Is it me, or the lens? (sharpness issues)

[Low_Sky]

1/1600, f/5.6, 300mm, ISO 800

Here's a photo I took today, straight out of the camera. I feel like it's not as sharp as it should be, and I'm wondering how I can determine if the problem is me or the lens (please ignore exposure, composition, etc. I'm interested in sharpness!). Other photos I took today with my 50mm f/1.8 came out sharp enough to satisfy me, but it seems like any photos I take with this 70-300mm never come out sharp. Off-hand with IS, or from a tripod, they never look sharp to me. Am I crazy, or is this really as unsharp as I think it is?

Here's the flickr link so you can go look at the full size image if you want. . . IMG_2389 | Flickr - Photo Sharing!

 

[tecboy]

Have you tried to sharpen in Lightroom? Are you using single AF point?

 

[robbins.photo]

1/1600, f/5.6, 300mm, ISO 800

Here's a photo I took today, straight out of the camera. I feel like it's not as sharp as it should be, and I'm wondering how I can determine if the problem is me or the lens (please ignore exposure, composition, etc. I'm interested in sharpness!). Other photos I took today with my 50mm f/1.8 came out sharp enough to satisfy me, but it seems like any photos I take with this 70-300mm never come out sharp. Off-hand with IS, or from a tripod, they never look sharp to me. Am I crazy, or is this really as unsharp as I think it is?

Here's the flickr link so you can go look at the full size image if you want. . . IMG_2389 | Flickr - Photo Sharing!

Were you letting the camera choose it's focus points automatically or setting your own focal point? I'm going to guess the former, and it looks like the camera did exactly what it's internal autofocus system does, it picked the highest contrast areas between the subject and the background and chose that as your focal point.

As a result you'll notice that the hindquarters, a light colored patch against a much darker background, is what the camera most likely chose as it's focal point - it does appear to be the sharpest part of the photo. The face is soft as a result. To fix this on your next shot you can stop down the lens (reduce the aperture) or you can setup your camera so you can pick the focus point yourself instead of letting it do it for you automatically. I generally use the later method, I prefer to pick my own focus points when possible and for animals just like people your best focus point is the eyes.

 

[480sparky]

Too small for my old eyes to tell. Got a link to a full-size image, or possibly post some parts of it at 100%?

 

[Low_Sky]

I was using a single AF point, putting it on the right eye, focusing, and recomposing without changing focus.

Sent from my phone with my giant, uncoordinated sausage thumbs.

 

[Gavjenks]

I'd say this is probably the lens, yes. It's a zoom and thus inherently at a disadvantage over the 50mm 1.8 prime, and you're shooting it at its extreme focal length, and you're shooting it wide open. You're hitting all the worst possible things at once for sharpness.
Almost all zoom lenses get soft at max range wide open.

Shoot it at 200mm and/or f/10 and it will be much sharper guaranteed.

 

[tecboy]

Are you using any lens filter?

 

[Low_Sky]

Thanks, gavjenks. I'll take it back out with me tomorrow, stay away from the extremes, and see if I can get some better results.

Tecboy, no filters, and I don't have lightroom so I can't sharpen it that way.

For those who asked, here's the direct link to the full size image. . . http://farm3.staticflickr.com/2155/12982585094_679eb565c9_o.jpg

 

[Derrel]

I looked at it full-sized on Flickr. I think that it's focused well--I see detail that would not be visible if it were mis-focused. I see some sensor noise. On the slightly out of focus background areas, I see traces of chromatic aberration--the subtle green fringing. My first thought was, "Well-focused, but I wonder if he had a cheap UV filter on it?" So. I see no UV was used. It looks to me like this is as good as the lens does when shot at 300mm at f/5.6 at ISO 800 on that body. It just is not delivering really high image quality.

 

[tecboy]

Have you tried mirror lock up?

 

[ConradM]

I'd say this is probably the lens, yes. It's a zoom and thus inherently at a disadvantage over the 50mm 1.8 prime, and you're shooting it at its extreme focal length, and you're shooting it wide open. You're hitting all the worst possible things at once for sharpness.
Almost all zoom lenses get soft at max range wide open.

Shoot it at 200mm and/or f/10 and it will be much sharper guaranteed.

Came here to say this.

 

[ConradM]

Also, your 50 will always be sharper than your other 2 lenses by design, especially if you're not shooting wide open. I found my 50 to be sharpest at f4 or f5.

 

[Braineack]

If that's the best you can do with this lens, I'd toss it in the trash.

 

[runnah]

Almost all zoom lenses get soft at max range wide open.

This is the problem right here.

 

[jaomul]

I am on a phone so can't see it very big but I will take everyone's word for it that it isn't to sharp. You don't say if it's on a tripod or if you have IS on or off. Anytime on a tripod turn IS Off unless it is a really expensive lens that has a special tripod sense mode.

Your shutter speed also is well up so IS can be Off even if handheld allowing shot to be taken more instantly after focus locks.

You could stop down the lens to f8 where it will be sharper, in this case at same iso your shutter speed will drop to 1/800th sec but that should be fine.

You may also be better not at Lens extreme. I would bet atlisted settings you would get a sharper shot at 250mm allowing the shot to be better with a small crop than the full image is now. Good luck