Nikon 70-200/2.8 sharpness at 200mm f/2.8

JMBarroso

Hello everybody,

This is probably an old discussion, but since I just bought the Nikon 70-200/2.8 VR, I just want to make sure I got a good copy, since it is not cheap.
My concern is when using the lens at 200mm and f/2.8, which I plan to use a lot. There is a clear difference in contrast and sharpness, comparing this aperture with f/4. Some MTF charts like the one in DPreview I think they do not show that difference. The MTF chart in Nikon site says is measured wide open, and at Tele looks sharp and contrasty.
I'm posting an example hoping 70-200 users can tell me if this is OK, or if my copy is somewhat below standard.
The pictures are 100% crops, taken with a D300 on tripod with no VR and cable release. Taken with Standard (SD) image control setting, but with sharpness 5. The focus was set at the center of the crop.

You can see the pictures here:
http://jmbarroso.smugmug.com/gallery/8633146_ewK2b#569643580_7hoUY

Thanks in advance for your help.

ziggy53

JMBarroso, welcome to the Digital Grin.

Typical for large aperture lenses the peak resolution for the Nikkor 70-200mm, f2.8G-AFS ED-IF VR is at f5.6.

The DOF will also increase as the aperture is narrowed and at a faster rate than the resolution.

The effect of both increased resolution and increased DOF will have a marked and visual effect on the image.

Check out the MTF resolution charts here:

http://www.photozone.de/nikon--nikkor-aps-c-lens-tests/247-nikkor-af-s-70-200mm-f28-g-if-ed-vr-review--test-report?start=1

To be honest, the f4 fence shot does look like it has been digitally sharpened as well. There seem to be halos that are consistent with USM sharpening. The 2 samples of the resolution/focus charts do not seem to have any problems that I can see.

Do take a number of images and base your final decision on a consensus of results and whether the results are suitable to your need. If you decide they are not sufficient, try another copy to be sure.

thegridrunner

I have a 70-200 vr 2.8 and my images are much sharper than that (I was actually surprised how sharp my images were at 2.8). The images you posted look out of focus (you may have a focusing issue here). See if you can trade your lens in for another or have it checked out by a techician.

JMBarroso

Thank you both for your advice.

The pictures do have some extra (camera-processed) sharpness, but both have the same setting. It's standard setting (SD) with an increase from sharpness 3 to 5. The charts are in neutral setting (NL) with sharpness 2.

I sent the pictures to the guys at the store and they say that soft veil does not look normal (just like thegridrunner said), and they will replace the lens (that's good !).

I had the whole bunch of pictures of this charts from Norman Koren and I processed the way it indicates in his site. Smoothing out the noise (...) 200mm f4 and 135 f2.8 looks more or less as expected, but there is something wrong for 200mm f2.8

http://jmbarroso.smugmug.com/gallery/8633146_ewK2b#571064396_j6poZ

Anyway, I'll go ahead and get a replacement. I'll let you know if the new one is better.

FedererPhoto

I'd suggest not fretting over charts and look at the images you are getting - if they are sharp, then who cares if they score a 1500 on a chart or a 1700?

thegridrunner

the higher resolution makes a difference when you start cropping. You are also paying a premium for the lens. Get the best lens you can get and don't settle for less.

JMBarroso

Third time is the charm !
I went to the store last saturday to get a second copy. It came out having a similar softness at 200mm f/2.8. Additionally, it had some blurriness to the right side of the frame.
I was almost resigned and called the store that I wanted to get the first copy back. But they offered me a third copy! (very good store, Fotocasion, in Madrid). I picked up the third copy yesterday and did some test shots. They look quite good and free of the described problems. I'll be doing some more testing but I think this is ok.
Regarding resolution charts, well, I started to generate them to have arguments just in case the guys in the store went like "that's ok for 2.8...". But lucky for me these guys know what customer satisfaction means.
I agree with Patrick. I'll be cropping for sure shots of birds, or to make a close-up of my kid at some event. And yes, for the price paid, I expected the lens to be really good. It is one of the new magic trio, isn't it? By the way Patrick, I can see you have the three of them .

Wil Davis

JMBarroso wrote:

…snip
But lucky for me these guys know what customer satisfaction means
snip…

That's impressive, and kudos to the guys in the store!

First Rule of Customer Satisfaction: The customer is always right (even when the customer is wrong, the customer is right!)

Glad it worked out -
- Wil

ziggy53

JMBarroso wrote:

Third time is the charm !
...

Fantastic! I have had to go through multiple lenses as well just to find the "one" that finally worked with my cameras. I'm glad you have found a pleasing copy.

Now we just need to see some beautiful images from this last lens.

JMBarroso

Ok, ok, but my photography level is quite modest yet (not as high as my requirements on expensive equipment )
With the last lens maybe this weekend I can get something interesting.
In the mean time, here are some shots I liked, taken with the other lenses.

1st 70-200
http://jmbarroso.smugmug.com/gallery/8763656_vQkjW/1/#580060092_KUZtj-A-LB
http://jmbarroso.smugmug.com/gallery/8763656_vQkjW/1/#580060223_LfwiF-A-LB
2nd 70-200
http://jmbarroso.smugmug.com/gallery/8763656_vQkjW/1/#576016289_5ZnKF-A-LB
http://jmbarroso.smugmug.com/gallery/7650338_oA7Q2/1/#579401349_mtTkp-A-LB

Tiziano

I know this is a thread about your lens sharpness but WOW, I love those shot JM!

ziggy53

Tiziano wrote:

I know this is a thread about your lens sharpness but WOW, I love those shot JM!

I agree. Those shots need no apology. Nicely done.