fantom, those branches are much closer to the camera then the bird. Depth of field make them look transparent. Try the same shot at f/22 and see what you get. You can get a similar effect shooting through a chain link fence at a distant object. With a large aperture you can make the fence disappear.
moosus wrote:
I recently bought a new Nikon 28-300mm 1:3.5-5.6 G and was trying it out on my D7200. Starting with this shot and the following four, which I won't show, there is this strange ripple-like anomaly in the bokeh and it appears in about the same place on the other shots as well. This effect isn't seen in the two shots of the bird before the shot I'm showing, or the next few of the bird perched on a wire farther away and then in the branches of a tree. I don't see the effect anywhere else at all. Should I send the lens back for a replacement or can someone suggest why or how this occurs and maybe I should just chill?
I recently bought a new Nikon 28-300mm 1:3.5-5.6 G... (
show quote)
Have never seen anything like that. If Nikon repair is too expensive, check out
www.tempecamera.com. They are excellent. (Phoenix area)
jerryc41 wrote:
Or a mini black hole. : )
How could this ever happen with a “Nikon” lens?
jimdandy wrote:
How could this ever happen with a “Nikon” lens?
Nikon in quotes - like it's not really a thing? Are you desperately trying to be clever, or are you taking "being a jerk" lessons from ole Timmers there?
If you really haven't figured it out, even the vaunted Nikon can sometimes pass through bad samples of their product (as has
every other manufacturer.
It's the effect of the lighting. Don't dump your lens.
TomV
Loc: Annapolis, Maryland
If this was shot at your house it should be easy to replicate.
I have a Sony zoom that exhibits terrible bokeh for an otherwise sharp lens. Branches in the background bloom excessively and can be distracting.
Easy.....it’s simply a portal to another dimension.....this one for the birds to pass through, of course. Be careful not to get too close, or your camera will go to the other side!
LFingar wrote:
fantom, those branches are much closer to the camera then the bird. Depth of field make them look transparent. Try the same shot at f/22 and see what you get. You can get a similar effect shooting through a chain link fence at a distant object. With a large aperture you can make the fence disappear.
Thanks for the reply. I understand what the aperture does and what its capabilities are and use it for these purposes constantly.
Your explanation does an excellent job of explaining what happens but I was looking for an explanation of why that occurs. There is a term for the apparent" bending" of the light within the lens that I cannot remember. If someone knows what the term is I could google it for more info.
I believe it is a phenomena similar to why a Stealth bomber is invisible to radar. I had this explained to me over twenty years ago by some missile/microwave engineers and understood less than half of their explanation. Now twenty years later I recall none of it.
This phenomenon is possibly related to the OP's initial question and understanding what is happening in LAYMAN'S terms may help to resolve the original question. The OP's query is quite interesting but will not keep me up at nite trying to figure it out.
Thanks again for the reply.
dwmoar
Loc: Oregon, Willamette Valley
moosus wrote:
I recently bought a new Nikon 28-300mm 1:3.5-5.6 G and was trying it out on my D7200. Starting with this shot and the following four, which I won't show, there is this strange ripple-like anomaly in the bokeh and it appears in about the same place on the other shots as well. This effect isn't seen in the two shots of the bird before the shot I'm showing, or the next few of the bird perched on a wire farther away and then in the branches of a tree. I don't see the effect anywhere else at all. Should I send the lens back for a replacement or can someone suggest why or how this occurs and maybe I should just chill?
I recently bought a new Nikon 28-300mm 1:3.5-5.6 G... (
show quote)
Oh no it is a time bubble
and the bird is about to enter it to go to the other side.....
fantom wrote:
........There is a term for the apparent" bending" of the light within the lens......
Diffraction. Sometimes it's a desired effect and sometimes not.
Gene51
Loc: Yonkers, NY, now in LSD (LowerSlowerDelaware)
jimdandy wrote:
How could this ever happen with a “Nikon” lens?
This is not really a Nikkor lens - it's design was stolen from another company and Nikon slapped it's name on it, believing that if it came in a Nikon box, had Nikon written the lens barrel, and the camera identified it in the metadata as a Nikon lens - people would blindly buy it and defend their purchases to the death if necessary.
I have mostly Nikkor lenses, and tried 3 different copies of this lens over a 3 yr period - once from Nikon's NPS loaner program, and twice from others that had purchased the lens. They were all simply awful.
Gene51
Loc: Yonkers, NY, now in LSD (LowerSlowerDelaware)
moosus wrote:
I recently bought a new Nikon 28-300mm 1:3.5-5.6 G and was trying it out on my D7200. Starting with this shot and the following four, which I won't show, there is this strange ripple-like anomaly in the bokeh and it appears in about the same place on the other shots as well. This effect isn't seen in the two shots of the bird before the shot I'm showing, or the next few of the bird perched on a wire farther away and then in the branches of a tree. I don't see the effect anywhere else at all. Should I send the lens back for a replacement or can someone suggest why or how this occurs and maybe I should just chill?
I recently bought a new Nikon 28-300mm 1:3.5-5.6 G... (
show quote)
It's pretty typical for the 28-300, though your specific conditions of aperture, distance to subject and distance between subject and background and between camera and background is probably the worst I've seen. Your lens is not broken, it's just not a great lens.
Bokeh is elusive - and some lenses can show outstanding bokeh at some combinations of distances and mediocre to awful at others.
https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/52348342https://photographylife.com/reviews/nikon-28-300mm-vrIf it's new you should be able to return it and get your money back. I would. But the reason is not that it's broken, but that it is just not up to Nikon's standards. That's a lot of money to have to "just chill" over.
fetzler wrote:
I tink you meant highlights from specular reflections. Of course there always the holy highlights. HI HI
Yes. Though it seems "specular" is not in the UHH spell-checker.
If you want to reply, then
register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.