Does anyone mind taking a look here if it’s normal the images to be this soft with the Nikon 400mm f4.5s?

[bcgnz]

Just got this lens. Is it too soft for Nikon 400mm f4.5s? Took it handheld with 1/500 shutter speed. Was expecting it to be sharper…

If it’s a bad copy, should I return it or send in for service?

 

[FastGlassGuy]

I don't have that lens, but I think it should be sharper then the pictures posted. Having said that, I think if you want constructive feedback, you need to provide more info. What body are you using? What are the other settings you used (f stop, ISO, exp. comp?) How much are these shots cropped? What were the weather conditions? Were you shooting from a vehicle? Ken

 

[Replytoken]

The best way to tell if it is the lens your or your ability to hold it steady is to put in on a stable tripod and run a series of shots of a static subject. I would also set the shutter speed somewhat higher. If the shots are fine, then you may want to work on your technique a bit. As a start, higher shutter speeds often make a lot of issues disappear. I always fight for light when I am out shooting as I live in a gray, rainy climate in the winter, but with newer sensors, I worry less about cranking up the ISO to keep my shutter speeds in the range of 1/1500th or higher when shooting BIF.

Good luck,

--Ken

 

[Steve W]

I don’t think it’s as much about movement, more about the point of focus. The second pic is an example. The dark stick behind and left is showing better detail than the bird. None of the images indicate a front or back focus problem as it varies from one to the other. It would be worth reviewing the photos with point of focus indicated on screen.
The other question is about distance, the closer you are the less depth of field…..less margin for error.
just my thoughts, happy for them to be debated or challenged.

 

[MrFotoFool]

It does not look soft, it looks like very shallow depth of field. The point of focus is tack sharp but the depth of field is so thin that the majority of the areas away from that point are soft (which is how they are supposed to be when shot with large aperture). Photos 1,2,5 head and beak are tack sharp, but focus quickly falls off on body. Photos 2,3 closest part of bird to camera - photos on chest -are sharp while focus falls of quickly (and since head is behind this point, it looks soft because we always look at head and eyes).

 

[fcotterill]

If ever in doubt, test the rig, and technique on a tripod. And a monopod is your friend in poor light prescribing slower shutter speeds.
Slight subject movements can inject a discernable softness, so can a slight to and fro movement in leaning as one frames a handhold telephoto on a bird.
Faster shutter speeds minimize these sources of error; so does capturing short bursts, by setting the highest realistic fps possible. This is 20 gps with a Z8 or Z9.
It's extremely doubtful this 400 f4.5S suffers from copy variation. However you can check this on a heavy tripod and photograph a fluffy object (cat's toy mouse is ideal) alongside a flat target such as printed barcodes.
There's no discernable evidence of back nor front focusing in the images above, but this is simple to check for by photographing an inclined steel engineer's rule, see here:

Please, help with D500 back-focusing - urgent :)

Hello, I recently acquired a D500 to use with Tamron 100 - 400. My main motivation was the crop factor - previously I used D600 and it was either a DX body, or D750 AND 150 - 600 AND a lot of heavy lifting :D . I went for D500 over D7500 for obvious reasons. It was hard to test in the field, as...

bcgforums.com

 

[Replytoken]

It does not look soft, it looks like very shallow depth of field. The point of focus is tack sharp but the depth of field is so thin that the majority of the areas away from that point are soft (which is how they are supposed to be when shot with large aperture). Photos 1,2,5 head and beak are tack sharp, but focus quickly falls off on body. Photos 2,3 closest part of bird to camera - photos on chest -are sharp while focus falls of quickly (and since head is behind this point, it looks soft because we always look at head and eyes).

Had the same thoughts after I posted and had a few more minutes to view the images in a bit more detail.

--Ken

 

[ajrmd]

I don't really have much to add to what has already been said other than to assess lens sharpness, centering etc. put it on a tripod and shoot a target. You are experiencing some difficulty with eye capture and appropriate DOF and these can easily be addressed.

 

[Larry S.]

I read the other’s posts before commenting….. First, you said you just got this lens. Work with it a bit to sort out its use on your camera. I also have this lens and know if the results are disappointing there was “operator error” in the mix. I’m really pleased with the 400 f/4.5 when I’ve done my part…. off my game…not so much…

 

[ButlerKid]

It is really hard to judge sharpness from images posted here. Re-sizing and such causes even images that are tack sharp to be a little less so. I find that is true when posting my images here. I have the 400 f4.5 and consider it a stellar lens. But it does require good technique to get the best results.

Second, hand holding at 1/500 is pretty slow, especially if you are analyzing sharpness. The newer lenses and cameras have such excellent resolving power that most recommend a shutter speed of about twice the focal length at a minimum. Of course, once you have an "insurance" shot at a faster speed, you can try "working down" the shutter speed by taking short bursts. But that is in the field, not testing a new lens.

 

[Nasos Kosmas]

I think the impression of soft images is coming from the light conditions.
I get similar outcome from my stellar 500pf/ Z8 on overcast days
Try shooting on a sunny day and then have the final judge.

