D850 Sharpness

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).

Status
Not open for further replies.
J

JayWu0505

New member
Member's gallery
I've been using the d850 for about 2-3 years(Starting bird photography about 5 years). First with 200-500 f5.6 and now with 600mm f4 E. I focus mainly on birds. When I first switched to 600mm f4, the change in sharpness wasn't as obvious as I expected. And I'd notice that most of the time, my photos can't even count as sharp. Is it just because I didn't get the focus right or it's the techniques that cause these problems?

I have several thoughts :
  1. I turn VR on all the time with my 600mm f4 E even on a tripod, and I rarely handheld, my shutter speed is usually around 800-3200, which I think is not that low being on a tripod. Should I consider turning off the VR, perhaps it helps with the image quality?
  2. Should I consider AF fine-tuning on my 600mm f4 E, cause as I mentioned, I constantly get photos that the focus point is right on the eye but still can't get a crisp sharp photo.
  3. I started shooting in Raw after switching to 600 f4 E, and all of my images on 200-500 f5.6 in JPEGs, but I didn't have Lightroom, instead, I use Darktable as an alternative. I notice that as I expected(or not), the raws were way softer than the JPEGs(with lots of adjustments in the camera) and even softer than the JPEGs from the camera after processing in the Darktable. I think that might be one of the reasons for softer photos. Should I consider switching back to JPEGs before buying Lightroom? - It might be that bigger RAWs files are capable of showing more noise and blurs than JPEGs.
  4. Maybe I was just taking photos too far away, I crop a lot... lol
 
Member's gallery
JayWu0505 said:
I've been using the d850 for about 2-3 years(Starting bird photography about 5 years). First with 200-500 f5.6 and now with 600mm f4 E. I focus mainly on birds. When I first switched to 600mm f4, the change in sharpness wasn't as obvious as I expected. And I'd notice that most of the time, my photos can't even count as sharp. Is it just because I didn't get the focus right or it's the techniques that cause these problems?

I have several thoughts :
  1. I turn VR on all the time with my 600mm f4 E even on a tripod, and I rarely handheld, my shutter speed is usually around 800-3200, which I think is not that low being on a tripod. Should I consider turning off the VR, perhaps it helps with the image quality?
  2. Should I consider AF fine-tuning on my 600mm f4 E, cause as I mentioned, I constantly get photos that the focus point is right on the eye but still can't get a crisp sharp photo.
Click to expand...
Absolutely! I’ve fine-tuned all of my long primes and TC combinations in two different D850s. IQ benefitted in all situations. The most extreme example was with a 500 E FL that I bought used. Upon using it, I could see it needed adjustment. In one of my D850s, I had to make a -18 adjustment, but it now works great. Interestingly, with a 1.4x TC, it required only a -4 adjustment.
JayWu0505 said:
  1. I started shooting in Raw after switching to 600 f4 E, and all of my images on 200-500 f5.6 in JPEGs, but I didn't have Lightroom, instead, I use Darktable as an alternative. I notice that as I expected(or not), the raws were way softer than the JPEGs(with lots of adjustments in the camera) and even softer than the JPEGs from the camera after processing in the Darktable. I think that might be one of the reasons for softer photos. Should I consider switching back to JPEGs before buying Lightroom? - It might be that bigger RAWs files are capable of showing more noise and blurs than JPEGs.
  2. Maybe I was just taking photos too far away, I crop a lot... lol
Click to expand...
Take a hard look at your shooting conditions to assess to what degree atmospheric conditions may be contributing to the soft images. Any time you shoot through air masses of varying density, refraction (or bending of light waves) can occur. Heatwaves are the most obvious example, when ground is heated up by the sun and light waves are bent as they pass through the heated air from the subject to your lens. But even much more subtle conditions not visible to the naked eye can soften images.
 
Member's gallery
I can't really answer the question without seeing an image and the associated capture data ( lens used, f stop, shutter speed, ISO, focus mode, amount of cropping, on tripod, etc).

FWIW - I used my D850 for several trips to Africa, Costa Rica and other locations shooting birds and wildlife. The images from the D850 rivaled those taken with my D5. I used the 500mm, then the 600 f4 and the 80-400 AF-s. Images were tack sharp.

