I am really sick of soft images

philaphotog · Sep 29, 2008

Hi all -

I do photojournalistic style photo shoots with parents and their small children interacting in their own homes. I strongly prefer, for all the obvious reasons, to use natural light. But even positioning people near windows, using a VR lense, whatever I can do... the images are still softer than I would like and it's driving me nuts. I'm breaking down and getting an SB600 (and learning how to use it to look as "natural" as possible)... but does anyone have other suggestions about what to do? With small babies it's not a problem, because everyone is pretty still. But toddlers just don't stop moving!

Thanks in advance,
Amanda

(Also, I currently use a D40 but am upgrading to a D700, if it matters)

reg · Sep 29, 2008

Well getting a SB600 isn't going to give you sharp images, neither is VR, or even a D700.

In fact, skip the D700 all together for now. All you need is BETTER GLASS. And maybe a better understanding of what makes a photo
(see also Photography Beginners' Forum & Photo Gallery ), but that's beside the point. Take that $2800 and get some nice lenses. Or maybe get a D300 and still some nice lenses. Or just get a D700. But it ain't gonna make your images any sharper.

Joves · Sep 29, 2008

What f-ratios are you using? Each lens has its own sweet spot. Wide open is never the sweet spot.

JerryPH · Sep 29, 2008

Post an example of what you consider soft.
In 90% of all images, post processing is required. You would be amazed how much sharpness is hidden in most pics!

dEARlEADER · Sep 29, 2008

Nikor 24-70 2.8

Nikor 50mm 1.4

JerryPH · Sep 29, 2008

dEARlEADER said:
Nikor 24-70 2.8

Nikor 50mm 1.4

- Nikkor 70-200VR F/2.8
- Nikkor 85mm F/1.4
- Sigma 18-50 DC EX HSM Macro F/2.8 (sharper than the 3 times more expensive 17-55 Nikkor F/2.8)

All award winning lenses known to be VERY sharp, however, I still bet the biggest part of the answer to the OP's question is in post processing.

philaphotog · Sep 29, 2008

The lense I am using is AF-S Nikkor 18 - 55 VR. I will try to post a picture; haven't done it before, and don't want to do it wrong and get yelled at!

D40 · Sep 29, 2008

Most likely it is a settings issue or lack of light. I just started working with off camera lighting and trying some new stuff and was amazed at how sharp the photos came out, that 50 f/1.8 at f/8 with the right light is SUPERB!

SpeedTrap · Sep 29, 2008

Skip the D700, and look at some better glass.
there is a reason the pros usually carry high end lenses.

Garbz · Sep 30, 2008

There's a reason some armatures also bolt $3000 lenses on $800 bodies.

philaphotog · Sep 30, 2008

On the other hand, I've gotten some great results using my 60mm micro f/2.8 Nikkon lense with my N90. I'm just trying to use digital more to keep my overhead down - lower cost by not developing film. I'm hoping that using the 60mm micro with the D700 body might help - any thoughts on this?

Village Idiot · Sep 30, 2008

reg said:
Well getting a SB600 isn't going to give you sharp images, neither is VR, or even a D700.

In fact, skip the D700 all together for now. All you need is BETTER GLASS. And maybe a better understanding of what makes a photo
(see also Photography Beginners' Forum & Photo Gallery ), but that's beside the point. Take that $2800 and get some nice lenses. Or maybe get a D300 and still some nice lenses. Or just get a D700. But it ain't gonna make your images any sharper.

So if he's shooting at shutter speeds of 1/15 and trying to shoot a moving object and can't get any faster shutter speeds due to the limit of ambient, then a SB600 won't help him out? Man. I should just return all my lighting and buy glass. I'm going to go purchase an 18-500 f/-32 IS lens I think.

SpeedTrap said:
Skip the D700, and look at some better glass.
there is a reason the pros usually carry high end lenses.

And appropriate lighting.

philaphotog said:
On the other hand, I've gotten some great results using my 60mm micro f/2.8 Nikkon lense with my N90. I'm just trying to use digital more to keep my overhead down - lower cost by not developing film. I'm hoping that using the 60mm micro with the D700 body might help - any thoughts on this?

That your pictures still might suck if you're not providing examples and explanations. If you're shooting in raw and not sharpening them, they'll be soft. If you're shooting wide open on a kit lens, they'll be soft. If you're using too slow of a shutter speed and relying on VR, they'll still be soft.

You're not providing any answers, so any feed back you might get will provide you with a really expensive purchase with no real solution.

/the end

epp_b · Sep 30, 2008

There's nothing wrong with those lenses, nor is there with the D40. Have you considered that maybe the problem lies behind the camera?

To answer your question directly about the SB-600, the flash head can be angled to bounce it off of walls and ceilings to make natural-looking lighting. If you are considering flash, also consider that the D40 (the D40x and D60 are basically the same thing) is Nikon's only current offering that can sync the flash up to 1/500th. This is great for freezing all camera shake and motion, which are crucial to getting sharp pictures.

Village Idiot · Sep 30, 2008

epp_b said:
There's nothing wrong with those lenses, nor is there with the D40. Have you considered that maybe the problem lies behind the camera?

To answer your question directly about the SB-600, the flash head can be angled to bounce it off of walls and ceilings to make natural-looking lighting. If you are considering flash, also consider that the D40 (the D40x and D60 are basically the same thing) is Nikon's only current offering that can sync the flash up to 1/500th. This is great for avoiding all camera shake and freezing motion, which are crucial to getting sharp pictures.

Shutter speed doesn't have that much to do with freezing motion when using a flash. Not unless you're exposing for ambient and shooting at like 1/50. Even then, you probably still won't notice it.

And the d40 will actually "sync" up to it's fastest shutter speed. 1/4000? And all Nikons have the ability to use high speed sync mode, named differently of course, with Nikon flashes. You can still shoot at 1/1000 with a D200 if the flash is set in that mode.

philaphotog · Sep 30, 2008

I am still working on posting a picture. At the moment I have two toddlers (my own) hanging off my legs, so it will take a little time.

As for the settings and etc. You're going to laugh. Really hard. I just put the D40 on automatic, with the flash disabled, and shoot. Yes I do KNOW this is a major part of the problem - my lack of understanding of aperture, etc. - and THAT is why I wrote this post. Your suggestions about camera settings to try are most helpful.

Samples of photos I've taken that have similarly unsatisfactory sharpness can be found on my website. If you have the time to check it out.

The address is:
http://www.shutterfly.com/pro/1215042339383/AmandaHallPhotography

The album "Harper" especially had some shots that did not satisfy me in terms of sharpness - in this case due to a very cloudy day.