File :-(, x, )
Anonymous
So guys. I bought this lens used (the first version of it) two months ago for my D70 and I gotta say--it takes ugly, sort of foggy and washed out, unfocused pictures.

it's not my camera because I've tried other lenses before it and stuff.

So can /p/ recommend me a similar small zoom lens with the minimum being 35mm (maybe 28 if necessary).

It sucks. Can anyone tell me a
>> Anonymous
Cut off the last "it sucks. Can anyone tell me a"

Sorry guys.
>> Anonymous
have the same lens. Dosen't give me any problems at all. I much prefer it to the kit lens i got with my D50.
>> Anonymous
>>39947

Really? I saw pictures with the kit lens that came out much...much better. :[
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
Correction, I have this lens.

The OP picture is the newest version.
>> Anonymous
>>39948
Yeah. However, the lens you and i have isn't all too new. I don't know about the life lines of lenses but maybe your lens is fubar?
>> Anonymous
I wouldn't doubt it. It's pretty dated, my lens.

Could you post a picture with exif using the same lens if it's not too much trouble?
>> Anonymous
bump...for me needing a conclusion to this before I buy my new lens.
>> Anonymous
>>39971
um. your lens is broked in some way or another. buy another one that isnt damaged or buy a similar lens. look around for one. see one that might look good, google a review for it. its not hard.
>> Anonymous
>>39971

So I'm not really sure it's...broked or whatever. It works fine, but the image quality is rubbish.
>> Anonymous
>>39972

Sorry, the above was meant for you.
>> Anonymous
If you take the lens off the camera and look though it, is it cloudy or hazy? If so, that could be your problem. Fungus really screws old lenses up and is something you really need to check. Its that or the lens elements are out of whack. Or you just suck and don't have the AF lock on f22 etc etc.
>> des
>>39950
I have this, it works a treat on film and digital
>>39945
your lens is probably borked. There's some sample-to-sample variation but even poor examples wouldn't be foggy, washed out and certainly not unfocused. Probably one of the elements is coming unglued or it got beat up/out of alignment.
If you can afford the 35-70 f/2.8, that'd be the thing to get if you like the throw.
>> Anonymous
>>39984

It's not really that-it's mostly a sharpness and sort of..color depth sort of thing.

I'm not quite sure--it could be my camera because a D50 seems to be taking better pictures than my D70
>> Anonymous
buuuump again
>> ac
>>40038
Quit that. If you want to bump it, add something to the discussion.
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
>>39955
lemme dig around and see what i can find for ya.

Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeNIKON CORPORATIONCamera ModelNIKON D50Camera SoftwareVer.1.00Maximum Lens Aperturef/3.4Sensing MethodOne-Chip Color AreaColor Filter Array Pattern670Focal Length (35mm Equiv)52 mmImage-Specific Properties:Horizontal Resolution300 dpiVertical Resolution300 dpiImage Created2007:04:06 13:27:20Exposure Time1/80 secF-Numberf/4.0Exposure ProgramManualISO Speed Rating200Lens Aperturef/4.0Exposure Bias0 EVMetering ModePatternLight SourceUnknownFlashNo FlashFocal Length35.00 mmRenderingNormalExposure ModeManualWhite BalanceAutoScene Capture TypeStandardGain ControlNoneContrastNormalSaturationNormalSharpnessNormalSubject Distance RangeUnknown
>> Anonymous
>>40065

So I've got to say, I don't think my lens is as crisp as this picture shows.

The edges aren't very sharp on mine. I'll post something of my own, soon--at full resolution.
>> Anonymous
I guess to...make some sense out of this...I saw unedited pictures with the D50's kit lens--and I know my lens doesn't have the sharpness to match this.

It could possibly be my settings, but I used different lenses on my D70 before, and they had more color and "depth" to them, if you know what I mean.
>> Anonymous
Buy a (if you can afford it) 28-70 f2.8 Nikon (1400$)
Or a Tamron 28-75 f2.8 (350$) Both are very good lenses, with the Nikon only being marginally better than the Tamron

Also for really cheap pick up a tokina 28-70 f2.8, focus distance isn't great but its a solid lens and performs quite well (the other two lenses beat it, but you can get the tokina for about 80-150$ used)
>> Anonymous
>>40085

Thanks. Right now, I think the tamron seems to be the best bet.
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
So here's basically what I'm talking about.

I took this picture and basically, compared to the kit lens, nothing's really in focus all too much.

Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeNIKON CORPORATIONCamera ModelNIKON D70Camera SoftwareVer.2.00Maximum Lens Aperturef/3.4Sensing MethodOne-Chip Color AreaColor Filter Array Pattern824Focal Length (35mm Equiv)52 mmSerial Number10018112Image-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution300 dpiVertical Resolution300 dpiImage Created2007:03:25 20:50:30Exposure Time1/100 secF-Numberf/3.3Exposure ProgramManualExposure Bias0 EVMetering ModePatternLight SourceUnknownFlashNo FlashFocal Length35.00 mmColor Space InformationsRGBImage Width2240Image Height1488RenderingNormalExposure ModeManualScene Capture TypeStandardGain ControlLow Gain UpContrastNormalSharpnessHardSubject Distance RangeUnknownISO Speed Used1000Image QualityFINEWhite BalanceAUTOImage SharpeningHIGHFocus ModeAF-SFlash SettingNORMALFlash Compensation1.0 EVISO Speed Requested1000Flash Bracket Compensation0.0 EVAE Bracket Compensation0.0 EVTone CompensationAUTOLens TypeUnknownLens Range35.0 - 70.0 mm; f/3.3 - f/4.5Auto FocusDynamic Area, Center Selected, Top FocusedShooting/Bracketing ModeSingle Frame/OffColor ModePortrait sRGBLighting TypeNATURALNoise ReductionOFFCamera Actuations2779Image OptimizationSHARPSaturation 2NORMAL
>> Anonymous
>>40109
I like that photo alot. From an abstract POV.
>> Anonymous
>>40121
Thanks, but it didn't turn out half as sharp as I wanted it to be.

And don't get me wrong, I have CS and everything, but I feel my pictures should look good from the get-go--leaving little post processing for me. (Which is what I found the D50 kit lens did)
>> des
     File :-(, x)
>>40122
wide open at iso1000; what exactly are you expecting from a ~$50 lens?
the part that is actually in focus, her shirt on the lower right, seems fairly sharp, considering.
You have to learn how and when to use what. This is a very personal thing dealing with equipment at hand, shooting style and situation. Can't learn that from anywhere but doing it. As long as there's nothing wrong with your lens, you just need to spend time.

Here's some from my 35-70

Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeNIKON CORPORATIONCamera ModelNIKON D70Camera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop CS2 WindowsMaximum Lens Aperturef/4.4Focal Length (35mm Equiv)105 mmImage-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution240 dpiVertical Resolution240 dpiImage Created2007:02:25 13:39:06Exposure Time1/200 secF-Numberf/7.1Exposure ProgramAperture PriorityISO Speed Rating200Lens Aperturef/7.1Exposure Bias0 EVMetering ModePatternFlashNo FlashFocal Length70.00 mmColor Space InformationsRGBImage Width800Image Height533
>> des
     File :-(, x)


Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeNIKON CORPORATIONCamera ModelNIKON D70Camera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop CS2 WindowsMaximum Lens Aperturef/3.4Focal Length (35mm Equiv)52 mmImage-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution240 dpiVertical Resolution240 dpiImage Created2007:02:21 17:20:17Exposure Time1/10 secF-Numberf/3.5Exposure ProgramManualISO Speed Rating500Lens Aperturef/3.5Exposure Bias-0.3 EVMetering ModePatternFlashNo FlashFocal Length35.00 mmColor Space InformationsRGBImage Width533Image Height800
>> des
     File :-(, x)


Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeNIKON CORPORATIONCamera ModelNIKON D70Camera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop CS2 WindowsMaximum Lens Aperturef/4.4Focal Length (35mm Equiv)105 mmImage-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution240 dpiVertical Resolution240 dpiImage Created2007:04:07 05:04:35Exposure Time1/80 secF-Numberf/5.6Exposure ProgramAperture PriorityISO Speed Rating320Lens Aperturef/5.6Exposure Bias-0.7 EVMetering ModePatternFlashNo FlashFocal Length70.00 mmColor Space InformationsRGBImage Width700Image Height465
>> Anonymous
>>40127
I tried my lens at the same setting as this and it still came out bad--even with the sharpening applied by the camera.
>> Anonymous
>>40146
you have a digital camera. just go take a picture of something with those settings and show us what youre talking about. doesn't need to be anything good, just something that illustrates what youre talking about.
>> Anonymous
OP here.