A large amount of cropping WILL reduce image quality. Jpgs are already sharpened. See Steve's video HERE.

Post a couple of raw photos with the capture data and let us see what might be happening.
 
Member's gallery
So many things can be at play as well as combinations. AF fine tune can help, yes. If you are on a tripod and up around 1/3200 sec, you probably don't need VR. Your long lens technique might need some improvement, IIRC Steve did a video on that subject.
Atmospherics are probably the second leading cause behind technique issues, IMHO. One aspect that has bitten me is the atmospherics generated by the lens hood which is especially noticable if you don't have some sort of covering (ie, it's still black and in the sun). Again, Steve did a video on this.
In the end, the best thing to do is try to eliminate as many variables as possible. The amount of cropping will emphasize the effects of atmospherics as well.
You may want to try Nikon's Studio NX for RAW conversion, it's free and probably the best converter for Nikon raw files available.
 
Member's gallery
JayWu0505 said:
I've been using the d850 for about 2-3 years(Starting bird photography about 5 years). First with 200-500 f5.6 and now with 600mm f4 E. I focus mainly on birds. When I first switched to 600mm f4, the change in sharpness wasn't as obvious as I expected. And I'd notice that most of the time, my photos can't even count as sharp. Is it just because I didn't get the focus right or it's the techniques that cause these problems?

I have several thoughts :
  1. I turn VR on all the time with my 600mm f4 E even on a tripod, and I rarely handheld, my shutter speed is usually around 800-3200, which I think is not that low being on a tripod. Should I consider turning off the VR, perhaps it helps with the image quality?
  2. Should I consider AF fine-tuning on my 600mm f4 E, cause as I mentioned, I constantly get photos that the focus point is right on the eye but still can't get a crisp sharp photo.
  3. I started shooting in Raw after switching to 600 f4 E, and all of my images on 200-500 f5.6 in JPEGs, but I didn't have Lightroom, instead, I use Darktable as an alternative. I notice that as I expected(or not), the raws were way softer than the JPEGs(with lots of adjustments in the camera) and even softer than the JPEGs from the camera after processing in the Darktable. I think that might be one of the reasons for softer photos. Should I consider switching back to JPEGs before buying Lightroom? - It might be that bigger RAWs files are capable of showing more noise and blurs than JPEGs.
  4. Maybe I was just taking photos too far away, I crop a lot... lol
Click to expand...
I don’t think it’s the camera itself - there’s nothing inherent in the D850 that would result in soft images.

Should I consider turning off the VR? Yes, absolutely. There’s no advantage to using VR when mounted on a study tripod, and it’s possible that the VR may be introducing some movement.

Should I consider switching back to JPEGs? No, stick with shooting in RAW to give you the greatest amount of data to use in post processing.

Should I consider AF fine-tuning on my 600mm f4 E? Always a good idea to do periodically, just to make sure your AF is accurate.

Croping. This can be a big contributor to softer images, even with a super telephoto like the 600. Try to get the image right in the field, or crop very modestly.

There are other factors that could be contributing to your softer images - field technique, atmospheric conditions, light, etc. I’d suggest that you eliminate as many of these variables as possible, by testing under controlled conditions. Mount your camera/lens to your tripod, in good light, and focus on an object (preferably with writing, like a can of paint) at a set distance - say 100 feet. You might even consider using a shutter release to eliminate possible hand movement. Shoot at reasonable shutter speeds, lowish ISO, favorable apertures, and with VR off. Run several tests using different settings. Check your results. Then turn VR on and repeat. If they’re all sharp, then your softness is likely due to field technique, atmospherics, or cropping. At least you’ll know that it’s not your camera or lens.

Best of luck!
 
Member's gallery
I suspect the biggest difference is that you switched from shooting jpeg to RAW and haven't yet learned to process the RAW files well. Try opening the files with Nikon NX Studio and see how they look. NX Studio can read the camera settings and process them just like they would come out of the camera as jpegs. That is the most likely suspect and less work than tuning lens/camera, running tests with VR on/off, etc. It's a free and easy test.
 
Member's gallery
Here are some RAW photos from last year's December when I first got the 600mm) until now that I would count as "close".

