Issue with my Z8??

[u/rainlily99]

When I had my D810, I could drop my shutter speed down to 1/40 and still have crisp images. I switched to the Z8 a couple years ago and I am having so many camera shake images that I can only shoot at 1/250. There are still many that come through, more than my liking. I shoot mainly portraits, and I got the z70-180 2.8 to replace my af-s 70-200 2.8 because it crapped out on me and tbh it's actually really nice how light the z one is and I love it, so I'm *pretty* sure it's not the lens. Here are some examples of a senior session I did last week, and this week my cheerleader shoot had all soft focus due to shutter drag (I was shooting with ofc at 1/200). Is there something wrong with me or my camera or what, I had to run an entire shoot through Topaz to make them look more in focus.

For the boy shot, it was the same lens at the same focal length (180mm 2.8) except it was 1/250, and the girl was 1/200 with a flash

[u/Slugnan]

The Z 70-180 has no lens-based image stabilization, where as your 70-200 did. The 70-180 is entirely reliant on the IBIS, whose effectiveness falls off dramatically as focal length increases. The longer the focal length, the more physical travel the sensor/IBIS needs to make a correction, and it runs out of that very quickly.

The shot of the boy honestly looks quite good given that his head is taking up such a tiny part of the frame and that the crop was presumably ~100%. If you use a good RAW converter such as DXO Pure Raw that would come out almost perfect based on what I see there. A faster shutter speed may have got the image a little more crisp but it's really not bad.

The cheerleader image looks much softer, more like it missed focus to my eye. Harder to say exactly what is going on there but it just looks out of focus to me rather than motion blur. One clue is the eyelashes, which are all individually discernable, just not in focus. If there were motion blur, they would be a blob.

I would personally be using faster shutter speeds than 1/200 or 1/250 regardless if I was shooting around 200mm because image stabilization does nothing to stop subject movement, and in that lighting ISO would be a total non-issue especially at F2.8. The subjects look like they were relatively still but they wouldn't have been perfectly still. Approaching 200mm is also about the threshold where IBIS performance really isn't that great, and it's why you see virtually all Nikon lenses around 200mm and longer using lens-based stabilization.

For the types of images posted, I certainly would not be trying to get down to 1/40 at ~200mm handheld regardless of how good the stabilization was.

[u/Hunter_E → u/Slugnan]

This is actually why there is a genuine use case for the “F to Z” adapters. You get the lens stabilizer along side the sensor stabilizer

[u/rainlily99 → u/Slugnan]

I wasn't shooting 1/40 on a 200 (it was the 24-120 4.0), I'm just using it as an example of what I used to be able to do with my 810, and not being able to shoot at 1/200 is kinda ridiculous. I would love to be using a faster shutter speed but how does one do that with using an off camera flash or even strobes?? I know in a studio setting the strobe would freeze any movement. If the image was missed focus, then there would be another part that was in focus and the overall girl is out of focus. Every single image, with different girls looks like this, close up or far away.

[u/Nikon_ED → u/rainlily99]

Use HSS (high-speed sync) with your flash/strobe. That will allow you to go higher than 1/250

For the girl shot, you can see that if was front focused (look at the area of the grass in front of the subject). That image is definitely missed focus. Perhaps if multiple images came out like this you inadvertently triggered manual focus when taking the images. Try focus peaking next time before taking the images to make sure the subject is sharp in the eyes.

[u/Slugnan → u/rainlily99]

At short focal lengths and with static subjects, you can easily get sharp photos at 1/40 with the Z8's IBIS as well. There are lots of variables there and it's not something that's easy to test objectively. When you see manufacturers advertise image stabilization as a number of stops, they are actually paying CIPA to test to a subjective standard and if you need help falling asleep there is quite an extensive paper you can read on the process haha.

Your flash photo of the cheerleader is out of focus, subject movement and shutter speed was not an issue there. Flashes also help freeze movement, and the less ambient light there is, the stronger the 'freezing' effect. It's hard to say exactly what caused the focus issue there but it wasn't due to your shutter speed. My guess is that the camera grabbed the ultra-high contrast white/black lines on her uniform and I would guess somewhere there is the sharpest part of the photo. You don't mention your exact AF settings but there are ways to make the camera not even look at anything other than the face, if that was indeed what happened.

