sudamar Loc: Southern Indiana

I shoot with a Nikon 750, using a 2.8 80-200 Nikon lens. The quality of my pixs look great until I see what some of my friends get with their Canon cameras and lens. The pixs with the Canon lens seem sharper. Am I wrong?

letmedance Loc: Walnut, Ca.

Maybe it is not the camera but the Photographer and his post processing

niteman3d Loc: South Central Pennsylvania, USA

Go to Flickr or a similar site and compare samples from other Nikon shooters. If they too are looking better than yours, you'll know what to do next... either improve yourself or your glass.

gwilliams6

There is so many variables in the sharpness and image quality differences of lenses vs other lenses. And so many differences in the megapixels and image quality of image sensors in different cameras. There is NO way for you to make any such conclusions without everyone of equal skill, photographing the same subject, under the same conditions with comparable image sensors and comparably sharp lenses.

Relax, I have owned and shot with the best from Nikon, Canon, Fuji, Sony, Panasonic, Leica, Hasselblad and other cameras, and have owned and shot with lenses from all OEM makers as well as the best lenses from third-party lens makers in over 50 years as a professional, and NO brand has a monopoly on sharpness and image quality.

We dont even know what camera models and what lenses you were comparing photographs from, and we dont know the different skill and experience levels of the photographers.

Nikon cameras and Nikon lenses take no back seat to any other brand when you compare image quality from equal size and quality image sensors and equal quality lenses .

FYI, I shot pro Nikon and Canon (both brands) for over four decades before moving over to pro Sony and they have all given me excellent image quality.

Cheers and best to you.

JeffDavidson Loc: Originally Detroit Now Los Angeles

If it is a new lens from Nikon, the one for your digital camera is a 70-200mm F2.8 and it is an extremely sharp lens.
Things that might affect the sharpness:
1. Focus
2. Camera movement
3. Shutter speed
4. Use of tripod
5. Focus point
6. Was it focused on the desired part of the image?
7. Aperture - depth of field

sudamar Loc: Southern Indiana

It is an older Nikon zoom....80-200, 2.8.

User ID

The difference is clearly the user.

To doubt the above diagnosis would just constitute a most emphatic confirmation of its accuracy.

You can very simply test this for yourself. Use a tripod, focus using magnified live view, and shoot at f:8. The D750 has a low pass filter, so you should normally apply just a small degree of sharpening either to your camera settings or in post.

CHG_CANON Loc: the Windy City

You're not wrong.

But still, you likely have not maximized the possibilities of your Nikon equipment. Or possibly, you're comparing unlike equipment, such as a 24MP DSLR body against a 45MP MILC? We don't know because you have presented no examples. Many of your Photo Gallery posts don't have the images stored, to inspect the EXIF looking for D750 entries.

To the idea of maximizing your equipment, consider presenting JPEG examples, being sure to store the file(s) with original EXIF. Consider other possible differences: do you shoot in RAW? What software do you use to edit? What computer equipment do you use? Do you inspect your images at the pixel-level when culling and editing?

Finally, the 80-200 zoom is a lens dating back to the late 90s. The lens is considered one of Nikon's all-time best, but still, new designs, especially native mirrorless options, are visually superior. We can only guess, at this point, at what differences you've noted and their root-causes.

camerapapi Loc: Miami, Fl.

Nikon has two lenses, the old 80-200 f2.8 and the new 70-200 f2.8 VR. clearly described by Paul. Both lenses, from what I know are very capable of fantastic results and both are as sharp as they can be as professional lenses.
I am not familiar with Canon so I am in no position to tell you how sharp Canon lenses are. I shoot Nikon, something I have been doing since I bought my first camera, a Nikon F in 1963. I have been very pleased with the quality of the images I get from Nikon lenses otherwise I would not have been shooting with them for over 50 years and I still do, some of them old optics like my 105mm f2.5 from 1967.

As has been already discussed there is a good chance you have not been optimizing the quality of your lens. The old 80-200 f2.8 has no VR so a tripod will make it better. The new 70-200 has VR and that along will improve the quality of your shots. If you ask me, I prefer to use a tripod with tele lenses.
Sharpness depends a lot on the photographer and especially so if using a professional lens.

Bill_de Loc: US

Switch cameras for a wekend. You may find your friend's pictures still look better. Is so, start looking over your friend's shoulder and see what he is doing that you are not.

---

ELNikkor

There are even settings inside your D750 that make your images look sharper. On my D750, I select "Set Picture Control", "Neutral", right arrow and there are a bunch of choices to set, including "Sharpening". You can also do the same for "Standard" and "Vivid". (Though it may be a nuance thing, our D750's have an anti-aliasing filter which some say prevents maximum sharpness compared to those cameras without the anti-aliasing filter, but that might be for pixel-peepers, of which I am not one.)

DirtFarmer Loc: Escaped from the NYC area, back to MA

It's the finger

Not the button.

jackpinoh Loc: Kettering, OH 45419

The quality of the lens and the skill of the photographer are more important than the quality of the camera, with one exception: DSLRs can exhibit front- or back-focus due to manufacturing tolerance variations in the lens and camera components, resulting in reduced image sharpness. Many cameras provide a way to calibrate this for prime lenses, but not for all focal lengths in zoom lenses. Mirrorless cameras use the focal plane for focusing and do not experience this problem.

Thomas902 Loc: Washington DC

"...it's a poor carpenter who blames his/her tools for their poor results. a timeless proverb

sudamar one thing that typically stands out if you query those who actually pay their bills with their photographic pursuits. Outstanding Photographic Excellence is not a consumer commodity...

Owing to UHH decorum I am not going to attempt to critique your portfolio... Instead I'm posting a link to the most recent image you have posted on the UHH Photo Gallery so that others here may better understand your level of expertise before they begin to regurgitate the most common parameters for achieving imagery of exceptional acuity.
https://www.uglyhedgehog.com/t-714267-1.html
Hopefully other UHH members may better understand your current level of finesse within the photographic arts thus focus their thoughts to more accurately i.e. meaningfully assist you in achieve your perceived goals.

That said sudamar please allow me to share the thoughts of another outstanding creator of Editorial Imagery since he greatly influence my path as I struggle to generate revenue from my work in the Editorial genre.

"If it's not good enough, you're not close enough."
Wisdom from the immortal Editorial Photojournalist Robert Capa

Sincerely wishing you much joy and success on your photographic journey sudamar
Please always remember it is the Journey not the final destination that counts...

"If it's not good enough, you're not close enough." Wisdom I live by sudamar... Hope this helps

Longshadow Loc: Audubon, PA, United States

What one is seeing is the end result...