Google Drive: Sign-in

Access Google Drive with a Google account (for personal use) or Google Workspace account (for business use).
drive.google.com
To add more details, I always shoot at f5.6 and with ISO lower than 1600.

Very grateful for all the advice and information, I'll definitely try them in the near future.
 
Member's gallery
MartyD said:
I think sometimes we expect too much from long lenses, in that we expect to be able to shoot subjects far away and get really sharp photos. You just can't overcome atmospheric conditions and the laws of physics. I would shoot some test shots at closer distances under controlled conditions to test the sharpness of your equipment.
Click to expand...
That might be the major problem, maybe I'd been expecting too much lol
 
Member's gallery
JayWu0505 said:
Here are some RAW photos from last year's December when I first got the 600mm) until now that I would count as "close".

Google Drive: Sign-in

Access Google Drive with a Google account (for personal use) or Google Workspace account (for business use).
drive.google.com
To add more details, I always shoot at f5.6 and with ISO lower than 1600.

Very grateful for all the advice and information, I'll definitely try them in the near future.
Click to expand...
That link seems to be not working as it should.
You could also post some crops here.
I would be really interested to see them.
 
Member's gallery
From what I can see, it looks like the photos of the Northern Harrier, Mallard, and GH Owlet are being impacted by some environmental factors (heat haze, foreground objects, etc.).

The other photos you've shared look tack sharp on the eyes at 100% on a 13" 2022 MPB M2 screen. I don't think you can get any sharper besides using some sort of program to enhance the photo like Topaz DeNoize or Gigapixel AI.

EDIT: Can you screenshot the photos in an editing program that shows the EXIF data? I don't think Drive allows you to see the f-stop, shutter speed, or other info.
 
Member's gallery
vandL said:
From what I can see, it looks like the photos of the Northern Harrier, Mallard, and GH Owlet are being impacted by some environmental factors (heat haze, foreground objects, etc.).

The other photos you've shared look tack sharp on the eyes at 100% on a 13" 2022 MPB M2 screen. I don't think you can get any sharper besides using some sort of program to enhance the photo like Topaz DeNoize or Gigapixel AI.

EDIT: Can you screenshot the photos in an editing program that shows the EXIF data? I don't think Drive allows you to see the f-stop, shutter speed, or other info.
Click to expand...
The photos of the mallard and the short ear owl are the main ones that made me wonder, they're both pretty close and need only a little crop, but their eyes are not as sharp as I would expect from that distance.
 
Member's gallery
I had the same issue you describe on my first 600mm F4, it’s a big lump of glass that is front heavy. Make sure you have a decent carbon fibre tripod that can take weight and more, practice a good technique of dampening the vibrations at the front by placing your hand on the barrel towards the front. Shoot at the reciprocal shutter speed of at least 1/600, switch off VR at typically 2x that shutter speed. The D850 does give good results cropped, but you can over do it.
 
Member's gallery
Hi JayWu0505.

I went through all the photos you shared, here are some observations:

(1) The mallard photo was over-exposed by at least two stops, it's very sharp.

(2) The snow bunting phot was out of focus, or at least, not focused on the eye.

(3) The LEO was very sharp.

(4) The barred owl was very sharp.

(5) The Northern Harrier was reasonably sharp, then again, D850 is not known for fast flying birds.

(6) The Cooper's Hawk was under-exposed 1 stop, the sharpness is acceptable.

The best way to check the "sharpness" is taking a series of shots in a controlled environment, for example, on tripod with a stationary test chart.

Good luck.

Oliver
 
Member's gallery
JayWu0505 said:
I've been using the d850 for about 2-3 years(Starting bird photography about 5 years). First with 200-500 f5.6 and now with 600mm f4 E. I focus mainly on birds. When I first switched to 600mm f4, the change in sharpness wasn't as obvious as I expected. And I'd notice that most of the time, my photos can't even count as sharp. Is it just because I didn't get the focus right or it's the techniques that cause these problems?

