...shaky hands? but my kit lense 18-105 turn out ok.

Settings are: Ap mode, ISO 200, some with in-camera sharpening and saturation, single point focus.

This is my flicker page, once looking at original sizes, looks very blurry and foggy in the photos, especially in corners.

I also tried a few shots at f16 or f18, but things in the distance still very blurry.

Any ideas would be much appreciated - if I need to exchange lens or practise more...

https://www.flickr.com/photos/119756785@N06/

Msmoto

Camera shake on the first one… look at the bridge and you will see the ones at a 45° angel are relatively sharp and those at 90° to those are fuzzy, clearly camera shake. At 1/60 second you still have fuzziness in the second one. Also, stopping down At 1/40 second it is difficult to stop people movement.

The DOF of a lens is limited and in some situations you may be asking more than is possible. I would suggest shooting at f/11, higher shutter speed, (I like 1/160th second) And,practice so as to learn the DOF of the lens. At 24mm, this is essentially a "normal" lens on crop sensor.

Your D90 should be good to ISO 800-1600, then it falls apart..

Pistnbroke

I looked at your flicker page and well ..which image was the problem one ???

remember if you halve the focal length ie 24 down to 12 you need 4x the MP to maintain the same IQ..
So the image that was spread over 12mp at 24 mm will only be spread over 3mp at 12mm assuming you stand in the same place and focus on the same spot

Ironheart

@asiona, the 18-105 has VR that lets you shoot up to 3 stops slower and still make sharp shots. The 12-24 has no VR so you would need to add up to three stops to achieve the same level of sharpness. i.e. If you shoot at 1/30 with VR you need to shoot at 1/250 to get the same result. Try turning VR off on your 18-105 and see how much you may or may not have been relying on this.

TaoTeJared

I'm with everyone, camera shake. Also above f11 you get diffraction (image becomes less sharp). Stick to F/8-F/11 (with wide angle lenses, everything will still be in focus) and try to keep the shutter above 1.5 stops X focal length at a minimum. For 24mm = 1/75th (or basically 1/80th).

tcole1983

If you are going from VR lenses to this lens you probably just need more practice. I agree with the camera shake. I had to better my shooting practices when I got my non-vr lenses to actually worry about shutter speeds and holding the camera still. I would say take some more snaps in better light and get the shutter speeds up even if you have to up the ISO. The pictures are blurry, but I have no doubt it is a capable lens. If you are a still having problems then send it back, but try some more first...maybe a tripod if you have one.

Also a note you can really shoot the lens wide open or just a little bit less than wide open. Because the angle is so wide you will get everything in focus even at F4. There are some cases you might not, but it shouldn't be a problem most of the time...that is to keep the shutter speeds up on a cloudy day like you were shooting.

This is with the Tokina version of the same lens...at night hand held. F4 at 12mm, but I got 1/50 shutter speed. This should be doable for you...I have a D5000

asiona1

hi guys, thank you so much for all the ideas.
I had trouble commenting with my other account, therefore a new one.
Now i know i would keep a faster shutter speed next time.
will do some more test shots on weekend.

what would be better environment for testing? something with foreground and distant mountain or just my backyard will do?

asiona1

I looked at your flicker page and well ..which image was the problem one ???

remember if you halve the focal length ie 24 down to 12 you need 4x the MP to maintain the same IQ..
So the image that was spread over 12mp at 24 mm will only be spread over 3mp at 12mm assuming you stand in the same place and focus on the same spot

sorryPistnbroke i was a bit confused with the last sentence, can you explain more? thank you

asiona1

I am also learning to use wide angle lens, and have been looking at photos from flickr.
came across with one photo i really enjoy. http://m.flickr.com/photos/fabbiomenna/8349612316/lightbox/

this is done with 1/800 iso 200 12mm and f8.

how can this fast speed be achieved in such a low iso, is it very bright out there? and also everything is so sharp and in focus with just f8?

Thanks a lot. looking forward to trying a few more shots tomorrow ^O^

tcole1983

You can try anywhere. Not sure what pistnbroke is talking about...doesn't seem relevant to the conversation. It is going to be 12 MP at 12 or 24 mm. You aren't comparing crops or your photos or shots of the same things at 12 or 24 mm so not sure where it is coming from.

The example you posted I can see the shutter speed being that high...it looks pretty sunny. It seems funny but a cloudy day can almost be as bad as shooting indoors. It will really block the sun out. I use the rule of keeping the shutter at least the same as my mm1/12 @ 12mm or 1/300 @ 300mm, but it seems like you might need double at least. I would say just be more patient and try to hold the camera steady. Of course if you can get the shutter speed high enough then it won't matter either way.

