Lens Help

[Justin Carl]

Okay, I used a 70-300 Promaster 1:4-5.6 telemacro today.
I was really impressed, but I'm not steady enough with my hands.
Some of my pictures at full zoom had some blur in them.
I was really impressed with the lens, but I was wondering what was causing this.
I was shooting a 1/500 of a second and still getting the blur.
Is this what vibration reduction is for?

I took this picture from about 5 feet away.
Long distance shots were great! No complaints there.

Here is a long distance shot:

 

[AFH]

Isn't a 70-300 a telephoto lens? You're probably too close.

 

[royden]

That's weird, I don't know what would casue that Justin. 1/500 should be plenty of time to eliminate blurs. Maybe a more experienced photographer could chime in. I shot in Costa Rica with a 75-300 tamron and it worked great.

 

[Justin Carl]

Isn't a 70-300 a telephoto lens? You're probably too close.

I guess it's a tele-macro. It has a switch on the lens that alows for a wider manual focus range.
I was really skeptical about it at first, but it turned out great.

That's weird, I don't know what would casue that Justin. 1/500 should be plenty of time to eliminate blurs. Maybe a more experienced photographer could chime in. I shot in Costa Rica with a 75-300 tamron and it worked great.

That what I though, but I did get some good pictures with it.
Like I said, I took that picture from about 5 feet away at almost full focal length.

 

[Justin Carl]

Where are all of the camera enthusiast?
I didnt notice until now, but the firsst picture has blur in it too?
Ill ask again, is this what vibration reduction is for?

 

[skajari1]

blurry pictures

Hellow friend, your taking great shots of your chamelen. the blurr on your pictures are actually normal. what your seeing is a short focusing limit caused by a small aprature. just remember this, the larger the aprature #, the wider field of focus ( less blurr) , the smaller the parature the smaller field of focus. in other words, want to blurr the background use a small aprature. It will focus your subject, but it can focus simply on the face, and body might be a little blurred.

 

[Tygerr]

Skajari is right about the shallow depth of field causing only a small part of the image to be in focus. In order to get enough light into the lens to shoot at 1/500th of a second, the aperture would have had to be quite wide open, and when that happens the depth of the image that is in focus is very narrow (so the cham's eyes are in focus, but the rest of its body is blurry).
In your long-distance shot, where there was full daylight the aperture was probably a lot smaller, meaning more of the depth of the image was in focus.

However, I don't think that is what you were referring to in your original post. I noticed that there is slight motion-blur on both the cham images. This is not something that is caused by shallow depth of field - it can only be caused by the shakiness of your hands, or from a slow shutter speed. Presuming you're sure you took the photos at 1/500th, it can't be slow shutter speed, so it must be the lack of steadyness.
I agree with you that VR is supposed to eliminate the effect of shaky hands, but you must realise that the blurring effect caused by vibrations is amplified by the length of the lens you are using. There is far more vibration bluriness caused using a long telephoto lens than when using a wide-angle lens.
So even though your lens has VR on it, it may not be enough to counter the effect of the vibrations when shooting at full zoom. The only solution would be to use a tripod, or shoot at even faster speeds.
But also just confirm that the photos were in fact taken at 1/500th of a second. Sometimes in Programmed Auto mode the lightmeter will return a reading of 1/500 in the viewfinder, but when the shutter is pressed for various reasons it may compute a different speed that it will record the photo at. You can check the meta-data on the file to verify what speed it was taken at.

 

[Justin Carl]

Thanks for the long post guys!
I was shooting in Aperature first, I usually shoot from this setting.
After I got a little blurr I changed it to Shutter Priority.
I set it to 1/500 to try and capture a clearer picture.
I've nerver had this problem before with my other 2 lens.
This lens did'nt have Vibration Reduction on it.
I have only had this camera for about 3 months, so I'm still learning.
Most likely I just wont take close up pictures with this lens anymore.
Thats what macro is for!
If you have any other suggestions let me know.

 

[fabos]

I was shooting in Aperature first, I usually shoot from this setting.
If you have any other suggestions let me know.

i would never shoot in the aperature setting! manual is the way to do it!
im not a camera pro or anything but ive been learning alot about my camera from trial and error and what it looks like happend to u is that u got a bit of camera shake! to b shooting at 1/500 u must have alot of light going into ur camera! ive come to notice that 1/90 is more then enought shutter speed to catch a cham. also by shooting at 1/500 doesnt allow you to shut down ur aperature very much. im guessing if u went back and looked at ur aperature setting it was something like 2.5-4.5... try taking these same shots in manual, put ur camera at 1/90 and try some different aperature settings. im sure ull be happy with what u see! Also u said u arent very still so maybe u might wanna try a tripod, i use a tripod evertime i shoot chams!
Good luck!

