Nikon 18-140, should it be this soft?

Zarch

Zarch

Suspended / Banned
Messages
1,005
Name
Mick
Edit My Images
Yes
Hello all,

Got this 18-140 on my D7100 that I use on general days out when i need both zoom and convenience. Now I know it's not optically perfect, especially compared to my 2.8 lenses, but DXO and others give it decent reviews on my D7100.

So i'm a little concerned about off centre performance of it at 18mm.

I've posted below two shots, with both the original (RAW straight into LR, then exported) and the post Lightroom version where i've applied lens correction, sharpening and the rest of the usuals.

In the first picture, the dance one, its the girl on the right hand side. Too soft? I don't think its a DOF issue as the rest of them in the group along that plane are fine, even the ones at the extreme left. And when you look at the original shot, she isn't even out in the extremes of the frame, just a big off centre.

In the running group shot, its everyone on the extreme left and right. 71C, 66D (left), 64C (right) etc. Again, centre look fine, even those right at the back/top, so no DOF issues, I was at f8. I used my flash for this one because of the shadows.

Anything you can think i'm doing wrong? Anything I could do better next time?

Granted, things look worse when I zoom 1:1, but I can still see it zoomed out.

Or is the 18-140 just a bit ropey off centre at 18mm and i'm expecting miracles from a super zoom lens?

Any thoughts would be appreciated.

Cheers, Mick


20150627_MJW_2957-2.jpg by Mick Wall, on Flickr


20150627_MJW_2957.jpg by Mick Wall, on Flickr


20150630_MJW_2987-2.jpg by Mick Wall, on Flickr


20150630_MJW_2987.jpg by Mick Wall, on Flickr
 
Last edited:
Morning all, anyone with any thoughts please?
 
I'll chip in to try and get the ball rolling.

The 1st one is difficult as theres so many people in the picture . To me the girl on right may have just moved her head which gives the appearance of soft, when you look at the people behind the rope barrier they look the same for me on both sides.

With the runners as there seems to be a slope and the right side looks to be in more shade there is going to be some difference. Again to me the front row looks sharper and gets slightly worse on the rear following rows, this maybe down to DOF or my monitor.

Was you using a tripod on these shots or handheld?


There's going to be some movement between the people and I expect a lens like the 18-140mm is not going to be the sharpest across the frame. It's a good lens by reports, but it is a kit lens and maybe expecting too much?
 
Last edited:
Looks good in the centre to me but a little soft at the extreme edges, not ideal but not unexpected with a kit lens.
 
Nawty said:
Looks good in the centre to me but a little soft at the extreme edges, not ideal but not unexpected with a kit lens.
Click to expand...

Thanks for replying Ned. Looking at the originals, the non-cropped versions, especially the dancing one, I wouldn't say the softness is in the 'extremes'?

Swanseajack said:
The 1st one is difficult as there's so many people in the picture . To me the girl on right may have just moved her head which gives the appearance of soft, when you look at the people behind the rope barrier they look the same for me on both sides
Click to expand...

Thanks for the reply Simon. I really don't think it's movement of her head/motion. I shot that at 1/1000 and the girl in the front left of the picture is jumping and is captured well.

Swanseajack said:
With the runners as there seems to be a slope and the right side looks to be in more shade there is going to be some difference. Again to me the front row looks sharper and gets slightly worse on the rear following rows, this maybe down to DOF or my monitor.
Click to expand...

When I look at the image, the people on the back row who are further away look far sharper than the people at the far right/left, so I can't see how it can be DOF?
 
Zarch said:
When I look at the image, the people on the back row who are further away look far sharper than the people at the far right/left, so I can't see how it can be DOF?
Click to expand...

Is it anything to do with needing to fine tune the focus on the camera for that lens?
 
They don't look great at all to me Mick, I see what you mean about the runners on the outer edge particularly. I agree it doesn't look like a DOF issue or motion blur, it just looks like it's really bad on the edges. The RAW files don't look great either for the rest of the frame, but clean up well in post by the look of it. Can you get hold of another one to compare? It does get good reviews so would be surprised if they are all this bad.

