Yamron 18-400mm Di II: There was a comment about this lens being poorly made and Unable to get sharp images. This photo was taken with this lens at the limit with a Nikon D7100 and...

PhotoPhred Loc: Cheyney, Pa

There was a comment about this lens being poorly made and Unable to get sharp images. This photo was taken with this lens at the limit with a Nikon D7100 and slightly cropped. Opinions welcomed.

(Download)

camerapapi Loc: Miami, Fl.

It would have been useful knowing what aperture and shutter speed were used and if the camera was handheld or on a tripod. I see softness in the eye, beak and legs along with the fence but specially at the center. Bokeh is very nice isolating the bird.
I do not have enough information so I am only saying what I see. If no tripod was used as a rule these shots improve when a solid platform is used for the camera. A small aperture usually brings detail all over.
Sorry I cannot be more specific.

Orphoto Loc: Oregon

My sense is that it is not very sharp. Of course many possible reasons for that. Yes you have a lot of blur but the quality of it (bokeh) is rather frenetic.

PhotoPhred Loc: Cheyney, Pa

Thanks, first I should have spelled TAMRON correctly. It was hand held, on a slowly moving truck. I will look up the exposure factors.

PHRubin Loc: Nashville TN USA

camerapapi wrote:

It would have been useful knowing what aperture an... (show quote)

I can see from the EXIF it was shot at f/6.3, 1/1600 sec, ISO 1000. I would have used an ISO of 800 or less, and corresponding increase in exposure time. With a firm hand-hold motion shouldn't be a problem, but noise was beginning to show.

PhotoPhred Loc: Cheyney, Pa

PHRubin wrote:

I can see from the EXIF it was shot at f/6.3, 1/1600 sec, ISO 1000. I would have used an ISO of 800 or less, and corresponding increase in exposure time. With a firm hand-hold motion shouldn't be a problem, but noise was beginning to show.

My wife and I were just taking the long way home from shopping in Lancaster Co. Pa. when this bird flew in front of us and perched on the fence. I didn't want to lose the shot so I just zoomed in and took the photo. She was driving slowly, there was a car approaching so we couldn't stop. I added another copy of the original with more crop.

(Download)

mwsilvers Loc: Central New Jersey

PhotoPhred wrote:

There was a comment about this lens being poorly made and Unable to get sharp images. This photo was taken with this lens at the limit with a Nikon D7100 and slightly cropped. Opinions welcomed.

By posting this, or you suggesting that this is a sharp lens? I have a copy of this lens myself so I can tell you with confidence that while the design of this crop sensor superzoom is probably the best of its type, it still has significant limitations and can't compete with the optics of the several 100-400mm wildlife lenses available.

Among other things, the lens is not particularly sharp, even in the center, and is even less sharp as it extends to 400 mm. Towards the edges of the frame, it is not even close to being pin sharp at any focal length or at any aperture. It is an inexpensive and decent quality superzoom which can be very convenient and fun to use as long as one does not set expectations for image quality too high. I think the proof of that is in your image which is not very sharp and does not possess the kind of separation from the background that one would expect in a higher quality lens. There is very little feather definition.

bikinkawboy Loc: north central Missouri

My Tamron 70-300 is really crappy at wider apertures. The center will be reasonably sharp, the right side noticeably fuzzy and the left side absolutely blurry. I have found that it sharpens up when I crank it down to f16 or even better at f22. Of course I generally need to use a tripod to do that and the subject not move any faster than a tree or turtle. The Tamron is the reason I bought a Nikon lens. It’s clear at any aperture. I’m glad the Tamron was part of a package deal. I’d hate to think I spent good money on that piece of junk.

Gene51 Loc: Yonkers, NY, now in LSD (LowerSlowerDelaware)

PhotoPhred wrote:

There was a comment about this lens being poorly made and Unable to get sharp images. This photo was taken with this lens at the limit with a Nikon D7100 and slightly cropped. Opinions welcomed.

The opinions were correct. When used wide open at or near maximum zoom, as you did - the results are a bit soft. Bokeh is not all that smooth, but not the worst I've seen. The lens is not known to be all that sharp at most focal lengths beyond the wider end, and typically worst at max zoom. Closing down the aperture to F8 may help a little. Compared to what is available that can shoot at 400mm, this lens is not in the same class.

This review explores its strengths and weaknesses. Your copy is pretty consistent with what they found.

https://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Tamron-18-400mm-f-3.5-6.3-Di-II-VC-HLD-Lens.aspx

ecobin Loc: Paoli, PA

Nice shot, Fred.

PhotoPhred Loc: Cheyney, Pa

ecobin wrote:

Nice shot, Fred.

Thanks. Taken from my wife's slow moving truck. He flew in front of us, perched on the fence, quickly took the pic, off he went.

olemikey Loc: 6 mile creek, Spacecoast Florida

I'd say not bad at all for "taken from a slow moving truck", the problems induced by that alone explain a lot of the issues of "user movement, vehicle movement, camera movement, vibration, slow shutter" - you were really challenging your camera and lens to get a good shot. Faster shutter speed required at minimum. Sometimes in fleeting moments, that is the best one can do!

PhotoPhred Loc: Cheyney, Pa

olemikey wrote:

I'd say not bad at all for "taken from a slow moving truck", the problems induced by that alone explain a lot of the issues of "user movement, vehicle movement, camera movement, vibration, slow shutter" - you were really challenging your camera and lens to get a good shot. Faster shutter speed required at minimum. Sometimes in fleeting moments, that is the best one can do!

Thanks. Gotta love a challenge.

olemikey Loc: 6 mile creek, Spacecoast Florida

PhotoPhred wrote:

Thanks. Gotta love a challenge.

Hi - I just re-read the original post. I use a D7100 (and D7200) very often, for most of my wildlife, long telephoto work: One big reason, the D7100 and D7200 are both capable of very clean work, and I routinely shoot at ISO 1000 to ISO 5000, with wonderful results. They (both cameras and their fine Toshiba Sensors) are actually considered to be ISO Invariant (within reason) and I have many well received "wall hangers" shot in the higher ISO ranges....this alone will help you help your gear to much better shots, esp. in situations with movement. And do not be afraid to experiment a bit (shots are basically free) at much higher ISO and shutter speeds, and from me to you - stop the car/truck, shut it off, and then fire away!!!! Good luck and have fun, let that D7100 run wild and free!!!

PhotoPhred Loc: Cheyney, Pa

olemikey wrote:

Hi - I just re-read the original post. I use a D71... (show quote)

I usually shoot in "P" mode and set the ISO depending on what I'm shooting at. In this case it was "slow down, honey, let my grab a quick photo" of that heron. I just pointed and clicked the shutter hoping that I got something decent. Thanks for sharing your expertise.