AF 80-200mm f/2.8D ED ... soft at f/2.8

[iamblurblur]

am very sure that I've focused on the eyes, thats why I mentioned that it is either it back focused or the picture is soft. actually most of the images that I've taken at 200mm are rather soft at wide open.

another sample shot.

shot at f2.8, 1/640, 200mm, iso 400 on D200 around 5-7m away i think (raw file, unedited)

100% crop, ignore the blur in between the eyes, it is water droplet frozen in mid air.

rather soft at 200mm as well...:dunno: or is it not focused on the spot?

just got my camera body from nikon today for sensor cleaning... and requested them to check on the soft focus i'm experiencing exactly like what u have here with all my lens line-up...

answer from them: ALL AF-D lenses will be experiencing either front or back focusing on ALL nikon DX bodies that produces such soft images... AF-S lenses will solve the problem. there is nothing they can do about it. (no such info was conveyed when we bought the cameras until u got the camera and send for servicing!!! have a whole AF-D line up and not expecting me to sell them off and replace with AF-S lenses right?)

the only thing can be done is the in-camera AF fine tune ability... if after fine tuning still not working... live with the soft images for the rest of your photography days unless a body upgrade (no guaranty you will get sharp images all the time even with the upgrade)...

 

[iamblurblur]

*answer from them: ALL AF-D lenses will be experiencing either front or back focusing on ALL nikon DX bodies that produces such soft images... AF-S lenses will solve the problem. there is nothing they can do about it. (no such info was conveyed when we bought the cameras until u got the camera and send for servicing!!! have a whole AF-D line up and not expecting me to sell them off and replace with AF-S lenses right?)*

sorry made a mistake, the AF-D lenses mentioned should be AF lenses. so that means 35mm, 50mm, 85mm... sad to say 80-200 is one of the AF lenses too.

 

[Spectrum]

am very sure that I've focused on the eyes, thats why I mentioned that it is either it back focused or the picture is soft. actually most of the images that I've taken at 200mm are rather soft at wide open.

another sample shot.

shot at f2.8, 1/640, 200mm, iso 400 on D200 around 5-7m away i think (raw file, unedited)

100% crop, ignore the blur in between the eyes, it is water droplet frozen in mid air.

rather soft at 200mm as well...:dunno: or is it not focused on the spot?

If this pic is not going to enlarge to 20 by 30 inches. I don't see there's any problem with the sharpness. An 8 by 10/12 inches print for this image will still look pretty sharp for my likeness. Anyway, each to his/her own thoughts. Have fun...

 

[2.8photography]

ideally shooting at 1/320 shouldnt be handshake problem. but this shot really looks like handshake than anything else. like the previous reply says, mount tripod to be sure.

oops no time so i forgot to take the picture. anyway i took another photo from the same day. however this was taken at 170mm, f/2.8 and 1/1000. surely there shouldnt be handshake here.

100% crop

but if the problem lies purely in the lens (and not handshake or camera etc), then what should i do? will callibration at NSC be sufficient and will it help? if so at how much?

thanks again

 

[lsisaxon]

oops no time so i forgot to take the picture. anyway i took another photo from the same day. however this was taken at 170mm, f/2.8 and 1/1000. surely there shouldnt be handshake here.

100% crop

but if the problem lies purely in the lens (and not handshake or camera etc), then what should i do? will callibration at NSC be sufficient and will it help? if so at how much?

thanks again

Is this a centre crop? If it's a centre crop and the shutter speed is 1/1000, then your lens is quite misaligned. If it's a corner crop, then it may be some sagittal coma.

 

[2.8photography]

Is this a centre crop? If it's a centre crop and the shutter speed is 1/1000, then your lens is quite misaligned. If it's a corner crop, then it may be some sagittal coma.

it is indeed a centre crop (though not exactly in the centre as i wanted to show the DOF, but close enough)

 

[ExplorerZ]

it is indeed a centre crop (though not exactly in the centre as i wanted to show the DOF, but close enough)

then i must say, ur lens is probably the worst copy i seen on the net(provided there is absolute no handshake blur)... :sweat:

 

[andrewtansj]

try to take a shot with a proper subject with foreground and background... but from the look of the sample shot, there seem to be some problem with the lens man...:dunno:

 

[2.8photography]

try to take a shot with a proper subject with foreground and background... but from the look of the sample shot, there seem to be some problem with the lens man...:dunno:

i do have some shots like that - will post up soon. however, i wanted to show a shot like this to illustrate the fact that the problem with my lens is not just a focusing problem

many thanks

 

[eugene_nyc]

*answer from them: ALL AF-D lenses will be experiencing either front or back focusing on ALL nikon DX bodies that produces such soft images... AF-S lenses will solve the problem. there is nothing they can do about it. (no such info was conveyed when we bought the cameras until u got the camera and send for servicing!!! have a whole AF-D line up and not expecting me to sell them off and replace with AF-S lenses right?)*

sorry made a mistake, the AF-D lenses mentioned should be AF lenses. so that means 35mm, 50mm, 85mm... sad to say 80-200 is one of the AF lenses too.