Pistnbroke

This guy is commenting on image quality....
If you photograph a brick wall at 24mm and have say 50 bricks in the frame and then zoom out to 12mm you will have 200 bricks in the frame. Twice the height and twice the width...The original 50 bricks will therefore only cover 3mp rather than 12mp so you cannot expect the same quality. When people buy a wide angle and pixel peep they are supprised at the lower quality ....that is why ...(Those of us who use wide angles use a D800)
VR will not help if you are not shaking !!!!

asiona1

Thanks guys, cant wait so i did some shots in the living room
https://www.flickr.com/photos/119756785@N06/

Amazingly sharp throughout the frame at f8. Havent got a tripod tonight, just rested my camera on a bunch of books.
Also reading through some other articles, I will get ISO up to find a faster shutter speed for hand held photos.

Will keep update with my progress ^^

Msmoto

@asiona1

Very sharp images…… I think you are catching on….

tcole1983

Looks much better.

As for pistnbroke's point...I understood what he meant but still not relevant really imo. It has lots to do with the distance of objects, how large they are, and what size you are viewing them at. I can see the warning label pretty well in your living room picture because it isn't that far away. You should still have sharpness at either focal length...you just can't read a sign on a mountain at 12 mm which you won't be able to at 24 mm either. But that should be basic knowledge that you are going to see more at a zoomed in mm then at a wide angle Anyway that wasn't the problem and was misleading in the discussion. The non-sharpness of your previous photos didn't have anything to do with this.

asiona1

https://www.flickr.com/photos/119756785@N06/

Some new photos taken after work, lovely walk on a sunny day.
Starting to love this lens just a bit short at 24mm.
Are there any settings I should improve or if you think the sharpness is fine?

BTW I am going to St Patrick parade on Sunday just for some photos, I have got 18-105mm and this lovely 12-24mm, which lens would be more suitable for parade?

Thanks heaps

Msmoto

I would decide on what you want to capture. The lens we use is based on what we want as our end product. To understand how equipment works, I have to use it, several hundred images…..

I might shoot a St Patrick parade with a 24mm on a monopod held overhead…..using a wired remote for the D90. Then if you can move in tight and capture some wide shots from about ten feet from the floats, etc. If you are restricted and can not get close, maybe the longer lens will be more versatile. Shoot a few hundred images, keep about ten…..then post on PAD.

asiona1

Shoot a few hundred images, keep about ten…..then post on PAD.

Yeah sure will do that, but what is PAD?

tcole1983

Shoot a few hundred images, keep about ten…..then post on PAD.

Yeah sure will do that, but what is PAD?

The PAD = Photo A Day thread...sticky at the top of the forum for each month.

I say use either lens...the 24 isn't too long, but I say just stick to it and try it out. If you force yourself to use just a single lens it makes you see what it can do and get creative with it. Push the limits so to speak.

NikonMick

I'm a big fan of the 12-12/f4, and have used it on both the D60 and more extensively on the D3100. You may care to have a look/see, cheers Mick

1. http://www.flickr.com/photos/68039985@N08/6834722634/in/photostream

2. http://www.flickr.com/photos/68039985@N08/7722265110/in/photostream

3. http://www.flickr.com/photos/68039985@N08/7762785526/in/photostream

4. http://www.flickr.com/photos/68039985@N08/7762822598/in/photostream/

tcole1983

I guess my thoughts changed on the UWA lens use once I got it. For some reason I had it in my head that I needed this really wide angle lens to get nice landscape shots of whole mountain ranges. Then I realized I never did.

I found the most uses being when you are close to something and want to still capture the whole thing. Architecture inside and outside, large or tall objects where it isn't possible to create enough space between you and the object, and it was decent at landscapes...but not for the reason I thought. Mine was a fun lens, but I wish I had gotten the Nikon version...I might have still had mine if I did. Once I went to my 17-55 though I didn't really find the need for that 5 more mm on the wide side as I didn't shoot too much in that range. Plus my 17-55 was F2.8.

Good luck and have fun. Keep it steady ;-)

asiona1

I guess my thoughts changed on the UWA lens use once I got it. For some reason I had it in my head that I needed this really wide angle lens to get nice landscape shots of whole mountain ranges. Then I realized I never did.

Yes, my initial thoughts would be the same and still currently believe that uwa would produce nice photos with foreground, shortened midway and sharp distant. Plus 24mm is not too wide as a "normal" lens, therefore i can still use it everyday on the street. Sometimes i do miss the 24+ if i didnt bring 18-105. but it diesnt hurt as landscape is my favorite although its hard to shot landscape in city.

I will keep using it for a bit while and get creative with my snaps.

PS: tripod is on its way, and probably will get a gnd filter as well for very sunny days.