Sponsor Message:
Aviation Photography Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Soft Lenses?  
User currently offlineWhappeh From United States of America, joined Mar 2006, 1562 posts, RR: 2
Posted (6 years 4 months 1 week 3 days 18 hours ago) and read 2440 times:

I've been having a conundrum lately with one of my new lenses. I got the 18-200VR at Christmas, and was very happy to pick it up. However, it seems EVERYTHING I shoot with it is soft as soft can be. Far much more so then my 18-70 that was the kit lens I was using before hand. I'm just curious, how can you really tell if its a lens problem, or is the lens naturally soft? If it is a problem with a specific lens, can you do anything about it? Send it to Nikon? Warranty?


-Travel now, journey infinitely.
9 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineRuudb From Netherlands, joined Jun 2005, 164 posts, RR: 6
Reply 1, posted (6 years 4 months 1 week 3 days 17 hours ago) and read 2423 times:

I think it is typical for these kind of lenses with a long reach, also it has a lot of vignetting, at least the sample I used. To be honest that was a bigger problem to me as being soft.

User currently offlineWhappeh From United States of America, joined Mar 2006, 1562 posts, RR: 2
Reply 2, posted (6 years 4 months 1 week 3 days 17 hours ago) and read 2422 times:

I haven't had much vignetting issues, atleast none that stood out worse to me then the overall softness. I'm having to do so much extra sharpening to my photos in post-processing, its damn near making them unusable.


-Travel now, journey infinitely.
User currently offline777MechSys From United States of America, joined Apr 2006, 350 posts, RR: 3
Reply 3, posted (6 years 4 months 1 week 3 days 15 hours ago) and read 2384 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!



Quoting Whappeh (Thread starter):
how can you really tell if its a lens problem, or is the lens naturally soft?

The first 18-200 lenses are supposed to be good. After that they pretty much suck. I tried it out on two different bodies and noticed the same soft issues.

The 18-70 was a descent lens. I liked it better than the 18-200.


User currently offlineWhappeh From United States of America, joined Mar 2006, 1562 posts, RR: 2
Reply 4, posted (6 years 4 months 1 week 3 days 14 hours ago) and read 2378 times:

I'm really surprised by the softness... I'm going to have to do some tests in good light tomorrow with some letters and text from fixed positions and find out.


-Travel now, journey infinitely.
User currently offlineJeffM From United States of America, joined May 2005, 3266 posts, RR: 52
Reply 5, posted (6 years 4 months 1 week 3 days 14 hours ago) and read 2370 times:

How do your prints come out? If they are acceptable at around 11x14 or slightly larger, I wouldn't worry unless you primarily display your images on the web. Trying to judge an image on a screen can be futile.

User currently offlineWhappeh From United States of America, joined Mar 2006, 1562 posts, RR: 2
Reply 6, posted (6 years 4 months 1 week 3 days 14 hours ago) and read 2366 times:

I haven't done any print work since I got the lens, only been working on shooting for anet and other digital medium. I may go make a print and find out, that could be good advice. Thanks.


-Travel now, journey infinitely.
User currently offlinePreelude From Canada, joined Dec 2006, 17 posts, RR: 0
Reply 7, posted (6 years 4 months 1 week 16 hours ago) and read 2287 times:

It's a general rule that the more range a lens covers, the poorer the optical performance will be, however there are exceptions. 18-200 = 11.1 zoom. Also if you want sharp images you usually have to step down the lens, typical sweet spot is around f/8 to f/9, at 500mm I have to shoot f/11 with my sigma 170-500. Prime lenses seem to be sharp at all f/stops...

User currently offlineWhappeh From United States of America, joined Mar 2006, 1562 posts, RR: 2
Reply 8, posted (6 years 4 months 1 week 16 hours ago) and read 2277 times:

With my 18-200 I always shoot at F/8 on Aperture priority (unless the situation warrants a change). I may do some jumping around the fstops and trying to find a sharper setting.


-Travel now, journey infinitely.
User currently offlineKereru From New Zealand, joined Jun 2003, 873 posts, RR: 46
Reply 9, posted (6 years 4 months 1 week 9 hours ago) and read 2257 times:

Check this out.
http://www.dpreview.com/lensreviews/...8-200_3p5-5p6_vr_afs_n15/page4.asp


I use my 18-200 on mainly walk around or close stuff.

Cheers,

Colin  old 



Good things take Time.
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Renting Lenses... posted Sat Mar 1 2008 09:47:57 by Rsmith6621a
Rejected - Soft & Oversharpened? posted Fri Feb 29 2008 12:45:46 by JonathanJet
Lenses Cheaper In Asia/US posted Sun Feb 17 2008 13:55:15 by EMA747
How To Spot Soft Lens Copies? posted Tue Feb 12 2008 03:29:12 by BuyantUkhaa
New Sigma Telephoto Zoom Lenses With OS posted Wed Jan 30 2008 21:20:43 by F14
Rejected: Soft - I'm Not Seeing It... posted Tue Jan 29 2008 08:46:37 by SEAchaz
Appeal? Reject Reason Soft---Help Please posted Mon Jan 28 2008 12:27:39 by Johnsiebert
Where To Buy Canon Lenses In SIN? posted Mon Jan 28 2008 11:07:11 by LHRjc
Soft And Oversharpen Rejections posted Sun Jan 27 2008 11:29:00 by Apache
Soft Rejection posted Sun Jan 27 2008 06:12:43 by Carlos