Nikon 400 f2.8 G VR and 500 f4 G VR Veiling and Softness Wide Open on a D810

[Nick Scavone]

If anyone has any input on my question posted on dpreview (link below), I would appreciate hearing from you. I tried to post here first, but the photo upload was too challenging for me after a long day at the office. Thanks.

http://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/3932834

Thanks.

Regards,

Nick

[Erik Lund]

For me it's too difficult to see what the issue is from those small images.
Should be fairly easy to upload some 100% crops here.

Are the lens rear elements and stick in filter clean?
How does the mounts look like? picture close up...

[Bjørn Rørslett]

The probability that two independent lenses of different build should both be defective in the same manner is extremely small. I would rather focus on the common denominator, which obviously is the camera and its operator.

The fact that pro calibre long lenses are designed to be near peak performance already wide open is not 'hype', just have a look at the MTF graphs published for them. What happens when you stop down is a small increase in contrast and (depending on focused distance) slightly deeper depth of field, but most of these lenses don't like stopping down more than a few stops before the quality starts to suffer.

[tommiejeep]

Nick, could be one , or more, of several things.   The 500vr shots are at low speeds.  I am assuming using VR-on.  What support are you using and how?  Have you visually inspected the lenses (glass) wide open ?  The drop in filters can get dirty relatively fast.  I have to clean the filters on the 300 2.8vr and 500vr every week during birding season,  Not sure I'm going to have much of a season this year  .

I would try and find some good light and shoot them at higher speeds without vr.   Bjorn wrote on long lens technique a while back.  He can give you the link here.   I rarely shoot the 500vr locked down since I normally shoot fast action from the W200 or small birds that do not sit for any time.

I wouldn't panic yet  but both lenses should be very good wide open and even with TCs do not need to be stopped down much.
Tom

[PedroS]

I started using big Nikon lenses several years ago with a 200-400 f4 V1 on a D200.
For my dismay I couldn't get anything that I liked, so started to wonder if they deserve such a grand...
Later I realize it was a focus problem, then a shutter speed one and then I looked at my tripod/head combos. It was a learning curve with lots of ups and downs; until I decide to sell it… shouldn’t have done…
Today if I look at the long lenses array in my possession, I see that the better I can control the externals the better the photos, which means never had a real issue with mines. I currently shoot the 200f2 and the  400f2.8FL. Had “all” of them, the 300f2.8, 500f4, 600f4 and 800f5.6 AIS. All of those served me well with no issues at all, and man, some have withstood harsh environments.
The outstanding quality of the new 400 allow me to have 3 long lenses in a smaller and lighter package, than ever before, which includes the new versions of both 1.4 and 2x TCs. Is incredible the IQ at 800 f5.6 (400+2xTC). At that 400FL wide open is breathtaking… And I’m also using a D810, and a D4s as well.
That said I don’t believe the problem is within the lenses, but being bought used it’s hard to tell how they have been treated.
Regarding the ones you have, the 400 is a different animal comparative to the 500. The 500f4 VR is not an easy lens to get perfect shots. It seems so, but suspects you and treats it as a bigger one. It really needs a stronger than expected support. From all that I had it was the most difficult one to handle, even the 800 AIS was easier to shoot.
Other thing that I found with the old ones vs the new ones was they need to be fine-tuned, with or without TCs. The 500 f4 (many will say differently) don’t like TCs. The 400 yes, all!

Look at your D810, because it could be the culprit...

But if you still have that bad feeling send those to the nearest Nikon to get them serviced. They deserve!

[Bjørn Rørslett]

Nick: I re-read the DPReview post and looked at the pictures. I suspect you might be mislead by the extremely shallow depth of field of such lenses and thus attribute the softer parts of the tree trunks to "veiling and softness" ? ?

For testing, try a flat subject filling the entire field of view next time. A bookshelf is perfect (if you have sufficiently spacious rooms of course). Otherwise the much-frowned-upon brick wall is there to serve your quest for the truth and nothing but the truth.

[Nick Scavone]

Thank you all for the thoughtful and helpful responses.

I was shooting locked down on a RRS tripod w/ Wimberly II gimbal. I was using long lens technique (hand on barrel, eye pressed against eyecup, etc).  I may have turned VR off -- I've read Bjorn's criticisms of the impact VR can have on photo quality so wanted unadulterated files to assess the quality of the photos. Photos are unedited except for standard Lightroom sharpening. The shutter speeds ranged from 500 to 1000 (I had my ISO capped).

No issues with the lenses or drop-in filters that I could see -- both are Ex+ quality, everything is clean and unblemished. The 400 was serviced with Nikon in August by the predecessor owner so doubt at least the 400 has mechanical issues. No record at Nikon of the 500 being serviced. (As an aside, I was very interested to find that by calling Nikon they will give you service information on used lenses. Good to know for anyone out there who is trying to assess whether to buy a used lens, particularly one with this kind of price-tag.)

