Long distance focus? (Page 2): Great tip.

les_stockton Loc: Eastern Oklahoma

Great tip.

wevans410 Loc: Simi Valley CA

That is a great tip, I will try it thank you.
I went back tonight and tried the lens without the teleconverter. I think they actually came out better. I've only included one picture, but there any number that appeared sharper than with the teleconverter.

les_stockton Loc: Eastern Oklahoma

wevans410 wrote:

That is a great tip, I will try it thank you.
I went back tonight and tried the lens without the teleconverter. I think they actually came out better. I've only included one picture, but there any number that appeared sharper than with the teleconverter.

Interesting. My friend observed the same thing after leaving that off. I'm wondering if there is a good teleconverter that doesn't cause the loss of sharpness. I don't mind losing a stop or two, but sharpness is still important.

Nikonian72 Loc: Chico CA

For optimum performance, I strongly recommend a Nikkor extender for Nikkor lenses.
Try the LCD focusing trial with & without tele-extender.

russebarre9

Hi I am a Canon guy also. I would always use a tripod for shots like this. I've seen on this site where other people have hd trouble using a 2x tel. Also maybe better with a 1.4 tel. I have a 70-300 Zoom that I can shoot accross a lake and get good pics or a mountain but haven't trid a shoot lick this for smaller subjects but think it would do pretty goodl. I had a 2x tel on it and finally took it off as with the tel. it just didn't do well and does better without it. Let us know what you come up with and try without the tel. Good luck.

DaveHam Loc: Reading UK

A suggestion; with that set up you may be experiencing vibration from the movement of the mirror in the camera when you go to take the shot. You could try setting mirror up and then taking the exposure. If the bird remains static this should help with the sharpness. I usually set mirror up, fire the mirror and wait a couple of seconds for the vibration to settle out before taking the picture.

rpavich Loc: West Virginia

les_stockton wrote:

quote=wevans410 That is a great tip, I will try i... (show quote)

From my experience, the results vary; one lens with the teleconverter will be a good match, while another lens will not...it doesn't seem to have a pattern at all.

The only real pattern that emerged was that the 1.4X brought better results overall than the 2.0X.

If you go to flickr hive mind and put in the search criteria "1.4X teleconverter" you'll see what results people get with this set up.

Also you can search flickr groups to do the same.

That's the way i do a lot of my research before buying a lens or what have you.

jimmix7 Loc: England

I'v been using the Nikon 70-300mm f4.5- 5.6 G and I also struggle to get a sharp image, only at 10ft at 200mm have I been able to get a half decent shot of a blackbird, all the other 10000s of shots I took were like your pic, which I find unacceptable for the price of the lenses. I'm wanting the Sigma 500mm now but am reluctant to get one,,,,

gilbert Loc: Melbourne, Fl

Nice shot. I have the same problem with soft photo's. I bought a Canon Rebel T3i and with the 18 megapixals the pictures are much better but at 200 feet the image is still soft. I use a 100-300 EOS and a 500 fixed focus w/adaptor. I believe all my lense primary glass is too small to gather enough light to get a clear sharp photo. Gil

rpavich Loc: West Virginia

Quote:

I'v been using the Nikon 70-300mm f4.5- 5.6 G and I also struggle to get a sharp image, only at 10ft at 200mm have I been able to get a half decent shot of a blackbird, all the other 10000s of shots I took were like your pic, which I find unacceptable for the price of the lenses. I'm wanting the Sigma 500mm now but am reluctant to get one,,,,

And

gilbert wrote:

Nice shot. I have the same problem with soft photo's. I bought a Canon Rebel T3i and with the 18 megapixals the pictures are much better but at 200 feet the image is still soft. I use a 100-300 EOS and a 500 fixed focus w/adaptor. I believe all my lense primary glass is too small to gather enough light to get a clear sharp photo. Gil

This is exactly what I've been saying on this, and another thread...we overestimate the capability of our lenses and we shoot things the size of a walnut at 100 yards and wonder why they aren't tack sharp.

It's not a secret but one "secret" to getting great images that are detailed and sharp is to work big...fill the frame with your subject; get closer than you think you need to.

If you are taking a shot of a sparrow with your 200mm lens...then you should be 50 feet from him. If you try that from a block away you'll get crappy results.

I'm not a genius; I learned the hard way....by finding out that I couldn't take a picture of a elderberry in my backyard at 100 feet... :)

My longest lens is my 135mm f/2L which is razor-tack-laser sharp...but if I try to exceed it's capabilities...it's a big disappointment.

bhfranklin Loc: Boston Area / Cape Cod

I beleive you said you used manual focus. Is it possible that your diopter adjustment is just off and your eyes don't see thru uit as you'd like?

Try adjusting that...

nikonshooter Loc: Spartanburg, South Carolina

wevans410 wrote:

I shot this picture of a Red Tailed Hawk from about 150 yds. I used Manual focus looking through the view finder, but didn't get it as sharp as I thought it should be. Any suggestions?
I'm using an AF-S Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8 with a 2x teleconverter on a tripod with remote release. Do I just need new glasses or am I expecting too much at that distance?

You have a great lens that is capable of taking sharp images, not the lens. That lens will render a sharper image at F/8 or F11. Although you open the DOF at F/22 this does not translate into the best - sharpest image.

Also, you are shooting at an affect 400 mm with an FX camera and 600 mm with DX. That being the case, you need to shoot with a shutter that is at least 1/600 second to combat camera shake. Use a tripod if possible. If hand held, make sure the VR is on.

What camera are you using?

Hanksite Loc: Greenville, SC

Old habits are hard to break. I also have used a tele-x converter for years. Got started with old film camera ages ago. Now using a Canon 60D and some great photo editing programs. I most definitely will try using primary lens and then then editing. Thanks. It is a good day when you learn something. :-)

davpal Loc: long island

read the report on the lens that you are using the picture should be sharper you do not need a tripod and the converter is
not needed as it takes away from the sharpness of the prime lens
the lens will focus sharp hand hold the lens is one of nikons best
it will not hurt to check your eyes for distance

nikonshooter Loc: Spartanburg, South Carolina

davpal wrote:

read the report on the lens that you are using the picture should be sharper you do not need a tripod and the converter is
not needed as it takes away from the sharpness of the prime lens
the lens will focus sharp hand hold the lens is one of nikons best
it will not hurt to check your eyes for distance

U R kidding, about the tripod use, aren't you?