I have several thoughts :
  1. I turn VR on all the time with my 600mm f4 E even on a tripod, and I rarely handheld, my shutter speed is usually around 800-3200, which I think is not that low being on a tripod. Should I consider turning off the VR, perhaps it helps with the image quality?
  2. Should I consider AF fine-tuning on my 600mm f4 E, cause as I mentioned, I constantly get photos that the focus point is right on the eye but still can't get a crisp sharp photo.
  3. I started shooting in Raw after switching to 600 f4 E, and all of my images on 200-500 f5.6 in JPEGs, but I didn't have Lightroom, instead, I use Darktable as an alternative. I notice that as I expected(or not), the raws were way softer than the JPEGs(with lots of adjustments in the camera) and even softer than the JPEGs from the camera after processing in the Darktable. I think that might be one of the reasons for softer photos. Should I consider switching back to JPEGs before buying Lightroom? - It might be that bigger RAWs files are capable of showing more noise and blurs than JPEGs.
  4. Maybe I was just taking photos too far away, I crop a lot... lol
Click to expand...

Technique issues aside...

The 600mm f/4E isn't really up to snuff for a 45 megapixel camera. Center performance should be over 4,000 on IMATEST and it only clears about ~3,400 at f/5.6.

What you're perceiving to be a lack of sharpness may simply be the lens at its optical limits. Nikon has serious resolution issues with many of their lenses.

Take a few test shots of a static subject as others suggested.
 
Member's gallery
missterephotos said:
Technique issues aside...

The 600mm f/4E isn't really up to snuff for a 45 megapixel camera. Center performance should be over 4,000 on IMATEST and it only clears about ~3,400 at f/5.6.

What you're perceiving to be a lack of sharpness may simply be the lens at its optical limits. Nikon has serious resolution issues with many of their lenses.

Take a few test shots of a static subject as others suggested.
Click to expand...

Interresting.
Which Nikon long lens can provide the best sharpness that the D850 sensor allows ?
 
Member's gallery
After having reviewed all your images in Nikon Capture NX-D, I can say that there is a lot that leaves me confused.
However, one thing is clear: It's not a focus problem (with the exeption of 5096 and 5098, where the focus seems to be just a bit behind).
If there was a focus offset, then you would find perfect focus somewhere else in the frame, but here, the sharpest regions are where they are supposed to be.

It also doesn't look like any motion blur to me.

0684: Could it be that this was shot through a window?
5096 and 5098: I am wondering about the light falloff at the right edge of the frame.

Atmospheric distortion may play a role in some images, but I have the impression that this lens is either not as sharp as some other lenses or there is something weird going on.

My tip is to test the lens in good light conditions without tripod at high shutter speed (1/2000 at least), VR on and VR off, focus on different stationary objects at small distance (<10m, to rule out any atmospheric effects).

However, they are very nice shots!
 
Member's gallery
The 600 f/4 E has plenty of resolution for a sharp photo. That's not the issue at all. It's a terrific lens and used by many professionals. If you can't make a sharp image with that lens, it's not a problem with the lens.

I found many of the subjects to be small in the frame. When you are zooming or cropping to 100% or 200% to see detail, you are pixel peeping. There are differences, but it's not by itself an indicator of a soft or unusable image.

Take this owl for example. Here is a crop of the image to a 67% view in Lightroom Classic. The image was well exposed and settings were appropriate, but it's an owl and you slightly missed focus on the eye. The focus was on the bright eyebrow feathers above the bridge of the nose and that's normally okay, but that owl has a recessed eye with feathers extending about 1.5 inches in front of the eye. Those feathers caused the DOF to shift forward and the corner of the eye is slightly soft at high magnification. By the way - I ran into this problem myself running a class with captive raptors at 20 feet away. Now I use Pinpoint AF precisely positioned on the iris of the owl for this kind of posture.
Screenshot 2023-04-28 070254 - edited 67%.jpg
You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.


Here is the RAW file showing the AF point at 200%
Screenshot 2023-04-28 070035 - 200%.jpg
You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.


My take is AF is accurate, so I would rule out AF Fine Tuning unless you want to bias focus to the rear because of your subject matter.

I looked at some other shots and I saw a combination of too far away and some other soft images.

Are you using Long Lens Technique with a hand across the lens barrel? It could be important to mitigate shutter shock which can be a factor on the D850.