Great, to make matters worse, I have a fucking hot pixel in the left lower corner. >:O
>> Anonymous
>>40084
>>40070

same person? if so i'm>>40065and i'd just like to make sure you know that the image i poasted is unedited, except for a resize.

also, like>>40126said, i get horrible image quality also if i use iso 1000.
>> Anonymous
>>40171
Yeah, they're both me. Sorry. OP, all of that.
Even so, the picture quality is amazing. I really think it's my glass, honestly. Because unless I up the sharpness inside the actual camera, I can't get a picture HALF this sharp
>> Anonymous
OP here.

Anyone have any idea how to rid my pictures of the hot/dead pixel? And not in CS because I don't feel like having to use the clone stamp every time I take a damn picture.

I'm looking for some way to clean the sensor/focusing screen as well.
>> des
>>40217
it's not like fixing a hotpixel in cs is hard.
The only thing that might do it auto is a dust reference photo+nikon capture. I'm not even sure about that.
>> Anonymous
>>39945
Nikon 35-70 f/2.8D. Really cheap, really good.
>> Anonymous
>>40238
I don't think that's OP's point.

People shouldn't have to deal with hotpixels, period. They're a nuisance.
>> des
>>40277
people shouldn't have to deal with a lot of things but shit happens. the time you spend fixing a hot pixel in cs costs a lot less than replacing the sensor or body.
>> Anonymous
Well regardless, hotpixels aren't your problem

look into a 28-75 3.5
>> Anonymous
>>40489
should have said sage
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
OP here.

This is what I'm talking about--image isn't sharp at all.

Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeNIKON CORPORATIONCamera ModelNIKON D70Camera SoftwareVer.2.00Maximum Lens Aperturef/3.4Sensing MethodOne-Chip Color AreaColor Filter Array Pattern824Focal Length (35mm Equiv)52 mmSerial Number10018112Image-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution300 dpiVertical Resolution300 dpiImage Created2007:04:08 16:09:05Exposure Time1/250 secF-Numberf/10.0Exposure ProgramNot DefinedExposure Bias0 EVMetering ModePatternLight SourceUnknownFlashNo Flash, CompulsoryFocal Length35.00 mmColor Space InformationsRGBImage Width2240Image Height1488RenderingNormalExposure ModeAutoScene Capture TypeLandscapeGain ControlNoneContrastNormalSharpnessHardSubject Distance RangeUnknownISO Speed Used400Image QualityFINEWhite BalanceAUTOImage SharpeningAUTOFocus ModeAF-SFlash Compensation0.0 EVISO Speed Requested400Flash Bracket Compensation0.0 EVAE Bracket Compensation0.0 EVTone CompensationAUTOLens TypeUnknownLens Range35.0 - 70.0 mm; f/3.3 - f/4.5Auto FocusClosest Subject, Right Selected, Unknown FocusedShooting/Bracketing ModeSingle Frame/OffColor ModeLandscape sRGBLighting TypeNATURALNoise ReductionOFFCamera Actuations3145Saturation 2NORMALDigital Vari-ProgramLAND SCAPE
>> Anonymous
You have a giant hair on your lens or sensor in that last picture. Are you using one of the preset settings or putting it in M/A/S/P and using it that way and did you check the lens for haze?
>> Anonymous
>>40490
sage?
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
>>40569
your lens is clearly fucked up.

What the hell are these?
>> Anonymous
>>40585
No idea, they're not there anymore--in pictures, I mean.
>> Anonymous
>>40580
I was using M I'm pretty sure. I'm not quite sure how to check the lens for haze--it looks alright though, the lens itself, I mean.
>> Anonymous
>>40586
How weird... :l
>> Anonymous
A lens should look nice and clear when you look though it, you'll see little bits of dust and whatnot, but if its haze, then you will see the discolouration. But, you might want to try S or A instead of M. Or just head back to presets and see if its shaper. Personally S or A are easier to use to get decent shots.
>> Anonymous
The circled items appear to be, from the top, a dust spot on the sensor and the bottom one is a bit of hair or something smaller which may also be on the sensor or on the rear lens element.
>> Anonymous
>>40590
OP here. Just checked the lens. Yeah--it looks okay other than the usual dust speckles and what not.

I used to shoot film with a different setup and I see the same thing inside the lens when I opened it to the widest aperture.
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
OP again.