 

[royden]

I'm going to venture to say that I think I know that Justin knows the difference between depth of field and camera shake. If not - feel free to correct me Justin. I can see the slight motion he's talking about in the first image. It can really only be camera shake - I'd agree with Tygerr.

Image stabilization would take care of that if your zoom had it, and if it did, I could categorize your financial status right now as either very good or very in debt, as the price on a telephoto zoom with image stab jumps from several hundred - to many thousands of dollars.

Try a tripod - It's cheaper!

Fabos - Aperature priority (AV) is a manual setting, it's just not fully manual. I agree with you, I rarely use AV. Shutter priority (TV) is the easiest manual setting if you know you have enough light and you don't care about the depth of field. Saying that 1/90 is enough speed to catch a chameleon is true, but you need to account for the light in the shot as well as the aperature setting and the ISO. 1/90 may be blown out of it's outside, or black if your in a dark situation.

 

[fabos]

royden i fully agree with everything u say! lke i said im not a pro or anywhere close to being one! i am actaully just now taking my first Digital photo class right now so i am still learning!

 

[royden]

me too -> not a pro

 

[Justin Carl]

Thanks again for all the post guys.
Slowly I'm working my wat through the different maunual settings(M,A,S,P)
Thus far I'm most comfortable with Aperature.
In (A)perature the camera controls shutter speed.
In (S)hutter the camera controls aperature.

I have done some sports photography with 1/500 in natural daylight
and inside with a good flash.

Royden Said,"I'm going to venture to say that I think I know that Justin knows the difference between depth of field and camera shake. If not - feel free to correct me Justin. I can see the slight motion he's talking about in the first image. It can really only be camera shake - I'd agree with Tygerr."

Yes, I do, but still learning.

 

[AFH]

While we're discussing lenses, could anyone explain what a telemacro lens is (described by Justin in original post)? I'm not a camera expert, but it seems they are two different lenses. Telephoto (used from a distance) to make far things closer, and macro (usually used within inches of the subject) to make small things bigger. It seems a telemacro would be an oxymoron.

But then again, I could just be a run of the mill moron

 

[Justin Carl]

While we're discussing lenses, could anyone explain what a telemacro lens is (described by Justin in original post)? I'm not a camera expert, but it seems they are two different lenses. Telephoto (used from a distance) to make far things closer, and macro (usually used within inches of the subject) to make small things bigger. It seems a telemacro would be an oxymoron.

But then again, I could just be a run of the mill moron

Here is a link of the lens I was using:
http://www.promaster.com/products/p...sm=sm2_2302&dir=&page=PROD&product=AF70300EDO

 

[AFH]

Interesting. It looks like kind of a hybrid.

 

[Tokoloshe]

Hey Guys, I borrowed a camera w/. lenses this last week and used a 70-300mm telemacro as well.

It worked out great for standoff, but if I wasn't careful I got blurred pics as well. I also didn't quite get down to scale definition, which I believe came down to the limited Aperture size of the lens.

I spoke to someone today about this and they suggested getting something like a 180mm Macro or 200mm Macro in order to get required standoff, but enable better light gathering (IE Better resolution/definition) capabilities.

Soon I hope to get my own set-up, but it looks like it is going to hurt my pocket a lot!
Cheers,
Tokoloshe.
Tygerr: dis nou lekker om nog n' Suid-Afrikaner hier te sien! Oppie Bokke!

 

[Tygerr]

Aperature priority (AV) is a manual setting, it's just not fully manual. I agree with you, I rarely use AV. Shutter priority (TV) is the easiest manual setting if you know you have enough light and you don't care about the depth of field.

I don't believe there is only one correct mode to use. I use pretty much all of them. When I'm taking snaps with my family or at parties, I'm quite comfortable in Programmed-Auto mode.
But when I'm doing portraits or landscape where DOF is important, I use Aperture Priority.
When speed is important to me, like for sports or low-light photography where I want to prevent motion-blur, I use Shutter priority.
I only use full Manual when I want to override the camera's light meter to create specific effects.

I agree with Royden though - best investment is a good tripod.

While we're discussing lenses, could anyone explain what a telemacro lens is

Telemacros are simply telephoto zoom lenses that the manufacturers have added a macro setting to. So you're right - they are a hybrid.
There is a trade-off cost to this added functionality though - most of them don't get as much magnification as dedicated prime macro lenses do (I haven't seen any that are 1:1).
And there is the same trade-off as any other zoom vs prime lens: less sharp, and a slower lens (i.e. smaller aperture).
But they are more affordable than having to buy a dedicated macro, and a separate dedicated telephoto.

Tygerr: dis nou lekker om nog n' Suid-Afrikaner hier te sien! Oppie Bokke!

Sekerlik. Maar wat doen jy in Texas? Daar's mos geen rugby daar nie... Of is jy 'n Bulls onderstener miskien? Ek sou ook weggehol hierdie seisoen... ;-)
Send me a PM, because I don't think we're allowed to use Afrikaans in the forums...