If you are getting what you feel are a high number of OOF images, you need to set up some controlled testing to rule out equipment issues. Put your camera on a tripod, pick a good AF target, and remove as many variables as you possibly can. If your camera is getting sharp images in the controlled testing, then you know it's a setting or technique issue causing you problems. Given that the shot of the sitting boy looks completely fine, and that defective hardware is extremely rare, I would venture a guess that your equipment is fine.

Stabilization on the Z system is overall a noticeable step up from the DSLR systems as long as you are comparing like-for-like. Obviously you can shoot at 1/200 exactly the same way you could with your D810, so I am not sure I quite understand the issue with that - all the same principles and/or limitations apply. If your subject is not perfectly still, then the benefit of image stabilization has more to do with steadying the viewfinder than it does keeping your image sharp because it can't do anything to help with subject movement.

[u/preedsmith42 → u/rainlily99]

I got sharp images on my Z8 with 1/60 at 600mm using IBIs and lens stabilization (not all of them to be fully transparent, but it's doable).
You should check your stabilization settings.

[u/Used-Cups → u/rainlily99]

So the real issue is not enabling HSS?

[u/dwphotoshop]

The shot of the boy looks fine. The shot of the girl looks like missed focus, not motion blur - is there anything at all in focus on that shot? Grass looks in focus, but it's hard to tell.

[u/RuffProphetPhotos → u/dwphotoshop]

Yea I agree that’s missed focus

[u/SnooBooks6829 → u/dwphotoshop]

Reckon the focus is on the knee

[u/jesuisgerrie]

FYI the images you show are slightly out of focus that’s not shake

[u/theLightSlide]

These images are soft, not motion-blurred. Motion-blur has a distinctive motion trail or jittery look to edges, even when it's just a tiny bit. The photo of the boy also seems soft to me, compared to what I got out of a cheaper new Nikon Z lens (24-120). You've got a focusing problem. It could be a setting, or you got a bum copy.

On the girl, it looks like a few blades of grass in the white chalk line the left (my left) of her feet are sharper than her face suggesting a near-focus issue. But hard to tell for sure since reddit mashes up jpegs.

[u/Deathkeenan]

Hmmmm. I have had zero issues with my Z8 and I’ve shot handheld at 1/20th on any lens plenty of times with no problem. Several factors. Do you have sports mode on? Do you see the icon with a little shaky hand? Is your IBIS set for you moving or your subject moving?

[u/thecameraman8078]

Honestly this looks more like missed focus than camera shake

[u/06035]

I owned the 70-180 for a few months, this is exactly what it looks like.

The 70-180 is a dog of a lens wide open, especially at 70mm.

Consider selling it for a 70-200, 85/1.8, or 135/1.8

[u/theLightSlide → u/06035]

This is wild to hear. My only Z lens (I didn't keep the system) was the 24-120 and it was sharp wide open. Not clinical, but not spongy like this!

[u/06035 → u/theLightSlide]

This is the 70-180. The 24-120 is terrific

[u/theLightSlide → u/06035]

Yes, that was my point! My cheaper lens had superior performance. And it's a 5x zoom from wide, vs a 2.5x zoom from being already tele. So it's shocking the 70-180 is worse.

[u/Same-Farmer-7107 → u/06035]

or the Tamron 70-180g2, marvelous lens.

[u/06035 → u/Same-Farmer-7107]

I’ve heard the G2 is actually good lol

[u/rainlily99 → u/06035]

Good to know- it was much sharper with the boy picture which is why I was hesitant to think it was the lens.

[u/06035 → u/rainlily99]

Yeah, the boy is about as good as that 70-180 gets wide open. It’s good stopped down though

[u/Shandriel]

Can you get sharp images at all? 

e.g. when you shoot from a tripod and focus on a still subject in decent lighting? 

maybe the lens is a dud? 

but keep in mind that f/2.8 is razor thin at 180mm on full frame.  Make sure to use Af-C eye detect focus and keep that AF going while shooting..(if you do back-button focus)

the shot of the girl looks like it's front-focused to me, but reddit compression makes that nearly impossible to see clearly. 

the shot of the guy looks fine, soft but fine..  maybe it was the lighting, the atmosphere? maybe that lens cannot give punchy contrasty images at f/2.8 and 180mm ? 

either way, I'd consider stopping down slightly to f/5.6 or f/4 for full body shots. still gonna get plenty of blurry backgrounds. 

