Pages: [1]   Go Down

Author Topic: Canon 70-200 IS f/2.8 Soft? I'm new to LL  (Read 4345 times)

mwillgo

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4
Canon 70-200 IS f/2.8 Soft? I'm new to LL
« on: January 26, 2008, 04:21:59 pm »

Hi I'm new to LL I bought a Canon 70-200 IS f2.8 it seems that I'm not getting the tack sharp results that I've read in the reviews It especially soft wide open and croped to 100% and only a little better at f/4 I've heard there are some bad copies what is considered acceptable. thanks Mike
Logged

Eldor

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 68
    • http://www.gemst.com/photos
Canon 70-200 IS f/2.8 Soft? I'm new to LL
« Reply #1 on: January 26, 2008, 07:26:11 pm »

Quote
Hi I'm new to LL I bought a Canon 70-200 IS f2.8 it seems that I'm not getting the tack sharp results that I've read in the reviews It especially soft wide open and croped to 100% and only a little better at f/4 I've heard there are some bad copies what is considered acceptable. thanks Mike
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=169819\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

My 70-200 f2.8L IS is tack sharp and I just about always shoot it wide-open.  I love the shallow DOF and the beautiful bokeh.

What camera are you using and are you shooting RAW or JPG?  What experience do you have?  (The reason I ask is that a few years ago when I moved from digital point-and-shoot cameras to DSLR's and started shooting RAW, I was disappointed and surprised to find my images seemed soft.  I needed to learn how to properly process the images before I was happy.)

It is possible of course that you've got a bad copy of the lens.

Good luck...
Logged

Ian_Donald

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 25
    • http://www.iandonald.com
Canon 70-200 IS f/2.8 Soft? I'm new to LL
« Reply #2 on: January 26, 2008, 07:35:54 pm »

Quote
Hi I'm new to LL I bought a Canon 70-200 IS f2.8 it seems that I'm not getting the tack sharp results that I've read in the reviews It especially soft wide open and croped to 100% and only a little better at f/4 I've heard there are some bad copies what is considered acceptable. thanks Mike
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=169819\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


Mike,

To get a useful response to your question you will need to provide more specific information.

In theory you can get a bad example of anything but I have never had a "soft" version of any variant of Canon's EF 70-200L - they are all nice sharp lenses.

Ian
Logged

mwillgo

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4
Canon 70-200 IS f/2.8 Soft? I'm new to LL
« Reply #3 on: January 26, 2008, 08:05:49 pm »

Quote
My 70-200 f2.8L IS is tack sharp and I just about always shoot it wide-open.  I love the shallow DOF and the beautiful bokeh.

What camera are you using and are you shooting RAW or JPG?  What experience do you have?  (The reason I ask is that a few years ago when I moved from digital point-and-shoot cameras to DSLR's and started shooting RAW, I was disappointed and surprised to find my images seemed soft.  I needed to learn how to properly process the images before I was happy.)

It is possible of course that you've got a bad copy of the lens.

Good luck...
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=169846\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I have a Canon 5D always shoot RAW I have excellent results with my 24-105, I've been shooting DSLR for about 2 years, I use Canons DPP to process/convert then use PS for post work. Maybe I need to work more with this lens as I was shooting birds in early morning light most soft. A basketball game last night with similar results
Logged

fnagy

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 35
    • www.franknagyphotography.com
Canon 70-200 IS f/2.8 Soft? I'm new to LL
« Reply #4 on: January 26, 2008, 08:37:22 pm »

Quote
I have a Canon 5D always shoot RAW I have excellent results with my 24-105, I've been shooting DSLR for about 2 years, I use Canons DPP to process/convert then use PS for post work. Maybe I need to work more with this lens as I was shooting birds in early morning light most soft. A basketball game last night with similar results
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=169862\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Just a thought? Being a constant and very satisfied user of this lens now, I had problems at first with what I perceived as a lens softness, but soon realized (actually my arms and shoulder screamed it!) that this is a very heavy combo (+ 1Ds MkII) compared to my previous Fuji + Nikon glass (+ Tamron).  I had to modify the way I shot, make sure of better stability and a steadier hand, arms close and tight (not chicken winged).  You are coming from a light 24-105 lens to a honkin big boy!  Were you paying attention to shutter speed? I have shot ball games, needed to shoot 2.8 to get 1/250 (and many soft ones) which I think is bare min., prefer 1/500 + for action (don't get as many soft ones, most are tack sharp.  IS is appreciated and useful, but when the lens is moving more than the IS is capable of correcting strange things happen.

I think your idea of working a bit more and experimenting with this lens puts you on the right path, use a tripod for some reference shots and check against it.  If you still think it's soft, go to where you bought it and maybe get an exchange, you just might have an odd wonky one.
Logged
Love & Peace
Frank

Jonathan Wienke

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5829
    • http://visual-vacations.com/
Canon 70-200 IS f/2.8 Soft? I'm new to LL
« Reply #5 on: January 26, 2008, 08:40:30 pm »

It would be helpful if you could post an example of what you find objectionable.
Logged

mwillgo

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4
Canon 70-200 IS f/2.8 Soft? I'm new to LL
« Reply #6 on: January 27, 2008, 02:29:53 pm »

Quote
It would be helpful if you could post an example of what you find objectionable.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=169868\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Thank You for you comments and suggestions, I have found again that it is not the equipment, I tried some test shots at wide open with a shutter speed in the 1/500 range and found the tack sharp results that I'm looking for. My basketball shoot was in a community gym with marginal lighting at best I was using 1250 and 1600 ISO, but many speed ratings were at focal length, some less. Next time I will use 1600 and 3200 ISO and work my new plugin Noise Ninja
Logged
Pages: [1]   Go Up