Canon 70-200 F2.8 IS does pic look ok

cruncher75

cruncher75

Messages
669
Name
Tony
Edit My Images
Yes
Hi first time ive ever owned one of these lenses I've had the f4 version so what im asking is does this picture look ok to you guys as I thought this lens was supposed to be really sharp just when I crop in its blurry I did take It hand held the cropped pic I did some editing to it taking with a 50D
View attachment 27517 View attachment 27518
 
Last edited:
The roofing felt is quite sharp... the cat is a tad soft but not completely out-of-focus... I'd guess that the focal plane falls just behind the cat.

I think its a focus issue more than a lens issue. Wide open at 200mm, you'll have quite a shallow depth of field and will have to nail focus.

Assuming this was AF, it probably picked up on the fine contrast of the roof texture. Take some test shots locked to the centre point with that directly on your subject and check that it gets accurate focus.
 
I'd say operator error - you've missed the focus. The lens is lovely and crisp , just not on the cat
 
Open it up in Canon DPP and see where the focus point is
 
I would try some tests, get it on a tripod and pick a fixed object that contrasts its surroundings and try several times to see if it is consistently missing focus.
Some people don't like them but google back or front focus test and there are test sheets you can print out.
 
Last edited:
The focus points/sensor extend quite a way beyond the square in the camera viewfinder.

If the area under the square is a bit lacking in detail or contrast the camera will often seem to have picked a focus point not of your chosing.

Have a look in the relavent camera borchure and normally there is a diagram of the focus sensor and the extent of the focus points.

Have a look at this

http://blogs.stonesteps.ca/showpost.aspx?pid=54

HTH

David
 
Last edited:
cruncher75 said:
So why would the cat not be crisp as I'm sure I foucsed on the cats nose
Click to expand...

I'd say that you missed the cats nose and put the focus point just behind it - hence why the cat isnt crisp.

Try a test shot on a brickwall paralell to the lens
 
cruncher75 said:
So why would the cat not be crisp as I'm sure I foucsed on the cats nose
Click to expand...

I'd say that you missed the cats nose and put the focus point just behind it - hence why the cat isnt crisp.

Try a test shot on a brickwall paralell to the lens
 
In that case definitely do some controlled testing as I said above.

Are you sure you didnt accidentally focus lock on the shed and then move back across to the cat? That would cause the focal point in DPP to show the cats face as lock rather than the shed it actually locked onto.
 
Last edited:
Also, you would probably get more response by posting in the equipment thread as a technical issue rather than photo critique
A mod may move it for you.
 
The mk1 version of the 70-200 Canon is not particularly known for sharpness at 2.8 but looks like it might have slightly back focused in that image. Test the lens in a controlled environment on a tripod and see what results you get.
 
Thanks took some of my kids playing in the pool and a few of them are blurry the end of the lens did steam up so maybe that was the course of them I have messed about a bit with the micro adjustment and done the brick wall shoot still some seem blurry I have to tripod so camera was rested on a bench could my camera be the problem
 
lot of ifs and buts there, you need to sit it on a tripod to eliminate camera shake/movement then try some test shots.
I had a similar issue a while back, I sat 3 tins of beans on the garden path next to each other in the horizontal plane but with about 8" between them in vertical depth if you know what I mean. I locked on the middle one but the resulting images consistently showed a back focus issue. It was a more real life test that I did along with the focus charts like the one in the link below.

http://regex.info/blog/photo-tech/focus-chart

This is the best image I could find to try and show what I did, space them apart a bit more and lock to a middle one-

http://www.joepylephotography.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/IMG_6958.jpg
 
Last edited:
Chr1stof said:
lot of ifs and buts there, you need to sit it on a tripod to eliminate camera shake/movement then try some test shots.
I had a similar issue a while back, I sat 3 tins of beans on the garden path next to each other in the horizontal plane but with about 8" between them in vertical depth if you know what I mean. I locked on the middle one but the resulting images consistently showed a back focus issue. It was a more real life test that I did along with the focus charts like the one in the link below.

http://regex.info/blog/photo-tech/focus-chart

This is the best image I could find to try and show what I did, space them apart a bit more and lock to a middle one-

http://www.joepylephotography.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/IMG_6958.jpg
Click to expand...
Thx will give it ago tomorrow I did use the focus chart but not sure I was doing it right
 
F/1.4 said:
The mk1 version of the 70-200 Canon is not particularly known for sharpness at 2.8 but looks like it might have slightly back focused in that image. Test the lens in a controlled environment on a tripod and see what results you get.
Click to expand...

I have a non IS Mk1 version of this lens and totally disagree with what you have quoted. The sharpness wide open is very good. This was the go to lens
before the Mk2 and didn't stop being sharp when the Mk2 came along
 
DerekL said:
I have a non IS Mk1 version of this lens and totally disagree with what you have quoted. The sharpness wide open is very good. This was the go to lens
before the Mk2 and didn't stop being sharp when the Mk2 came along
Click to expand...

I had one from mpb and had to send it back as for me it wasn't very good at f/2.8. I had a look on a few forums, fredmirada etc and alot of people said the same thing i.e that it wasn't very impressive at 2.8. Maybe I had a bad copy but out of all the 70-200 lenses I owned (nikon VR2/Tamron VC/Sigma OS) it was worse than them all. Even a Nikon 80-200 push pull lens I had
 
Get some tins and try as above. Tripod for stability as at 2.8 you don't need to move much to affect the results. Shutter speed fast enough to remove camera shake. IS off.

Don't put the tins too close together as the AF point is bigger than the square and you need to make sure it doesn't target a different can. Make sure they are all the same distance from each other. Ie front edge is same distance from front edge of next can. Test at 25-50 times focal length. I generally use 25x and find that ok.

To get an accurate idea of where the lens focuses needs some repeatability. Remove as many variables as you can and then you will have a better idea which direction to go.
 
This^^^

The test shots you have put up don't really show much. The test shot needs to be unprocessed, square on all nice and symmetrical etc, bit closer and probably portrait.
 
The target must be flat and square to the camera, large enough for there to be no possibility of the AF picking up on anything else. A tripod will ensure the camera/distance doesn't move. Don't go too close, or you may get small errors at normal focusing distances. Optimum AF is often a slight compromise - the best overall setting at different ends of the zoom range and focusing distance. For a 70-200, suggest framing up at something like the width of three cereal boxes.

 
Last edited:
You just needs things that you can easily see whether or not they are in focus. Try again with the focus chart but line it up square?
The point is that you lock onto something obvious and inspect the the area around it in the image to see if there is a discrepancy between what the AF locked onto and what is actually in focus. In your cat image it looks like you inadvertently AF locked the shed then moved back to the cat (explaining why the AF dot was on the cats nose in DPP) or your lens/body has a focus issue.
 
Chr1stof said:
You just needs things that you can easily see whether or not they are in focus. Try again with the focus chart but line it up square?
The point is that you lock onto something obvious and inspect the the area around it in the image to see if there is a discrepancy between what the AF locked onto and what is actually in focus. In your cat image it looks like you inadvertently AF locked the shed then moved back to the cat (explaining why the AF dot was on the cats nose in DPP) or your lens/body has a focus issue.
Click to expand...
ok thx will try before work tomorrow
 
Took it into LCE they said it's the filter I had on it as the reflection it's quite poor on it I should of tried some without it on in the first place
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top