NIKON D3100 - Dissapointing

dbov22

dbov22

dbov22

Associate
Joined
27 Jan 2011
Posts
262
Location
Washington
I too have bought the Nikon d3100 with kit lens and also been using a Tamron 18 - 200 lens, can't say i'm impressed at all with the images, even low ISO (100) and outdoor sunny shots with/without tripod and/or VR the images are nearly always over exposed and at 100% when looking at images on computer they are very smooth and not very sharp at all....i've had oppinions from other people who know their stuff and i'm getting better images from a 4 year old Pentax entry level DSLR. I've contacted NIKON who want some sample pics.

It also does not have an 'auto bracketing' facility which is quite annoying!

Bit dissapointed really for the money I paid, might as well have kept my Ricoh GX100

Anyone else finding it to be not all it's cracked up to be??
 
i'll stick some examples up, no - AF is on auto, i've also tried using manual, the images that are in focus are still not very sharp, just quite smooth etc
 
is there no way of putting images straight onto here? should I be signing up to online picture hosting, any recommendations appreciated!
 
That's a shame, it gets a decent enough write up, and you should be getting some decent pics. I know with my D5000 it took a few weeks to iron out the settings and it was only really when I played with the Active D Lighting menu that things really improved - not sure if that is a feature of the D3100 - might be worth having a look though?
 
google 'DSLR focus test' and download and print out the target, set up and photograph the target as per the instructions and you should find out if its front or back focusing , it also could be the fact that usually images straight out of the camera need a little sharpening for screen or print.

Regards Simon
 
It is ether a user problem or faulty hardware because I know form first hand experience the picture quality is great.


Do you notice a difference between the 2 lenses?

Do you shoot jpeg or RAW?
If jpeg, what are the camera control settings?


If you come from P&S type cameras then you will find the default jpeg output much softer and less contrasty on a DSLR, especially a Nikon, this is by design. Normally it is good to push up the sharpness and contrast in the camera if you want want good jpegs, but best is to shoot raw and sharpen later.

Also don't forget the DoF will be much shallow on a DSLR, so even at 5.6 you will get a fairly narrow focus plane at close distances compared to the small sensored cameras that offer massive DoF.

Try using Liveview for focus, it is slow but accurate and independent of the phase detection system.
 
Last edited:
The body won't be causing a problem like that without a fault - if all is working fine then the sensor will never be causing softness in images - it takes one hell of a lens to out-resolve a 14.2 mp crop sensor, at which point your images definitely won't be "soft" anyway.

Check if the 18-200 is faulty, if the d3100 is proven to be fine
 
check this one, although photobucket's '100%' isn't the real 100%

http://i1192.photobucket.com/albums/aa327/dbov22/DSC_0004.jpg

I'm shooting in RAW, I did go from a p&s camera, however it was a Ricoh GX100 with manual settings options so I got used to using that before hand. I am not an expert with photography so got someone to check it whio knows their stuff in detail etc, he described it as 'naff' also my g/f used it to photograph some wedding ideas inside and outside with/out flash etc on auto mode, the pictures were terrible, completely over exposed and the focus was terrible....
 
Last edited:
That photo looks fine to me.

Are you post-processing the RAW shots? No saturation, contrast or sharpness is applied in-camera with RAW unlike when you shoot in JPEG mode (whether that be on a compact or DSLR).
There is also a chance you are confusing softness with depth of field. It's worth reading up on this aspect of photography if you haven't already.

Try Adobe Lightroom for processing, it has a 30 day trial.
 
Last edited:
Again, I can't see anything massively wrong there. Any softness (the wall) is due to depth of field, stick it in aperture priority and f/11 then shoot a few frames to see if you prefer that. It doesn't look terrible though.

I do feel that newer Nikon's (D3100 and D7000) tend to overexpose slightly, when I shot with the D7000 I did feel like you could semi permanently dial in a stop of negative exposure comp.

You really need to post more shots with settings - so far I can't see anything wrong. If anything I'd say it's likely to be the lens if they are soft, the resolution of DX sensors is starting to push the resolving power of lesser glass, certainly on the D7000 you need the fancier budget glass like the 16-85 to out-resolve the sensor...I suspect that's partly true here too...
 
bigredshark said:
Again, I can't see anything massively wrong there. Any softness (the wall) is due to depth of field, stick it in aperture priority and f/11 then shoot a few frames to see if you prefer that. It doesn't look terrible though.
Click to expand...

Funny enough that was the first thing I looked at when the image was posted and it was taken at f/11.
However since it's a fairly wide angle shot (18mm) I'm guessing the camera was pretty close to the subject, meaning a narrower depth of field, so the aperture would need to be even higher to get the wall in focus.
 
i will get some more pics up, just trying to find good bad examples, i understand the whole f number comments, however, i'm talking about the very point at which the image is focused, i love the whole soft wall thing etc, i'm talking about when the image is true 100% size they are not too clever at all, very noisey at ISO 100 etc, does image shack allow to upload the photos to be viewed at true 100%? photobucket's 100% is nowhere near 100%...
 
If your images are like that hose adaptor then your images are fine. I think you must be looking at end products to justify your camera is wrong. The importance of post production is a massive essential factor with digital images.

A dslr isn't going to equal amazing images straight out of the thing.

Anyway post up some more images to see if you do have a problem.
 
What sort of photo were you expecting? Looks perfectly acceptable to me, considering you're using a fairly cheapo do-it-all uberzoom.

If you've shot in RAW then bear in mind you need to sharpen in post-processing, but even that image there looks perfectly acceptable.

If you're just not happy with images, look at yourself as a photographer and the lenses as the most likely culprits.
 
I can only agree that from the above picture the camera is not an issue.
Perhaps post more and we can nail this.


The other thing no one has mentioned is make sure you use fast enough shutter speed.
The rule of thumb is 1/ effective focal length. So for the 200mm of the super-zoom you will want an exposure of at least 1/300s. If you have shaky hands then 1/500th will be better, if you are a sharp shooter then you can reduce this, and maybe 1/100th would even work (unlikely on a small light camera and lens).

VR can also cause problems. If VR is switched on and your shooting more than about 1/500th second VR may soften images (Thom Hogan has an excellent article on this).
VR will not work 100%, it is a probability thing, just increases your odds.


If you photogaph moving subjects VR will make no difference, and you will need a fast enough shutter speed.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom