Nikkor 55-300dx and 28-300 fx comparison. One aspect anyway.

[Texas Dave]

I'm sure this may seem rather elemetary to most here but this helps me understand my lens a little better each time I break off onto a tangent like this.

I was loaned a nikkor 28-300 fx this weekend and did a little comparing to my 55-300 dx. Among the various comparisons I did, the moon shot kind of struck me as odd. I honestly was thinking that the 28-300 was going to be allot sharper. I took both shots within a minute of each other.

Exif for both is.
f5.6
1/125
ISO 100
@ 300 mm

Both shots with mirror up and remote trigger on my nikon d7100.

Those are clouds moving by on the second shot.

[Texas Dave]

On another note.

What should I have done in order to get the moon AND the clouds in focus. Is this a results of having my d7100 set to spot metering?

[Manfred M]

On another note.

What should I have done in order to get the moon AND the clouds in focus. Is this a results of having my d7100 set to spot metering?

So far as your camera / lens are concerned, both the moon and clouds are "at infinity", so both should be in focus when you take the shot. In focus and metering mode are totally independent of each other and there should be no effect.

I suspect that the real issue (assuming that the focus is off) is that your camera did not lock focus properly. When doing night shots, I suggest that you find something at ∞ and then disconnect your camera's autofocus (both at the lens and camera body), being careful not to nudge either your zoom or focus ring. I assume that you are racked out to the 300mm focal length on both shots. If worried, taping down the focus and zoom rings with a bit of gaffers tape could help.

As for exposure, this is the type of shot I would shoot on manual, using the histogram to guide me as to a proper exposure. Bracket your shots until you get the proper exposure. Using your built-in meter is not going to be a reliable and repeatable way of getting the exposure right (even when you use exposure compensation), as your camera is going to try to hit that 18% neutral gray.

[Manfred M]

I'm sure this may seem rather elemetary to most here but this helps me understand my lens a little better each time I break off onto a tangent like this.

I was loaned a nikkor 28-300 fx this weekend and did a little comparing to my 55-300 dx. Among the various comparisons I did, the moon shot kind of struck me as odd. I honestly was thinking that the 28-300 was going to be allot sharper. I took both shots within a minute of each other.

Exif for both is.
f5.6
1/125
ISO 100
@ 300 mm

Both shots with mirror up and remote trigger on my nikon d7100.

Those are clouds moving by on the second shot.

Shots in the summer with lots of particulate matter and water vapour in the air means that you will get some softening of your shot, regardless. There is obviously a fair bit of water vapour in the air, and just because you can't see it other than with the clouds, it doesn't mean it's not there interfering with your shot. I personally would have expected roughly the same performance out of both lenses; based on my experiences with the 55-200mm and 18-200mm.

The 28-300mm lens designers had to trade off image quality considerations to get the extended zoom range, whereas while this is true to a lesser extent for the 55-300mm. Don't forget that you are shooting both lenses wide open, so at a point where their performance is relatively weak.

Want clearer shots; head to the mountains in the winter.

[krispix]

Hi Dave,

This is a really tricky one. The Moon does not emit any light, but reflects the sunlight incident on it. Therefore exposures tend to be within a few stops of daylight. However, the night sky (clouds etc.) are not getting anything like this. The dynamic range of your sensor (the zone of acceptable exposure across the image) is nothing like wide enough to cope with such a diversity. Photoshop (or the like) will not fix this with 'dodging' & 'burning' because the Moon is completely blown and has no detail to burn. Similarly, the clouds may get a bit of life in them by dodging, it won't be enough to salvage the effect.

To be honest, the only solution for a shot like this is to take two exposures; One for the Moon and another for the clouds then merge the two in post-production processing. I wouldn't be surprised to see something like 15 stops between the two. If the clouds will stay still long enough, you could do about 5 exposures across the range and do a proper HDR.

As for the focus issue, Manfred has that covered nicely.