I did wonder if it was a decentering issue as none of the frame looked good in RAW, but then I wouldn't have thought you could 'tidy it up' so much in PP if that was the case? Looks to be a lot of CA/colour fringing to me too.
 
Last edited:
I'd say forget looking at the moving people. Even at 1/1000 or whatever you could have movement blur.

However, just looking at the first one, it doesn't look right. First, I get the impression it might be front focussed but just looking at the grass it is completely out of focus at any distance for about the left 3rd so I think there might be some sort of decentering problem or other mis-alignment problem.
I don't know the lens at all but if any of my lenses (including my 18-55 kit lens and 18-200 or any of my cheapo E series lenses) consistantly was that bad I wouldn't use it......

Only way to really tell though is to do some more controlled test of non-moving subjects while using a tripod.
 
Thanks all,

I'm coming to the conclusion that there is a hardware issue (decentering) with it.

I can't believe this has happened to me again, I had the same issue with a 18-200 last year.
https://www.talkphotography.co.uk/t...imited-performance-what-other-options.551109/

If I threw my gear around like a madman I could understand these things, but I don't, i'm quite precious about my stuff. :(

I'm just hoping the chap I bought it off can lay his hand on the receipt for me and I might be able to get it resolved via warranty.
 
Zarch said:
Thanks all,

I'm coming to the conclusion that there is a hardware issue (decentering) with it.

I can't believe this has happened to me again, I had the same issue with a 18-200 last year.
https://www.talkphotography.co.uk/t...imited-performance-what-other-options.551109/

If I threw my gear around like a madman I could understand these things, but I don't, i'm quite precious about my stuff. :(

I'm just hoping the chap I bought it off can lay his hand on the receipt for me and I might be able to get it resolved via warranty.
Click to expand...
Fingers crossed for you. I know the feeling of bad luck with camera gear but that appears to have changed recently so hopefully it'll do the same for you.
 
Zarch said:
Or is the 18-140 just a bit ropey off centre at 18mm and i'm expecting miracles from a super zoom lens?
Click to expand...
Wouldn't surprise me.

Have you done a brick wall test? Why not?
 
Logged a call with Nikon, uploaded the above NEFs and got this reply.

Thank you for your e-mail. There is a little bit of fall off at the corners but it is difficult to say whether or not this is due to the wide angle being used and / or the distance from camera to subject.
With wide angle lenses there can be some softening towards the corners due to the optical nature or them and in certain situation this can be worse. The only real way of knowing what is happening is to have the lens inspected at a service centre to make sure there is nothing wrong or out of alignment. Please see the information below for this.
​
Basically, not particularly helpful or insightful.

So i've raised a returns for the service centre. They've given me a free post label and its gone in the post today.

Just hope it get looks at under warranty. The chap from TP classifieds kindly forwarded on the receipt when he bought it (last Oct). Its from an eBay store, but UK stock/dealer and in his name, not mine. But he didn't register the lens serial no at Nikon, I have.

I just get the feeling they'll say its not covered under warranty for some reason and i'm going to get stung for a repair bill. :(
 
Zarch said:
Logged a call with Nikon, uploaded the above NEFs and got this reply.

Thank you for your e-mail. There is a little bit of fall off at the corners but it is difficult to say whether or not this is due to the wide angle being used and / or the distance from camera to subject.
With wide angle lenses there can be some softening towards the corners due to the optical nature or them and in certain situation this can be worse. The only real way of knowing what is happening is to have the lens inspected at a service centre to make sure there is nothing wrong or out of alignment. Please see the information below for this.
​
Basically, not particularly helpful or insightful.

So i've raised a returns for the service centre. They've given me a free post label and its gone in the post today.

Just hope it get looks at under warranty. The chap from TP classifieds kindly forwarded on the receipt when he bought it (last Oct). Its from an eBay store, but UK stock/dealer and in his name, not mine. But he didn't register the lens serial no at Nikon, I have.

I just get the feeling they'll say its not covered under warranty for some reason and i'm going to get stung for a repair bill. :(
Click to expand...
Unfortunately I don't think they'll cover it under warranty as it's not transferable AFAIK, and the contract is between the original purchaser and them. Fingers crossed they don't cross reference the name on the receipt with the name of the person who registered the lens, ie you.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top