The issue is not (in my estimation) motion blur. I'll try to post 100% shots tonight to give a better sense of what I am referring to, but both lenses wide open show a bit of veiling or haziness particularly in the highlights (which are not blown). If I stop down each lens by a stop, it largely disappears. Photos also improve in sharpness with the stop-down. Perhaps the veiling/haziness is in part a byproduct of a high ISO. Perhaps this is just to be expected for these lenses (both lenses show the same tendency so seemingly this is the case), and  I am being too critical. (Indeed, when I looked at the photos again without zooming in to 100%, frankly they look quite good).

Bjorn, as to your last point, perhaps you are right that the veiling in the highlights I am referring to may be outside of the narrow focus plane, so are blurred for that reason. I will look into that further. I am not usually a brick wall kind of guy, but perhaps it's time to take it up.

Thanks again to all.

Regards,

Nick

[Erik Lund]

What RRS tripod and head? also - Test shooting on a wimberley head needs high shutter speeds and I would not call it locked down...
You need to know when VR is on or not... can ruin the shot or make it.
You need to nail focus to see what they can do

I was using long lens technique (hand on barrel, eye pressed against eyecup, etc

Well... I know you get a comment on this

Assume your new tools are fine and start using them and have fun! 

[PedroS]

What RRS tripod and head? also - Test shooting on a wimberley head needs high shutter speeds and I would not call it locked down...
You need to know when VR is on or not... can ruin the shot or make it.
You need to nail focus to see what they can do

I was using long lens technique (hand on barrel, eye pressed against eyecup, etc

Well... I know you get a comment on this

Assume your new tools are fine and start using them and have fun! 

Erik is right, you're going to have some comments on here...  mine first.

But before, take in account the pertinent Bjorn comment, about curved targets. They are misleading. My first test with all those “bigies” is at close range. If you can't get anything perfect, start wonder on your support... the longer the range the worst it will look.

For these lenses nothing less than a series 3 (Gitzo) or similar should be used (and even then). The gimbal heads are a trap, better to test on sandbags!!

Now the long lens technique... I just cal it "your worst enemy". Much better is just putting your thumb beneath the barrel and push it up as a lever, with almost no contact with your face against the camera. Look at the body as a shaker... because it is!
So VR off, speed up to 1/1000s and wide open, MU on camera and straight target.

[Bjørn Rørslett]

Long Lens Technique (LLT) is indeed an evil in disguise.

See: http://nikongear.net/revival/index.php/topic,485.0.html

Support issues tend to be overwhelming from 200 mm onwards, in particular with today's high resolving cameras. A little surprising as the basics are not rocket science and doing this correct can provide perfectly sharp exposures at say 1/4 sec with a 1200 mm lens ...

[bobfriedman]

is it me?... i don't see any problems with those shots.. i use the D810 routinely with the 200/2VR, 300/2.8VR, 500/4VR, 600/4VR etc..

with my own lens, i have noticed full frame light fall off wide open with the 500 but that is it.... one of my sharpest lenses by the way and i shoot wildlife with it handheld with a TC14III often as well.. only been on a tripod to focustune.

[Gary Irwin]

Nick, this may sound like heresy but my quick-and-dirty approach to testing long lenses is to first fine tune the focus to the body (absolutely essential) and then take hundreds of rapid-fire shots of different scenes in good light to high-contrast objects in AF-C mode. Just leave VR on and don't over think it. (I don't even bother with a tripod most of the time.) If you getting even a few sharp images the lens is fine. If you find your keeper rate isn't has high as you want, then it's time to start working on your long-lens technique which is more art than science.

[PedroS]

That's a good input Gary, but I have learned that between a great photo and an exceptional one, most of the time is just a tripod difference...

[Erik Lund]

Yes that's how I do more or less Gary  just shoot away 

[Nick Scavone]

Below are 100% crops of three photos taken using the D810 and 500mm f4 G VR. On RRS TVC33 tripod with Wimberly II gimbal ("locked down" to the extent you can do so w/ the WII). Shot with a 1000 shutter speed, VR off, live-view focus on the birdfeeder. 2 second delay with each shot, mirror up, electronic shutter. First shot is at f4, second at f5.6 and third at f8. The shot at f4 clearly shows the lower contrast, veiling. Less sharp obviously too. This may well be standard for the 500 f4, but I am surprised at the mediocre quality of the f4 shot. If I have to shoot the lens stopped down to 5.6, obviously this is a detriment. I may consider buying the new 500 FL if it does not have this quality, although I'd be saving for quite a while (and perhaps have to find a new wife).

I should add that the photo at f8 is outstanding. Frankly, I had heard focus at infinity with this lens (and all Nikon exotics) was poor, but I find my copy of the 500 exemplary in that regard.