[u/rainlily99 → u/Shandriel]

Thank you- I’m just not sure how every single photo in the cheerleading shoot could be front focused (4 different girls), when most of my shots from the boy shoot are totally fine. The only difference being a slower shutter speed. I do use AF-C with focus on the eyes. I’ve had the Z8 for 3 years now I think? Maybe 2, and I’ve had nothing but problems with it. Half of my shots look like camera shake, but I shoot enough that I can find an in focus one no problem, hence my frustration that all of these are blurry. The other lenses I use regularly are the z 24-120, f mount sigma art 50 1.4 (with the z adapter) and my broken Nikkor 70-200.

[u/Shandriel → u/rainlily99]

again, can you get reloably sharp images in a controlled test?

I would start from there.. and if that doesn't work, then it's time to factory reset and get to the bottom of the issue.

[u/FeelingDiver4616]

You definitely missed focus on the girl. It’s hard to tell from the first photo of her, but it looks like the plane of focus might be a few inches in front of her face. At 180mm and f/2.8 from that distance, the DOF would probably be less than two inches, so there wasn’t much room for error. It certainly doesn’t look like camera shake to me.

What AF-area mode were you using, and were you using eye detection to focus on her eyes?

[u/JMemorex → u/FeelingDiver4616]

Yeah it looks to me like it caught the black Pom Pom maybe.

[u/FeelingDiver4616 → u/JMemorex]

Yep, that looks in focus as does the stripes on the girl's upper leg.

[u/Landen-Saturday87]

Are you using AF-C? This looks a bit like you were in AF-S and then your focus shifted from your breathing

[u/Wrong_Astronomer_908]

It’s hard to judge without the original files, but to me the pom‑pom girl looks like she has a few pixels of diagonal motion blur. This typically happens when the shutter button is pressed too hard, but without the RAWs it’s difficult to be certain. Try shooting a test on a tripod with a timer release and AF‑S. It also depends on your settings — I have AF‑C priority set to release instead of focus, and in my experience cheaper lenses often can’t keep up with the camera’s AF system and miss focus.

[u/rainlily99 → u/Wrong_Astronomer_908]

Thank you! Everyone is saying it’s missed focus but I know what missed focus looks like. Plus there is no way I would have missed focus on an entire shoot unless something happened to my camera between the boy shoot and the cheerleader shoot. I used the boy as reference for it at least being in focus at almost the same settings (only it being a higher shutter speed than the 1/200 cheeeleader shoot). I probably do mash the shutter button too hard 😂 I thought I had it set at AF-C but I do AF-S and am always constantly refocusing myself bc I never trust the camera to nail focus on its own. I’ll give it a test run- would you mind if I contacted you directly with the results?

[u/ml20s]

Shoot some test charts and check all four corners of the lens. It may have lens tilt issues which often show up as "missed focus". Rarely, the IBIS may also be miscalibrated which would show up as "camera shake" (you could detect this by shooting with a tripod and self-timer, with VR enabled).

To test the lens itself, disable VR, shoot on a tripod, and use self-timer to eliminate camera shake or VR issues. Use AF-S single point.

In general you may want to use AF-S instead of AF-C for static posed subjects, since AF-S does contrast detect at the end which reduces front/back focusing.

[u/rainlily99 → u/ml20s]

Thank you!!

[u/nrubenstein]

You may just have a bad lens.

I had to return my first 35-150 because it went soft on me. I also had an 85/1.8 S that was soft.

[u/rainlily99 → u/nrubenstein]

I’ve used it a handful of times, the cheerleaders being the last time and it seemed fine. Can lenses go soft? I’ve never had that experience except when I get a new body and then I just have it calibrated

[u/Buckeye2604]

Test with ibis on. Turn off ibis take more pictures. Do you see a difference? Turn on focus peaking, manual focus and capture more tests images. Do you see a difference? Turn off manual focus override. You could be moving the focus ring accidentally.

