Are these images unexpectedly soft? (D500 / 500pf)

[Ever]

Hey friends. I’ve been shooting wildlife for around six months and have been learning a lot, however I still consider myself a beginner. So I welcome any feedback of while exploring this.

I feel the images below are pretty soft. Some are at distance / in sub-optimal lighting, but I still wonder if they should be better. Knowing this will help align my expectations.

They're shot RAW and exported from Lightroom using 2048px without crop/edits. In addition, here’s a Flickr album with additional examples. They’re screenshots of NX Studio showing the focus points (one at 100% zoom, one at no zoom).

Details:

• AF Mode: AF-C
• Stationary: single-point AF
• BIF: sometimes Dynamic AF (72pt?), sometimes Group AF. NX Studio seems to make it look like single-point (one square), but it’s assumed to be Dynamic or Group when BIF
• VR: Sport (I tend to leave this on. Yet to try turning it off for 1000+ shutter speed)
• Posture: Handheld. Generally try use 560+ shutter speed for stationary targets, 1000+ for mobile targets, 2000+ for BIF. Mindful movement / tracking / breath control. Not bumping the manual focus ring
• Time: typically sunset. Sometimes high-noon because #life
• AFFT: -4 (a recent change)
• Other: lens hood w/ neoprene wrap

I ask because I feel like I was getting better shots with the 200-500 (sold for the 500pf). It’s hard to imagine the 500pf is performing worse than the 200-500. I also changed where I’ve been shooting. I tend to visit one specific wildlife area, and I haven’t ruled out that it could be posing its own challenges (distance, lighting, atmosphere). That said, I assume the setup would excel there, but I could be wrong.

I spend quite a lot of time looking at other people’s images, and I note the body/lens when a photo catches my eye. Most tend to be from full-frame mirrorless, but more often than not it's from a similar setup, and with much sharper IQ.

Thanks for any guidance.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

 

[Ever]

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

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

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

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

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

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

 

[Kev68]

Well its very difficult to assess with the resolution of the screen shots posted here or on Flickr, some look OK to me but yes a few look soft and probably a combination of heat haze, distance and low shutter speed or high iso.

My D500 and 500pf was very sharp and gave some of the best wildlife images but I did calibrate the camera (slightly) to the lens, tried to limit cropping and avoided shooting in harsh light!

At the end of the day getting close to the subject is key, you will find things rapidly fall apart as distance increases.

 

[SCoombs]

Some of these are small enough in the frame that you can't expect too much from them, but others do look perhaps soft.

It is hard to judge because of the lower resolutions between forum size here and having only screen shots on Flickr, however I feel like especially on Flickr I see a lot of what may be "heat haze." I also wonder from some of the examples posted here whether you might just need to do auto focus fine tuning.

 

[SCoombs]

Specifically, the wolf and duck photos look to me like heat haze and the songbird pictures look more like the lens needs AF fine tuning. It's lkely if the latter is true that the heat haze photos would have also been better with AF fine tune even if they'd still be suffering from thermals.

 

[DRwyoming]

I agree with the posts above.

Yes, many of those images seem a bit soft but it's very hard to tell in these web sized shots whether things like front or back focus is happening.

The subject size in frame is quite small and that's with 500mm and a crop body camera so the big thing is what we all struggled with at the start, find ways to get closer. It can seem really tough when starting out but folks who persevere find ways to get quite a bit closer than what you posted when shooting an equivalent field of view of a 750mm lens on a full frame camera. Getting closer does a couple of things, first it minimizes the amount of: air, dust, water vapor and heat turbulence between you and your subjects which can make a massive difference in sharpness but it also gets more pixels on the subject which tends to enhance detail and minimize the need to crop which leads to the best image quality.

At first glance and at these resolutions I'd suspect heat haze from shooting too far away and perhaps shooting in the heat of the day is a big contributor to the soft images.

I can't tell how much motion blur is in these photos at this posting resolution but from what you've posted I'd bump all of those shutter speeds up until you're certain motion blur isn't contributing to your problems. Shooting handheld with an equivalent field of view of a 750mm lens I'd want a lot more than 1/500" unless you have very solid technique and your subjects don't twitch at all which most perched birds do. And for flying birds I'd start up around 1/3200" for most shots until you're convinced you can reliably get away with slower shutter speeds.

How did you determine your AF Fine Tuning? Unless you consistently see front or back focus issues that are easily identified and are easily repeatable from test to test it's often best to leave AF fine tuning alone. Remember AF Fine Tuning doesn't make a lens any sharper, it just adjusts the distance of best focus to align with the AF system. IOW, if the lens is consistently focusing a touch too close or too far then AF Fine Tuning can help with that but it won't make a lens any sharper than what you'd achieve with good manual focusing technique or what can be achieved in Live View where the camera uses the main sensor for focusing.

 

[Butlerkid]

Not only will shooting early in the morning or late in the afternoon give you softer, more colorful light.....it will dramatically lessen the amount of atmospheric distortion between you and the subject......assuming you study your subjects and figure out how to get much closer.

 

[Ever]

Quick note on the image sizes/screenshots:

• Photos in this post increased to 2048px jpg (the largest I found met the apparent 2mb limit)
• I'm not aware of a way to export from NX Studio in a way that retains focus points.

Will reply to the questions/suggestions shortly. Thanks again.

 

[SCoombs]

• I'm not aware of a way to export from NX Studio in a way that retains focus points.

There isn't as far as I know. I also take screen captures of NX studio to showcase focus points when I need to and these can be helpful. It is however more helpful for trying to diagnose things like this to see higher resolution exports from NX studionor whatever one is using to process photos.

 

[Ever]

Thanks gang. Really appreciate the insights.

Regarding AFFT, I landed on -4 after using Steve's tutorial on YouTube. I figured give it a try when the images felt soft.

Sounds like thee are the main suggestions:

• Get Closer
• Avoid the heat of the day
• Avoid harsh light
• Bump up shutter speed

I'll take them to heart.

That said, I still feel like I'm seeing softness in specific photos. For example, the ones below were taken at a distance/time of day/shutter speed that was getting sharp photos on the 200-500. Not on the same day, so it's not a scientific approach. But I feel like the ones below should be sharp(er). Again, I'll work on my technique for all three.

Will leave some thoughts on each photo:

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

For the coyote above I'll try using a faster shutter than 800 next time. That said my understanding is 800/1000 is reasonable with AR using mindful technique, no? The sun has recently set and is at my back on a decently cool Winter day.

---

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

Same thing for the coyote above, but even slower (640 shutter speed). +-0.3 bias, so seems like I was already trying to boost up the light. Maybe I had more wiggle room.

---

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

This one of the song bird above is admittedly more like 5pm. But it's in the woods and with what I've heard referred to as "dappled light". I feel it's completely out of focus. Is 800 shutter speed still questionable here? Stationary bird using AR with what feels like natural/artistic light.

---

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

Focus point above.

 

[DRwyoming]

That said, I still feel like I'm seeing softness in specific photos. For example, the ones below were taken at a distance/time of day/shutter speed that was getting sharp photos on the 200-500. Not on the same day, so it's not a scientific approach. But I feel like the ones below should be sharp(er).

It's entirely possible your 500mm PF has some issues but in general it's a very sharp lens and at least on par if not substantially sharper than Nikon's 200-500mm unless the 500mm PF has some kind of issue.

FWIW, if I suspect lens problems or want to put those fears to rest the best way is to shoot some static subjects with fine detail at moderate distances in good light. If you watch some of @Steve's lens testing videos test targets like cans with fine crisp printing can work. If you do that sort of testing then make sure you use good camera support (a table top or other solid supports can work if you don't own a tripod) but eliminate all the common problems like shaky camera, excessive ISO (which can make images look grainy and soft) and the like. Sure we don't photograph test targets when out in the field but the idea is to test the lens in controlled conditions, eliminate a lot of the field variables like heat shimmer when shooting across long distances and determine if the lens itself delivers sharp images under ideal conditions. If so you can put lens quality fears to rest or perhaps identify a lens that has issues and get it in for service.