So here's yet ANOTHER example of how un-sharp my lens is. :[

Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeNIKON CORPORATIONCamera ModelNIKON D70Camera SoftwareVer.2.00Maximum Lens Aperturef/3.4Sensing MethodOne-Chip Color AreaColor Filter Array Pattern824Focal Length (35mm Equiv)52 mmSerial Number10018112Image-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution300 dpiVertical Resolution300 dpiImage Created2007:04:10 16:59:22Exposure Time1/13 secF-Numberf/3.5Exposure ProgramAperture PriorityExposure Bias-0.7 EVMetering ModeCenter Weighted AverageLight SourceUnknownFlashNo FlashFocal Length35.00 mmColor Space InformationsRGBImage Width2240Image Height1488RenderingNormalExposure ModeAutoScene Capture TypeStandardGain ControlNoneContrastNormalSharpnessHardSubject Distance RangeUnknownISO Speed Used400Image QualityFINEWhite BalanceAUTOImage SharpeningHIGHFocus ModeAF-SFlash SettingNORMALFlash Compensation41.0 EVISO Speed Requested400Flash Bracket Compensation0.0 EVAE Bracket Compensation0.0 EVTone CompensationNORMALLens TypeUnknownLens Range35.0 - 70.0 mm; f/3.3 - f/4.5Auto FocusDynamic Area, Center Selected, Top FocusedShooting/Bracketing ModeSingle Frame/OffColor ModeLandscape sRGBLighting TypeNATURALNoise ReductionOFFCamera Actuations3276Image OptimizationCUSTOMSaturation 2NORMAL
>> Anonymous
>>40770
looks out of focus and/or shaky hands. not a good example of what youre trying to show us.
>> des
>>40770
it doesn't look soft
>>40773
has it right, that's at 1/13, it's hand shake. Is this the usual situation you use your camera in? You might just have an exposure problem not an optics problem
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
>>40781
Not usually. I up the ISO a bit more.

But usually, I can hold 1/13 pretty steady.


Here's a second example, too.

Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeNIKON CORPORATIONCamera ModelNIKON D70Camera SoftwareVer.2.00Maximum Lens Aperturef/4.1Sensing MethodOne-Chip Color AreaColor Filter Array Pattern960Focal Length (35mm Equiv)90 mmSerial Number10018112Image-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution300 dpiVertical Resolution300 dpiImage Created2007:04:10 14:20:01White Point Chromaticity0.3Exposure Time1/1250 secF-Numberf/5.6Exposure ProgramAperture PriorityExposure Bias-0.7 EVMetering ModePatternLight SourceUnknownFlashNo FlashFocal Length60.00 mmColor Space InformationUncalibratedImage Width2240Image Height1488RenderingNormalExposure ModeAutoScene Capture TypeStandardGain ControlNoneContrastNormalSharpnessHardSubject Distance RangeUnknownISO Speed Used400Image QualityFINEWhite BalanceAUTOImage SharpeningHIGHFocus ModeAF-SFlash SettingNORMALFlash Compensation1.0 EVISO Speed Requested400Flash Bracket Compensation0.0 EVAE Bracket Compensation0.0 EVTone CompensationNORMALLens TypeUnknownLens Range35.0 - 70.0 mm; f/3.3 - f/4.5Auto FocusDynamic Area, Center Selected, Top FocusedShooting/Bracketing ModeSingle Frame/OffColor ModeAdobe RGBLighting TypeNATURALNoise ReductionOFFCamera Actuations3232Image OptimizationCUSTOMSaturation 2NORMAL
>> Anonymous
>>40783
why dont you just set your camera down on a table, turn it down to the lowest iso you can, and take a picture of something with a nice edge that can show the softness of the lens (if thats actually the problem). take all the other factors out of it and isolate the problem. set the timer too so you dont accidentally jolt the camera as you push the shutter button.
>> Anonymous
>>40783
btw, this pic looks like youre focused on some point on her jacket, not her face.
>> des
>>40792
I think he was too close to her.
I know mine will crank until it hits the macro (lol moar liek close focusing) but then still let you take a picture. If that is indeed the case, OP if you want to get that close, zoom out. The lens' close focusing works best at its widest.
but yeah, I agree:
>>40790
this is all shooting in the dark
>> Max Archer !Pm84fAHH6M
If you want to spend a decent amount (~600), look at the Nikkor 24-85 f/2.8. Great lens, I love mine.
>> Anonymous
>>40819
600?

That's a bit out of the question for me, right now. (I'm OP)