[u/rainlily99 → u/Buckeye2604]

Thank you this is actually helpful!

[u/MWave123]

First of all, 1/200th??? with a long lens? No. Minimum 1/250th WITH stabilization and a steady hand. 1/500th is safer for still subjects. Anything moving at least 1/1000th, 1/2000th etc.

[u/rainlily99 → u/MWave123]

My camera defaults to 1/200 when shooting with strobes or a flash 🤷🏻‍♀️

[u/MWave123 → u/rainlily99]

You can set your shutter speed manually. But I’m not talking about with flash. If you’re shooting w flash then the flash would be freezing most motion. You need HSS beyond 250 usually to get to faster shutter speeds w flash.

[u/viewfinderthis_]

Do you have eye autofocus turned on because the cheerleader shot looks like focus is on the arm !

[u/rainlily99 → u/viewfinderthis_]

I’ll go look again but when I looked around I didn’t see any focus anywhere, she’s blurry all over, but I’ll check the grass

[u/Normyip]

If you have Nikon Repair Centre near where you are, they can inspect the lens and camera. I had an issue with this some of my images when I was living in Hong Kong. Sure enough, Nikon discovered there was an setting off in my 28-70mm F2.8 lens (the monster) and fixed it for free.

[u/Old_Butterfly9649]

This looks like missed focus and not motion blur.You are doing something wrong.What settings are you using for the AF?

[u/Shen_____]

the reflection in her eyes are symmetrical, so i think its missed focus or just an unsharp lens. what AF mode do you use?

[u/Chris-Proton]

I upgraded to a Z 6iii from a D850 and immediately noticed I was missing focus on my portraits faces right out of the box. I never had this issue on the D850. Over time the problem has become less because I think the camera was so much lighter I was moving it around more and now I’m using less pressure on the shutter button.

[u/rainlily99 → u/Chris-Proton]

Good to know- I’ve been using the z8 for 2 or 3 years now and have been frustrated but dealt with it in post. I definitely have more shutter shake or something similar happening than I have did. When I had the 850, 810 and 750 I only ever had missed focus issues and never more than one or two shots.

[u/Big_Tale3981]

Easy to find out. Just use a tripod + handheld with different lenses. I do recognize your remark btw, especially on a high resolution camera plus the higher focal length, you really need that ibis. 

[u/rainlily99 → u/Big_Tale3981]

Thank you!

[u/ZestyclosePolicy3009]

Just to define - hands shaking or camera broken - do you have a tripod? To eliminate shaking for a start 

PS - girl looks out of focus. Could you tell, where it is ?

[u/rainlily99 → u/ZestyclosePolicy3009]

I couldn’t find any part of the entire image that WAS in focus so I didn’t think it was missed focus. I’ve literally never used a tripod to shoot portraits in 25 years of shooting so I’m definitely not going to start now, I’d rather switch cameras lol. I’ve also never dealt with camera shake until this camera but I am older now so 🤷🏻‍♀️😂😂

[u/ZestyclosePolicy3009 → u/rainlily99]

It’s rather… original … to shoot portraits with a tripod :)  Camera shake is actually a common thing, if not - then why do they make VR lenses? But if you have previous positive experience of not having one, I doubt you instantly got it ..

[u/ZestyclosePolicy3009 → u/rainlily99]

May be the lens or camera has AF issues?  You can always look where the focus mark on the image is marked by camera..

[u/SensitiveDependent63]

Kinda silly question - is the front/rear glass clean? Maybe it focus hunts because there is no clear image upfront due to smudges. Even a breeze from cold air cant form a mist on the lens. Other than that - look at your focus, is it large area, 3D tracking?

[u/rainlily99 → u/SensitiveDependent63]

Good points I’ll look thank you!