Emh... So, this only affecting DX camera with AF lenses?
DX Camera with AF-S / AF-D lenses will not have this problem at all?
:bigeyes:

 

[tltan]

Have this lens. Tried it out sometime ago when my friend told me of the problem.

Indeed, most copies of AFD 80-200 f2.8 face softness at 200mm minimum focusing distance due to the back-focusing issues. Other then that, anything below 170mm is pretty ok wide open...very sharp.

Wonder if anyone has did finetuning on their D3 or D300. Is there any reference to do that to improve the backfocusing issue?

Thanks.

 

[ExplorerZ]

Have this lens. Tried it out sometime ago when my friend told me of the problem.

Indeed, most copies of AFD 80-200 f2.8 face softness at 200mm minimum focusing distance due to the back-focusing issues. Other then that, anything below 170mm is pretty ok wide open...very sharp.

Wonder if anyone has did finetuning on their D3 or D300. Is there any reference to do that to improve the backfocusing issue?

Thanks.

well, the softness is not just because of backfocus, its the nature of the optics. even with perfect focus, it is still soft compared to anything below 170mm. backfocus just made the whole thing looks worse :sweatsm:

can check out the blur blur from slrgear.com, it clearly show that this lens perform well in all but 200mm f2.8 be it when u focus from 1.8m~infinity the lens just doesn't perform as well at 200mm. (most 70-200 from major brand doesn't perform at the tele as well) but this problem is worsen by the backfocus when one try to focus at about 2-5m range. (soft + backfocus :sweat

 

[tltan]

thanks for the link. dont really care about the charts. =p Taking a well composed slightly blur picture (can be USMed) is better then a sharp yet lacklustre one?

Take more pictures, the lens is capable, am I? =p

 

[Kunioo]

Hi,

Just bought this lens (AF 80-200 f/2.8D 2-touch) a few days ago.
I am having serious back focus (about 1 inch I think) at 200mm, found during doing AF fine tune (using focus chart) with my D300.
Almost want to go back to shop for exchange.

Yesterday morning, take a day off, try out thing to reconfirm the problem (on tripod, mirror lockup, exp delay) before go to shop.
This is what I found:
1) Close distance (1.3-3m from distance scale) at 200mm (no matter what f-number) all back focus.

2) Zoom down to 135mm and below (no matter what f-number, until D300 difraction value at f/11), AF work perfectly (in fact I AF fine tune using 135mm instead of 200mm) for close and long distance.

3) Long distance (20-30m, i estimate) at 200mm very sharp (no matter what f-number) as comparable to 135mm and below.

I didn't test other focal length because no marking on the lens (marking is 80, 105, 135, 200)

With the above result, I give up going back to shop for exchange.
Just conclude that at 200mm, no close up, means for macro or potrait, will use 135mm and below.
200mm is for long distance!
Bottom line is this lens is very sharp, and good value.
It is as sharp as my 24-70 f/2.8 and 105 VR micro.
I love its sharpness and contrast.

I hope this information is helpful.
Thanks!

 

[Kunioo]

Oh 1 more finding I missed out:

For close distance (macro mode from distance scale), if using MF, I can get very sharp image for 200mm at wide open f/2.8.

 

[yanikonian]

Well, focusing accuracy depends upon subject distance / zoom distance ratio and totally not f-numbers?

Thanks for sharing..

 

[Mendis]

My experience with the 2 touch AFD 80-200f2.8 at wide open is similar;

soft at 200f2.8(not talking about back/front focusing)
Sharp at 200f4

IMO, the one touch is sharper at wide open.

 

[kayheem]

Hi all,

I have a couple of questions regarding this issue of front/back focussing at minimum distance:

1) From what distance does this cease to be a problem? 4m? 5m?

2) Are 3rd party 70-200mm F2.8 lenses (e.g. from Sigma, Tamron) similarly affected?

Thanks!

Kay Heem

 

[ksaurus]

I am using AFS version of 80-200mm, so far no issue and the focus is very fast and accurate.

 

[Kunioo]

Are you using full frame? Heard that full frame using this lens has no problem at 200mm f/2.8.