If you want to double check your AF Fine Tune settings, take a few images using normal AF through the viewfinder and then take a few using Live View. If the Live View images are sharp but the normal AF through the viewfinder images are soft or show obvious front or back focus issues then the fine tuning isn't right. Basically that's a variation on the Dot Tune method described here to check AF tuning:

Sometimes it's a lens plus camera body combo issue like a slightly tweaked lens mount that can lead to sharpness troubles but again some controlled testing can help you identify that or put those fears to rest. If the lens and camera can capture sharp images under good conditions at moderate distances then you can put those fears aside and work on the technique stuff mentioned above.

 

[BlackRockArt]

I doubt if there is anything wrong with the lens, all I see is the atmospherica distortion or heat haze. Personally I would try to take photos in the morning right after the sunrise when the air is cold and crispy.

Oliver

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

 

[JP Onstwedder]

I agree that you should expect better from the camera and lens combination. I used to shoot with that setup and didn't have similar problems; I'd suggest following Dave's (DRWyoming) suggestion to do some controlled testing.

 

[AlanB313]

Let us know how things go.

Others that are much more experienced than I have given good advice. I personally have found that as I improve my technique (getting closer, choosing to go out in better low angle light, faster shutter speeds, lower iso, etc) that I'm getting better results.

If you do decide to send in your lens for a check-up at Nikon, the full service on the 500mm pf is $166. I sent mine in. They also diagnosed a bent mount. That brought the total to $262. With tax and shipping back to me total cost was $304.

Fixing the bent mount really helped. I had a discernable wiggle when mounted to my d500.
Here's what the full service does, there should be a check mark on everything in the middle column, but it didn't copy over, so I added the Xs.

	Standard Inspection Service $71.35	Premium Maintenance & Inspection Service $166.90	No Thank You, My lens needs a repair
Clean External Surfaces		x
Clean External Lens Elements		x
Check Lens Bayonet Mount		x
Check Zoom Operation		n/a
Check Focus Operation		x
Check Focus Accuracy		x
Check Aperture Lever/Diaphragm Function		x
Check Switches/Button Operation		x
Check Lens Contact Communication		x
Update Firmware (if applicable)		x
Tighten External Screws		x
Replace Loose External Rubber Rings		x
Replace Missing External Screws		x
Computer Focus Calibration		x

 

[Soopahmahn]

I think a few of those show evidence of front-focusing. I'd make sure to very thoroughly run AF Fine Tune with a good target, Steve's video on how to do this is excellent. Lots of other good advice above as well.

 

[K9Kirk]

It's hard to say for certain what the problem is without doing a side-by-side comparison of both lenses using the same settings on the same subject. All I can say is maybe when using smaller focal lengths, the pics come at sharper than the 500 with the same s.s. Hand steadiness always has a play on the outcome as well.

 

[Tibor Hrnko]

I don't think the photos are too soft.
The main issue with them, in my view, isn't the softness but the busy surroundings.

If they were taken from a bit closer, the camera would find it easier to focus, and the overall impression would be better IMO.

 

[John Woodworth]

I think that until you take images in controlled conditions, as DRWyoming and others have suggested, you will just be second-guessing yourself.

One of the things that continues to amaze me is the beneficial effects of a "higher-than-you-think" shutter speed has on image quality.

Another technique is to "focus pump". That is, take multiple shots with refocusing each time.

In many of the images you show, the subject is on the small side.

 

[EricBowles]

In looking at the Flickr album with images and crops, I'm seeing some common issues. Many of your images have grasses or sticks between the camera and the subject. These stray items in front of the subject are maddening since they frequently are the focus point rather than your subject. I suspect that you did not even see the sticks or grasses. But knowing that they are likely, you can take extra time to make sure you focus on the subject rather than these alternate targets.