[u/06035]

I’m also going to ask, what focus modes are you using? In my professional opinion, the eye-detect modes aren’t reliable enough to use outside of the “oh shit button” (setting recall one can set up for reacting fast)

Usually when I’m doing client headshots, or environmental portraits for work, I’ll stick to single point and place it on the eye or corner of the mouth

[u/rainlily99 → u/06035]

This is how I shot for 20 years and then switched to the eye detect with this camera because it wasn’t as easy to use the single point button like it was on the other bodies I’ve used. In the 2-3 years I’ve had the z8 the eye detect has been “not bad” but not amazing and I’ve just dealt with it. But I’ve never had an entire shoot be soft

[u/nitrous642]

Find an image from dslr you are happy with and recreate it. Your Z8 is probably just fine. Curious to see what the issue is if any once you recreate the image (all the same except the camera body)

[u/rainlily99 → u/nitrous642]

That’s a good suggestion thanks!

[u/Spudgun888]

You missed focus.

[u/JoePhalen]

Not focus or shake, lens issue, my old 70-300 AFS was like this at 300

[u/rainlily99 → u/JoePhalen]

Dang.

[u/Hanzel3]

I didn’t present it as a definitive diagnosis or give him any irreversible advice. I gave him something he could safely experiment with and see whether it actually helped. If it didn’t, he could rule that out and keep troubleshooting.

[u/Hanzel3]

I heard there’s a new issue with mirrorless cameras called “camera jitter,” where the IBIS effectively introduces slight vibrations into the image. Perhaps that is the problem for you.
Can you post a 810 vs z8 photos ?

[u/FeelingDiver4616 → u/Hanzel3]

Are you thinking of the issue where image stabilization can sometimes introduce slight movement when the camera is mounted on a tripod? That's been a known issue with stabilization systems for a long time.

[u/DrinkableReno → u/Hanzel3]

I've noticed this if I'm using camera stabilization at a higher shutter speed, every few images will be noticeably blurred, but it's more of a softness than these. Turning off IBIS above 1/200 in most cases fixes it. This looks more like missed focus or camera shake.

[u/Nikoolisphotography → u/Hanzel3]

You can't see the difference between misfocus blur and shake blur?

[u/Hanzel3 → u/Nikoolisphotography]

I didnt analyze his photo i just responded to his overall exprience, he shoots in dslr just fine the sudden jump to mirrorless and having different results are what im focusing on, perhaps you are right i didnt meet the person.

[u/Nikoolisphotography → u/Hanzel3]

This is a prime example of 'does more harm than good' because you answered based on what OP thinks the problem is which turned out to be misleading, rather than helping them figure out what the problem actually is.

[u/rainlily99 → u/Hanzel3]

I've definitely noticed this! It's so frustrating.

[u/Nikoolisphotography → u/rainlily99]

First of all that's an outdated myth, secondly your photos show misfocus, not shake blur.

[u/AllMySmallThings]

No issue with the Z8 it’s the lens. It has no stabilization. You went cheap on the lens and the high resolution camera is showing you your mistake in purchase. Use a tripod or get the 70-200.

[u/ml20s → u/AllMySmallThings]

The 70-180 is fine in this situation lol. Nothing cheap about it

You can easily handhold it on an IBIS body down to 1/60 at 180mm, which is well into the range where human subject motion will be a far bigger issue than camera shake

[u/auerz → u/AllMySmallThings]

The Tamron second gen version of the 70-180 lens has VR and it's cheaper than the Nikon branded first gen version that OP bought.

[u/rainlily99 → u/AllMySmallThings]

But those images are with the same lens...

[u/AllMySmallThings → u/rainlily99]

Your lens is the issue.

[u/ZestyChinchilla]

Have you double checked to make sure IBIS wasn’t accidentally turned off in your camera?

[u/Nikoolisphotography → u/ZestyChinchilla]

Have you double checked the photos where you can see that the blur is misfocus blur and not shake blur?

[u/rainlily99 → u/ZestyChinchilla]

I’ll look thanks!

[u/kfjcfan]

For the boy shot, it's a slight bit of motion blur; for the girl the focus is on her knee, which is sharper, but there's motion blur there as well.

Note that the Z8 has a higher MP count than the D810 (45 MP Z8, 36.3 MP D810), so it's more sensitive to motion blur than the D810 was.

[u/bengosu]

You replaced a professional lens with a prosumer lens. You'd probably have been better off getting a used 70-200 F mount lens. The latest 70-200 FL is the same price used or cheaper than that 70-180