# Nikon D90 not getting Sharp Photos



## oktato (Aug 23, 2010)

I bought a Nikon D90 camera and have a couple of months with it, i'm a newbie on advanced photography but i'm trying to get as many tips as possible, my problem is that eventhough I know for sure that the Nikon D90 is a great camera, i'm not getting sharp stills, so I really need your help to know if i'm doing anything wrong or it is something with the camera.ale:


All of these photos were taken with the "auto function"

http://www.flickr.com/photos/52387156@N06/4921351851/
This is slightly out of Focus (3216x2136, f/36, 1/125 s)


http://www.flickr.com/photos/52387156@N06/4921945108/
In Focus (3216x2136, f/36, 1/4000 s)



I'm using a 24" inch monitor (i don't know if that has something to do with it), but i've seen sharper photos on it that the one I show you.


thanks


----------



## Markw (Aug 23, 2010)

F/36 is your problem! At F/36, your ISO is at ISO3200!  On the D90, I wouldnt go above ISO600 if you didnt have to.  I own one too.  Keep the F/# under 16 and the ISO under 600 and they should sharpen up in a heatbeat.  

Ill let someone else explain. :thumbsup:
Mark


----------



## oldmacman (Aug 23, 2010)

Wow, how are you doing f36 with 1/4000 shutter on a shot in shadow? Looking at the pic, it seems as if the far end of the table is in focus. are these hand held and what lens are you using?


----------



## Markw (Aug 23, 2010)

oldmacman said:


> Wow, how are you doing f36 with 1/4000 shutter on a shot in shadow?


 
He lives on Mercury.

Mark


----------



## oktato (Aug 23, 2010)

oldmacman said:


> Wow, how are you doing f36 with 1/4000 shutter on a shot in shadow? Looking at the pic, it seems as if the far end of the table is in focus. are these hand held and what lens are you using?


 


I'm using a Nikon VR 18-105 mm


----------



## emh (Aug 23, 2010)

Looking at the EXIF data:
The first pic was taken at f/36, 1/125s, ISO 3200, +0EV
The second pic was f/*5.6*, 1/4000s, ISO 3200, +2/3EV

I think what you are seeing as softness in the first pic is the noise due to high ISO. The second pic is better because it's brighter thanks to the +2/3EV exposure compensation, which reduces noise despite the high ISO.

I second Markw's recommendation -- stay below ISO 600 or so whenever possible.


----------



## Markw (Aug 23, 2010)

..The first photo has these settings:

F/36, 1/125s ISO3200

...the second, however, was not shot at F/32.

F/5.6 1/4000s ISO3200

Mark


----------



## Markw (Aug 23, 2010)

Ahh, emh.  You beat me to it.

Mark


----------



## KmH (Aug 24, 2010)

Read your camera users manual.

Get the ISO set to 200, not 3200.

Read about depth-of-field (DOF) and how small lens apertures like f/32 soften focus because of diffraction.


----------



## AdrianC (Aug 24, 2010)

F/36, 1/125s ISO3200
F/5.6 1/4000s ISO3200

Very random settings. Lower that ISO to 100 or whatever the minimum is and go from there. I would use F/8.


----------



## Alan92RTTT (Aug 24, 2010)

oktato said:


> All of these photos were taken with the "auto function"



I think you just pointed out your problem. The default for auto mode if multi-point focus. The camera selects the focus points and they may be "wrong" for the result you want. 

This image is a good example http://mi3si.org/imagesjpg/230090814/DSC_0644.JPG (Its full rez so I linked it) If you look close the car is slightly out of focus and the bushes behind it are sharp. If I look at the image in the Nikon software it shows that the camera focus points were in the bushes. 

Change the cameras to run in single point focus mode and you should get better results.