Group AF mode is not very precise. It's an area - and it's much larger than your subject. Group AF usually works well, but the big issue is it focuses with nearest subject priority. That means it tries to focus on the nearest high contrast target within the AF area. With everything in the same AF plane, it works very well. But it lacks the precision to differentiate between grasses in front of your subject and the subject itself. In later cameras Group AF has evolved to Wide AF - and that is my most used AF mode. Just be aware of the issues and the likely miss.

Dynamic AF is also not very precise. It's good for moving subject because it allows the focus point to temporarily leave the subject and be maintained as long as you return it to the subject. It can work through grasses and sticks because it does not use Nearest Subject Priority. The common miss is that it picks up the background.

Focus may also miss because it can pick up any part of your subject - and the side or shoulder may not be in the same plane as the head and eye. There is no subject or eye detection. The Flickr images show a lot of images where the AF box actually used was the side of the subject or a low contrast area. That suggests the camera was struggling for focus with a busy target. I don't have an easy answer - that's how focus works. But the more forgiving the focus box is, the less precise it is. I see a lot of soft images that simply need more precision in focus and technique.

All of this does not avoid the fact that AutoFocus is inherently imprecise. Phase Detect AF provides good results quickly, but at the expense of accuracy. Taking several photos can be helpful since one is usually better than another. A faster shutter speed is useful. A larger subject is useful so you fill more of the frame - and make AF more accurate.

I did not see a pattern of AF misses that were consistently one direction. I saw a few that had focus behind the ideal target, but there are lots of potential sources of error. I would not expect AF Fine Tuning to make much difference. All it does is sift the Focus Plane a fraction of an inch forward or backward. It does not make images sharper. Increased sharpness usually comes with a faster shutter speed, stopping down the aperture slightly, and really good technique - but each of those carries a downside such as increased noise, busier backgrounds, or less mobility. More than anything, it's a matter of practice and concentration.

 

[Calson]

With this generation of Nikon DSLR I frequently needed to use manual autofocus override with subjects. This is especially true with animals where the camera lacking subject detection is not going to focus on the eyes or even the head of the subject.

Sometimes what is perceived as a lack of sharpness it the result of either subject motion blur or a lack of contrast with flat lighting. Shooting at much faster shutter speeds around 1/3200s is worth a try and check the results you get. Longer focal length lenses magnify the image but also any shortcomings of the settings used or ones technique.

 

[PhotoLover]

I kinda agree with what Eric said above. It does look like a lot of the pictures were taken mid-day, when generally things don't look good. I know this because of all the bad pictures I've taken in such situations. And yes, branches or grass in front of the subject can fool the AF.

For the last couple of years my primary gear has been D7500 and then D500, both with a 500 pf. That combo has outstanding AF accuracy and speed; it's not as good as the latest set of mirrorless cameras like the Z8/Z9, but very good (Steve has reviews of those cameras and that lens). If the camera is missing focus in fair to good light, either there is a technical problem with the gear or maybe some tweaks to technique are needed.

With the D500, I'm usually in Group AF, with a button set to switch to single point. With things like BIF, if there is light and the background not terrible, it will grab onto to subjects quite well. For things like a bird perched in a tree in shade, I'll use single point, and it also will grab onto things quite well unless it is pretty dark or the background has no contrast with the subject. But if that is the problem, it will hunt; it won't focus on the wrong spot, it will simply not get focus.

Other things I've found helpful ... I set the range limiter on the lens most of the time, since that speeds up AF a lot with subjects > 8 meters away. I don't stray that far from the center AF points, especially if the light is not great. I'm always in burst mode, even with perched or "motionless" wildlife. Sport mode VR always on (I don't turn it off at high shutter speeds). This lens is completely sharp wide open at 5.6, so I only stop down when I know I need the extra DOF.

For shutter speed, with perched birds if the light is not good I'll cheerfully go down to 400 and 320; I have keepers as low as 125 handheld. The VR is pretty good on that lens. For BIF in flight, faster is better of course, but with larger birds (egrets, ospreys, etc) 1600 is still good enough most of the time if the light is not as strong as you'd like.

