600TC bokeh oddity?

If you would like to post, you'll need to register. Note that if you have a BCG store account, you'll need a new, separate account here (we keep the two sites separate for security purposes).

N

nautiboy

Well-known member
Supporting Member
Marketplace
Member's gallery
I normally would wait until I had more potential examples before soliciting opinions, but as discussed in my other thread (Streak inside lens 600TC) I'm sending this lens back for repair/replace and I'm wondering if it's something I should bring up and/or use in an evaluation of replace vs repair.

Until yesterday, I hadn't seen any obvious visual artifacts with this lens. And I don't think what I'm seeing here is related to the streak, but I'm wondering if it points to another issue. The rendering of the background reflections looks really strange and off to me. I've shot literally hundreds of thousands of photos with my F-mount 800f5.6 and 600f4 and I don't recall ever seeing a background rendered this strangely. I've also shot at this particular location, often in similar lighting conditions many times. It's possible it has happened and I haven't noticed it, but this was so jarring to me I feel like I would've noticed it.

I'm just curious if people have seen similar and think it's "normal" given the shooting conditions, or if it might be an indication of another issue. None of these images have been processed beyond using LR to convert from RAW to JPG.

This shows up in every frame I shot around this time and from this direction. This first shot is an example of the full, uncropped image (and yes, it's underexposed by 1stop to help protect the highlights on the bird). And no, I don't think this particular photo in general is very good, it just shows the issue well.

_DSC4454.jpg
You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.


And here's a tight crop from the area to the right of the bird showing some of the problems. The issue is with the reflections in the water. They have an odd mix of blur and sharp(ish) and look really busy. If I didn't know better I'd blame it on running it through Topaz or something similar.

_DSC4454-2.jpg
You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.


And here's the same area from a different frame, which had a slightly different focus point.


_DSC4456.jpg
You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.


And here's a close crop of the area in front of the bird. The circular, out-of-focus highlights are very dappled.

_DSC4458.jpg
You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.


Anyway, it's possible it was just a freak thing, with just the right reflections at just the right distance. And I may be overly-sensitive due to the previous issue noted. So I'm seeking opinions/thoughts. Also note that looking at the smaller, rescaled versions, it's not quite as obvious, but I think it still mostly comes across.
 
Member's gallery
Do you have any examples of strange bokeh that doesnt involve reflection off water? If its only happening in these reflections I wouldnt worry about it. You have a lot of small ripples and thin reed reflections kind of stacking up and making weird patterns.
 
Member's gallery
nautiboy said:
Anyway, it's possible it was just a freak thing, with just the right reflections at just the right distance. And I may be overly-sensitive due to the previous issue noted. So I'm seeking opinions/thoughts. Also note that looking at the smaller, rescaled versions, it's not quite as obvious, but I think it still mostly comes across.
Click to expand...
Wow, these look a lot like AI based sharpening artifacts. Assuming these haven't had anything more than raw conversion with processor defaults these are really strange and problematic.

Not sure if this is a lens problem but the streak on the inside of the front element is more than enough to return the lens and seeing these artifacts really doesn't help.
 
Member's gallery
DRwyoming said:
Wow, these look a lot like AI based sharpening artifacts. Assuming these haven't had anything more than raw conversion with processor defaults these are really strange and problematic.

Not sure if this is a lens problem but the streak on the inside of the front element is more than enough to return the lens and seeing these artifacts really doesn't help.
Click to expand...

Yeah, as I mentioned in my comments, it really looked to me like the type of thing I sometimes see after running through Topaz. But no, the only thing I did was import to LR and then export as JPG. I suppose I could try another RAW converter, maybe run it through Nikon's studio. But it sure seemed strange when I saw it. It could be just strange effects due to ripples in the water as @Wes Peterson suggested. And no, I haven't seen it in any other image with this lens so far. But I also haven't really spent a lot of time with it. I only just got the lens 2 weeks ago and I've been busy with a variety of things, so I've only had about 3 or 4 sessions with it.
 
Member's gallery
It's not easy to make a judgment from a photo like this.
Many things can make the image quality less than good. One of these, for example, is the humidity that rises from the water.