What specific model of tripod and gimbal head are you using. I've recently seen soft images caused solely by the tripod and gimbal head using a D850 and 500 f/4 lens - and they were completely resolved by using a more robust tripod and ordering a new gimbal head. You could test this by getting a laser pointer, mounting it on the lens hood, and watching what happens as you press the shutter release.
 
Member's gallery
missterephotos said:
Technique issues aside...

The 600mm f/4E isn't really up to snuff for a 45 megapixel camera. Center performance should be over 4,000 on IMATEST and it only clears about ~3,400 at f/5.6.

What you're perceiving to be a lack of sharpness may simply be the lens at its optical limits. Nikon has serious resolution issues with many of their lenses.

Take a few test shots of a static subject as others suggested.
Click to expand...
I’d have to disagree on that. The Nikon E exotic primes (400/500/600mm) are known for their outstanding IQ and VR. I’m constantly impressed by my 500E’s IQ on both my D850 and Z9, even handheld with TCs. IMO, unless his particular copy is flawed, there’s no reason to suspect lack of image sharpness is due to the lens.
 
Last edited:
Member's gallery
ARClark said:
I’d have to disagree on that. The Nikon E exotic primes (400/500/600mm) are known for their outstanding IQ and VR. I’m constantly impressed by my 500E’s IQ on both my D850 and Z9, even handheld with TCs. IMO, unless his particular copy is flawed, there’s no reason to suspect lack of image sharpness is due to the lens.
Click to expand...

The 600mm f/4G is about is about 3,100 at f/5.6.
The 600mm f/4E is about 3,500 at f/5.6.

The 400mm f/2.8 G/E have almost 50% better resolving power if the shot is framed identically (i.e. - move closer) and they struggle with the sensor also.

There's never been anything particularly impressive about the 400/500 len's optics except reach and f stop.

These 45mp sensors are absolutely brutal, and the numbers don't lie.

You can disagree all you like. Excellent lenses will hit over 4,000. I've been waiting to see these kinds of tests performed on the Z mount counterparts.
 
Member's gallery
missterephotos said:
The 600mm f/4G is about is about 3,100 at f/5.6.
The 600mm f/4E is about 3,500 at f/5.6.

The 400mm f/2.8 G/E have almost 50% better resolving power if the shot is framed identically (i.e. - move closer) and they struggle with the sensor also.

There's never been anything particularly impressive about the 400/500 len's optics except reach and f stop.

These 45mp sensors are absolutely brutal, and the numbers don't lie.

You can disagree all you like. Excellent lenses will hit over 4,000. I've been waiting to see these kinds of tests performed on the Z mount counterparts.
Click to expand...
Just curious if you’re writing from personal experience using these lenses on 45mp cameras, or just basing your opinion on numbers? Also, I’d have to ask what are the alternatives if not super telephoto Nikon primes? There are many professional wildlife photographers who seem pleased with their 600 f4 lenses on 45mp bodies, but what the heck do I know, I’m just an amateur. 🥴
 
Last edited:
Member's gallery
missterephotos said:
The 600mm f/4G is about is about 3,100 at f/5.6.
The 600mm f/4E is about 3,500 at f/5.6.

The 400mm f/2.8 G/E have almost 50% better resolving power if the shot is framed identically (i.e. - move closer) and they struggle with the sensor also.

There's never been anything particularly impressive about the 400/500 len's optics except reach and f stop.

These 45mp sensors are absolutely brutal, and the numbers don't lie.

You can disagree all you like. Excellent lenses will hit over 4,000. I've been waiting to see these kinds of tests performed on the Z mount counterparts.
Click to expand...
So what lens and camera do you use for 600mm and longer? Obviously there is a huge difference between 400mm and 600mm. The point is to use the longer reach of 600mm - and often it is still cropped.

Where do you get your test results - because Imatest results are all over the place and are limited to a specific set of test conditions? Probably the most reliable source is LensRentals, and they don't have enough room to reliably test long lenses using Imatest.

Let's try to focus the comments and discussion on what will help the OP - not theoretical arguments about test results for alternative gear or any lens on a high resolution camera. Those comments may be interesting and generate a good discussion with a post starting a new topic.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top