Sometimes with subjects like small shorebirds cavorting on waters edge I'll go with dynamic area, maybe 25 points on the D500, as group mode sometimes will grab the shore or water below the bird and I can't quite hold on with single point. But I'm mostly in group mode or single point and if the light and background is ... anywhere near good ... the AF will get a lock. In your pictures above, the AF should be able to handle those situations. The coyote shots clearly could be missed if the camera grabbed the grass in front of the coyote. Sometimes you can't see things in front of the subject at the time you take the shot.

The biggest technique mistake I make trying to get "good" photos is shooting midday, especially on warmer days. The combination of indifferent to bad light plus possible heat distortion makes quality shots almost impossible. I'm trying to get better about not bothering to take pictures in those situations; the results are never going to make me happy. At best, I'll get a few half-decent shots of something in the shade.

 

[AlanB313]

I kinda agree with what Eric said above. It does look like a lot of the pictures were taken mid-day, when generally things don't look good. I know this because of all the bad pictures I've taken in such situations. And yes, branches or grass in front of the subject can fool the AF.

For the last couple of years my primary gear has been D7500 and then D500, both with a 500 pf. That combo has outstanding AF accuracy and speed; it's not as good as the latest set of mirrorless cameras like the Z8/Z9, but very good (Steve has reviews of those cameras and that lens). If the camera is missing focus in fair to good light, either there is a technical problem with the gear or maybe some tweaks to technique are needed.

With the D500, I'm usually in Group AF, with a button set to switch to single point. With things like BIF, if there is light and the background not terrible, it will grab onto to subjects quite well. For things like a bird perched in a tree in shade, I'll use single point, and it also will grab onto things quite well unless it is pretty dark or the background has no contrast with the subject. But if that is the problem, it will hunt; it won't focus on the wrong spot, it will simply not get focus.

Other things I've found helpful ... I set the range limiter on the lens most of the time, since that speeds up AF a lot with subjects > 8 meters away. I don't stray that far from the center AF points, especially if the light is not great. I'm always in burst mode, even with perched or "motionless" wildlife. Sport mode VR always on (I don't turn it off at high shutter speeds). This lens is completely sharp wide open at 5.6, so I only stop down when I know I need the extra DOF.

For shutter speed, with perched birds if the light is not good I'll cheerfully go down to 400 and 320; I have keepers as low as 125 handheld. The VR is pretty good on that lens. For BIF in flight, faster is better of course, but with larger birds (egrets, ospreys, etc) 1600 is still good enough most of the time if the light is not as strong as you'd like.

Sometimes with subjects like small shorebirds cavorting on waters edge I'll go with dynamic area, maybe 25 points on the D500, as group mode sometimes will grab the shore or water below the bird and I can't quite hold on with single point. But I'm mostly in group mode or single point and if the light and background is ... anywhere near good ... the AF will get a lock. In your pictures above, the AF should be able to handle those situations. The coyote shots clearly could be missed if the camera grabbed the grass in front of the coyote. Sometimes you can't see things in front of the subject at the time you take the shot.

The biggest technique mistake I make trying to get "good" photos is shooting midday, especially on warmer days. The combination of indifferent to bad light plus possible heat distortion makes quality shots almost impossible. I'm trying to get better about not bothering to take pictures in those situations; the results are never going to make me happy. At best, I'll get a few half-decent shots of something in the shade.

These are all great suggestions. I also use a d500 with a 500mm pf. I use mostly dynamic mode but have been trying group AF here and there with BIF. I have single point AF programmed for my pv button and single point metering for my fn button. I use these for birds deep in foliage. I'm going to swap them however because I use single point AF more often and the pv button is harder to get to. I wish these buttons were a little closer together.

I agree about taking photos midday. I almost never get shots I care about midday unless the weather is also contributing. Such as dynamic cloudy weather conditions with bursts of sun breaking through. Or muted light. Otherwise, midday is for when I want id shots.

I shoot mostly handheld and I'm finding that faster shutter speeds are giving me better results. I'm using 1/3200 whenever light allows for BIF. I quickly spin the back dial to vary shutter speed if iso is creeping up. Still learning with this fabulous camera.