Test results added - 500 VR sharpness and focus question

So far I am very happy with my new 500 VR when shooting at close ranges. I never used to bother shooting at longer distances, as the results were never satisfactory before I got this lens. So today I was testing my new lens and shooting at a well known Great-horned Owls nest in our area. The first image is a processed full frame image of the nest with adult and young, and the second image a 100% crop of just the adult bird. I was shooting from over 50 metres, but don't know the exact distance as the lens just reads 50m then infinity. Probably around 60m distance. I took shots with the 500mm alone, with the 1.4x and with the 1.7x. All had pretty well the exact same results with regards to sharpness and focus. I took over 50 images and every one is pretty well unusable due to so much blur. I tried with VR on Normal, VR on Tripod, VR turned off, self timer, and self timer with delay mode on (i.e. mirror up before shutter opens) The best results were with VR on Normal and no self timer. The VR is definitely working as I can see it working in the viewfinder.

So is this the best I can expect for sharpness and focus from this distance with this lens? The image looked fantastic in the viewfinder and very sharp to my eyes. There is absolutely no heat blur at this of year.

Full frame image after ACR & CS3 processing 100% crop - no processing or sharpening

Tim, just curious as to what tripod legs and head you were using

You should be able to get significantly sharper images than this one with the 500, VR on or not. Long lens technique is something that I have to work on carefully. If I don't pay attention to my technique I'll get softer shots. If I pay attention to technique I am usually rewarded with very sharp images even using an older 600mm f/4 AF-I lens without VR. If you have used long lenses before and already have the techniques down pat then you may suspect that the lens is part of the problem. If you haven't used long lenses before you may have some practicing to do. I hope you find the 500 VR to be an outstanding lens because I hope to upgrade to one sometime later this year! Good luck!

Tim,

Where was your focus point? Can you load the image in ViewNX to display the focus point?

Mike - I am using the Feisol CT-3371 carbon fiber tripod and the Markins M20 ballhead. The same setup I use for all of my images.

Alan - I have been shooting with long lenses since 1980. I think you have been around here long enough to recognize that I am not a rooky at this Long lens technique is not the issue here. The tripod and head were rock solid with the head locked right down. Whenever I shoot with the same techniques from closer ranges, the images are razor sharp. My suspicion is that this is a distance issue, but since I don't ever shoot from these kind of distances, I wanted to get some feedback on that perpsective here. I gather you are suggesting that the images should still be razor sharp from 60 metres? If so, then I am at a loss as to why none of these images are really sharp

ATJ wrote:Tim,

Where was your focus point? Can you load the image in ViewNX to display the focus point?

Hi Andrew

The focus point was on the adult birds shoulder and cheek.

Tim,

If you scan the whole image, are there any parts that are sharper than the adult bird's shoulder and cheek? Maybe you have a back or front focus error.

Hi Andrew

Yes, I have already done that, and there is no where in the image at all that is sharp or in good focus. I also should mention that I took a whole bunch of images while I was there at various AF fine tune settings, between -20 and +20, and none were sharp or in focus. At that distance, it made minor changes, but nothing that made s real difference. The best was just leaving it a 0.

Tim,

No idea, then. You might have to send the lens off to Nikon.

It might be worthwhile setting up a trial with various subjects from minimum focusing distance through to 60m and see if it is gradual problem or there is a point where it happens suddenly.

I looked at the NEF you sent. I tried to upload images here but I'm having a problem uploading tonight.

I think that ACR is messing you up. I converted the image using Capture NX, which I rarely use, and the only change I made to the camera settings was to turn off noise reduction. The image was much sharper than your post.

Then I played with the sharpening / Noise Reduction tab in ACR to see if I could reproduce NX in terms of sharpness. I managed it with a few settings but what was consistent about them were that they had stronger sharpening that ACR defaults to. Something like 70, .5, 70, 40, 0, 0 seemed to work pretty well for the D300 at ISO 800. I'm sure if I played with it I could find a better setting for that ISO but the default seems to be pretty bad.

Tim, Why don't you shoot side by side with your Sigma 500 which you know well and compare?!

KK Hui wrote:Tim, Why don't you shoot side by side with your Sigma 500 which you know well and compare?!

I wish I could, but I sold it already. I did talk to Glenn Bartley who was at the same location the other day shooting with his Canon 500, and he says his images are about the same for sharpness and focus. I am thinking that 60 metres is just out the range too far for quality images with this gear.

Anthony Medici wrote:I looked at the NEF you sent. I tried to upload images here but I'm having a problem uploading tonight.

I think that ACR is messing you up. I converted the image using Capture NX, which I rarely use, and the only change I made to the camera settings was to turn off noise reduction. The image was much sharper than your post.

Then I played with the sharpening / Noise Reduction tab in ACR to see if I could reproduce NX in terms of sharpness. I managed it with a few settings but what was consistent about them were that they had stronger sharpening that ACR defaults to. Something like 70, .5, 70, 40, 0, 0 seemed to work pretty well for the D300 at ISO 800. I'm sure if I played with it I could find a better setting for that ISO but the default seems to be pretty bad.

Thanks again Tony

I did open up the file into Capture NX, and while it did look better than in ACR, it was still far below what I would hope for with this setup. It has convinced me to play with NX a bit more now though. However, I am still quite disappointed that I didn't gain much from my Sigma 500 after spending $8300

Might be worth trying to shoot a static target under controlled conditions to check performance of the lens, one thing with a telephoto is that at that distance focusing adjustments are very small, Canon manual focus lenses used to use what they called a vari-pitch cam to allow precise focusing to occur near infinity, maybe there is some issue there?

ChrisRoss wrote:Might be worth trying to shoot a static target under controlled conditions to check performance of the lens, one thing with a telephoto is that at that distance focusing adjustments are very small, Canon manual focus lenses used to use what they called a vari-pitch cam to allow precise focusing to occur near infinity, maybe there is some issue there?

Thanks Chris

Are you saying to shoot this controlled target at the same 50 to 60m distance, or more typical closer distances? I know that the images I have shot so far at my usual distances are pretty darn good. Also, as I mentioned, I did do some manual focus shots and they were worse. Shouldn't I be getting the same focus as I am seeing in the viewfinder?

Have you tried using Liveview with magnification to critically check focus? It should be easy to tell if the focus should be slightly forward or back.

gregster wrote:Have you tried using Liveview with magnification to critically check focus? It should be easy to tell if the focus should be slightly forward or back.

I did try to use Liveview while I was there, but I could not get it to work. I have never used it before and did not have the manual with me. I will figure that out tonight

You should be unless something is out of adjustment. I'd say shoot a target at the 50m distance in question, possibly a group of targets at different distances and focus bracket them.

Normally distant views are less of an issue as the magnification is lower and DOF greater so back focusing seems like it should be less of an issue. Does seem odd that it should be less than pin sharp at large distances, some things like motor sport would be shot at distances like that. It's still possible that something is out of whack in adjustment of the lens.

Tim what was your shutter speed?

Alan Murphy wrote:Tim what was your shutter speed?

Exif says 1/100s and f/9