 

[Steve]

Where did you shoot these? Were you in a house or hear a building? Some of it looks a little like heat distortion, some of it just missed focus. As suggested, I would do a more formal test - sometimes it takes a minute to get used to a new lens

 

[MartyD]

I would use Nikon NX studio to see exactly where the focus point was when the image was captured. I don't know what distance these were shot at but at 400mm, f4.5 focused at about 20 feet you only have a little over 2 inches of DOF, at 30 ft you would have about 5 inches.

 

[Alistair]

#3 and #4 are front-focused. #5 looks OK to me. #1 and #2 look OK(ish) - maybe off focus a hair- but it is hard to tell at the export quality posted.

Edit - I should add that it is a very sharp lens. At f5.6 it as sharp as almost anything out there, at least it should be. You could try a higher shutter speed in good light ( at least 1\1600) using sport or no VR at f5.6 at a somewhat shorter distance to subject and the lens should be extremely sharp.

 

[bcgnz]

thank u all for the advice. I'll circle back with other photos and test results when I get a chance this weekend.
I'm sharing the same photos again but with the focus point highlighted. I cropped the image by 200%.

The images were shot at about 15 - 20 feet I think.

 

[JAJohnson]

thank u all for the advice. I'll circle back with other photos and test results when I get a chance this weekend.
I'm sharing the same photos again but with the focus point highlighted. I cropped the image by 200%.

The images were shot at about 15 - 20 feet I think.

View attachment 104604View attachment 104605View attachment 104606View attachment 104607View attachment 104608

I assume these are screenshots from NX Studio? Weird that AF hasn’t identified the eye in any of them, but there could be valid reasons for that. Was Bird or Animal detection set to On?

 

[bcgnz]

I assume these are screenshots from NX Studio? Weird that AF hasn’t identified the eye in any of them, but there could be valid reasons for that. Was Bird or Animal detection set to On?

yes they were screenshots from NX studio.
I forget to switch away from single point focus mode.. the focus point might have shifted the when the shutter opened?

 

[Alistair]

yes they were screenshots from NX studio. I forget to switch away from single point focus mode.. the focus point might have shifted the when the shutter opened?

OK but single point has no tracking or subject detection functionality. So it just focuses where you place the focus point and does not shift otherwise. By the look of it the camera has focused where you told it to. Assuming the images at the top of the thread represent the whole scene, for this type of scene just put the camera in auto area with bird subject detection and it will do the rest. If you are using a lowish shutter speed such as 1/500 I suggest you use sport VR mode and take a very short burst at 20FPS to make sure you get a frame with no motion blur.

 

[bcgnz]

OK but single point has no tracking or subject detection functionality. So it just focuses where you place the focus point and does not shift otherwise. By the look of it the camera has focused where you told it to. Assuming the images at the top of the thread represent the whole scene, for this type of scene just put the camera in auto area with bird subject detection and it will do the rest. If you are using a lowish shutter speed such as 1/500 I suggest you use sport VR mode and take a very short burst at 20FPS to make sure you get a frame with no motion blur.

Ohh I'll try that! This seems to explain why the focus was all over the place..

 

[JAJohnson]

yes they were screenshots from NX studio.
I forget to switch away from single point focus mode.. the focus point might have shifted the when the shutter opened?

If you’re using a Z8 or Z9, wide-small AF area with Bird subject ID enabled should find the eye and therefore solve that part of the problem. I also recommend the “shutter speed ratcheting” technique offered by @ButlerKid. She’s an outstanding wildlife photographer and knows whereof she speaks.

You have an outstanding lens. With some practice you’ll get the sharp photos you desire.

 

[bcgnz]

If you’re using a Z8 or Z9, wide-small AF area with Bird subject ID enabled should find the eye and therefore solve that part of the problem. I also recommend the “shutter speed ratcheting” technique offered by @ButlerKid. She’s an outstanding wildlife photographer and knows whereof she speaks.

You have an outstanding lens. With some practice you’ll get the sharp photos you desire.

don't have expeed 7 body yet, on my pocket list!

wow this is so cool! thanks for the suggestion!

 

[Steve W]

Stopping down a little always gives a bit more DOF especially at close distances.

 

[threesixty]

Hey, BC

I shoot both the 400mm 4.5 and the 400mm 2.8 TC, and the 4.5 is very close in sharpness to the exotic 2.8 — both lenses are exquisitely sharp.
So the 400 4.5 should get you razor sharp results, even wide open.

As others have noted, I’d test the lens under controlled conditions — high shutter speed, stable platform, and outside away from heat sources that can cause atmospheric distortion.

I suspect that you’ll find the lens is fine, and then you can start narrowing down what the problem was with those particular shots.

Good luck!

 

[tomcat]

yes they were screenshots from NX studio.
I forget to switch away from single point focus mode.. the focus point might have shifted the when the shutter opened?

Yes, the focus point will shift when the shutter opens/closes. Drives me nuts when I am in single-point focus and find the focus point has shifted and not stayed on target, when I review the image—-(may be due to 76 yo hands or my balance being a webble/wobble now?). So now, even with a static subject , I shoot AF-C, with some of the shots staying on my intended focus point—-lol

 

[David Bostock]

The meta data for your first image says you were in Single Shot Auto Focus. Try switching to Continuous Auto Focus...and as others have said subject detection helps a lot.