As the owner of the 600TC I can tell you that the blur is normally up to the level of the product, but different, less "soft" than that of the old 600 FL. All the new Nikon lenses, due to the new optical treatments, make the background more contrasted, especially in the tonal transitions between light and dark, making the whole less soft to the eye, this thing is highlighted well in the 100-400. Furthermore, the 600TC has a slight vignetting almost certainly caused by the lens hood. I say this because I had a shorter lens hood printed in 3D that I designed for my needs and with that, I don't have any vignetting while with the original in some cases you notice a slight vignetting.
 
nautiboy said:
Yeah, as I mentioned in my comments, it really looked to me like the type of thing I sometimes see after running through Topaz. But no, the only thing I did was import to LR and then export as JPG. I suppose I could try another RAW converter, maybe run it through Nikon's studio. But it sure seemed strange when I saw it. It could be just strange effects due to ripples in the water as @Wes Peterson suggested. And no, I haven't seen it in any other image with this lens so far. But I also haven't really spent a lot of time with it. I only just got the lens 2 weeks ago and I've been busy with a variety of things, so I've only had about 3 or 4 sessions with it.
Click to expand...

Did you run the denoise ai in Lightroom?
 
Member's gallery
Based upon your concerns expressed here, it sounds like the issues you have with this lens will always bother you, even if just peripherally.

I'd contact the seller and tell them you wish to return the lens. If they can exchange it for you, I'd take them up on it.

If not, just return it for a refund.
 
Member's gallery
Do you have raw files that you could share? Would be curious to pixel peep some of the in focus areas or those of higher contrast to see if there are obvious flaws e.g. CA... Had some issues w/ a 180-600mm lens that I was able to get replaced (after some hassle) where side-by-side shots w/ a 24-70mm lens of the same subject w/ variables controlled were able to clearly point out problems (smudging of fine details, high ISO an absolute disaster, extreme CA in contrasting areas), . Side-by-side quality comparisons of my old copy v.s. new copy from the store of the exact same subjects were also night and day, sometimes you just have a lemon. If you're able to somehow find similar problems w/ in-focus areas, it becomes much easier to test the lens v.s. others in your collection, as replicating OOF zones w/ different DOF of the lenses becomes a non-issue.
 
Member's gallery
Well, it looks like the main reason for my post (deciding whether I should insist on a new copy vs a repair) is mostly moot now. I got a call from Nikon this morning. He asked if I had sent it in for repair yet, and I said I hadn't and expressed my concern about whether there were other issues. He said that was actually why he was calling - they had decided they were going to replace it instead of repair it.

I am still curious about the bokeh though just because it seems so odd to me. Answering some earlier questions:


jerrylwatson said:
Do you have a filter on the lens?
Click to expand...

No filter, except the clear drop-in filter that comes with the lens (I haven't checked, but I'm assuming the 600TC is the same as the F-mounts that require the factory-supplied clear filter to be installed). No TC (neither external nor internal). No processing other than just an import to LR and export to JPG. I was shooting from a monopod with mono gimbal. Image stabilization was enabled.

Whiskeyman said:
I'd contact the seller and tell them you wish to return the lens. If they can exchange it for you, I'd take them up on it.

If not, just return it for a refund.
Click to expand...

The seller was nikonusa, and Nikon is going to replace it. 🎉


jcollins said:
Do you have raw files that you could share?
Click to expand...

Sure, I can share that when I'm back on my computer that has my photos.
 
Member's gallery
Marco74 said:
As the owner of the 600TC I can tell you that the blur is normally up to the level of the product, but different, less "soft" than that of the old 600 FL. All the new Nikon lenses, due to the new optical treatments, make the background more contrasted, especially in the tonal transitions between light and dark, making the whole less soft to the eye, this thing is highlighted well in the 100-400. Furthermore, the 600TC has a slight vignetting almost certainly caused by the lens hood. I say this because I had a shorter lens hood printed in 3D that I designed for my needs and with that, I don't have any vignetting while with the original in some cases you notice a slight vignetting.
Click to expand...

That's interesting information, thanks! And yes, what I'm used to is what I get from my 800f5.6E and 600F4E.
 
Member's gallery
Great news that Nikon USA has decided to replace your lens. It is a lot better than a repair.
Probably your lens after repairment will go on the store online with a small discount.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top