----------



## NateS (Aug 24, 2010)

I have never heard anybody say to not go above ISO600 on the D90.  ISO800 is perfectly usable and if exposed properly shows hardly any grain.  ISO 1600 is very usable as well if you are willing to do a pass through noise reduction in post.  I will agree that 3200 is too high unless you are only printing 4x6's, but 800-1600 is very good on this camera if used correctly.


----------



## oktato (Aug 26, 2010)

I went to my manual to find out how to lower the ISO and took some photos on ISO 500, they look really good, here's an example DSC_0018 | Flickr - Photo Sharing!

you can even see the dust on the dog's head


thanks for all your help, if you ever need some guidance on oil and gas refining process contact me, that I master.

thanks again


----------



## AdrianC (Aug 26, 2010)

Try taking pics at 100ISO, they will be even sharper...


----------



## NateS (Aug 27, 2010)

AdrianC said:


> Try taking pics at 100ISO, they will be even sharper...



No they won't.  ISO 100 (fake ISO) is going to look probably about the same as 400-500.  ISO200 is the base iso and where they lens will be sharpest with best quality.


----------



## ghache (Aug 27, 2010)

i shoot iso 400-800 alot and pictures are almost noise free.....like nates said, even at 1600 its not that bad.


----------



## JG_Coleman (Aug 27, 2010)

Wow...maybe I just nit-pick my own work too much... but I really hate ever going beyond ISO 400.  Then again, maybe it just has to do with the type of shots I'm taking.  Usually I'm working on landscapes at f/22... and, for me, having distant background trees look like swarms of green bees at 1:1 is extremely dissappointing.


----------



## NateS (Aug 27, 2010)

JG_Coleman said:


> Wow...maybe I just nit-pick my own work too much... but I really hate ever going beyond ISO 400.  Then again, maybe it just has to do with the type of shots I'm taking.  Usually I'm working on landscapes at f/22... and, for me, having distant background trees look like swarms of green bees at 1:1 is extremely dissappointing.



Type of shot makes a big difference.  You difinitely don't want much grain in a landscape unless you are going for a more vintage b&W look.  For people though a little grain is acceptable since it isn't usually prevalant on the subject...only the background, and that can be fixed easily with selective noise reduction.  On landscapes you want most of the scene in focus and having grain takes away IQ much more noticabely.  

If you think ISO 600 on the D90 is bad...pick up a D70s and throw it on ISO800.....it will make you cry in comparison.


----------



## AdrianC (Aug 27, 2010)

NateS said:


> AdrianC said:
> 
> 
> > Try taking pics at 100ISO, they will be even sharper...
> ...



ISO 100 is fake ISO? I always thought that just the HI1, HI2 settings were fake.


----------



## ghache (Aug 27, 2010)

AdrianC said:


> NateS said:
> 
> 
> > AdrianC said:
> ...


 
nikon d90 iso is 200. if you wanna go down to iso 100, its lo7 lo3 lo1, 
the only time ive been using it its outdoor shooting in sunlight, it gives me an extra stop down.


----------



## ghache (Aug 27, 2010)

NateS said:


> JG_Coleman said:
> 
> 
> > Wow...maybe I just nit-pick my own work too much... but I really hate ever going beyond ISO 400. Then again, maybe it just has to do with the type of shots I'm taking. Usually I'm working on landscapes at f/22... and, for me, having distant background trees look like swarms of green bees at 1:1 is extremely dissappointing.
> ...


 
i had a d60 and when i got my d90 i could clearly see the difference...i was having some sorth of orgasm.

i cant wait to get a d700....LOL


----------



## NateS (Aug 27, 2010)

AdrianC said:


> NateS said:
> 
> 
> > AdrianC said:
> ...



Sure is.  The Hi settings and the Lo settings are fake iso...same processes in each just in the opposite direction.  The sharpest highest quality iso you can use on a D90 is ISO200...the true base ISO.


----------



## AdrianC (Aug 27, 2010)

Oh, ok yeah, I just checked the d90 stats and it does start at 200.


----------

