I bought a 70-200 2.8 a few days ago and so far, I am not really impressed.
I am working mostly at 200mm wide open for my tests at iso200 or 400 and the shutter is always over 200. The problem arise when when I look at the picture at 100%. The image isnt as sharp as I would have expected. Maybe its because I am used to my 50mm 1.8 but still.. I am wondering if I have a defect or if its normal and simply require some PS work.
So could anyone with that zoom post an unprocessed picture taken at 200mm iso 200 of an item with some detail (christmast tree, cat, etc...) so I could do some comparison with my results?
I always shoot raw, mostly because I always increase the exposure and play a bit with the shadow and contrast. So JPEG arent the most conveniant. Where are these contrast and sharpness settings you talk about? Havent seen them on the camera...
As for the USM, I applied one (setting: 100, radius 3, threshold 2) afterward (even 2 times in a row) and the picture looks ok. But I was expecting better performance right off the camera.
Are you shooting handheld? You did not mention it. 1/200 sec could be a bit slow for 200mm especially for a x1.6 camera. See if the sharpness improves at shorter exposures.
On the left its the original picture straight from the camera, then a USM with 100-3-2 and the last one is with the USM a second time (looks better and a single one when you look at the whole picture)
original pic very soft-this lens is sick sharp on any body...methinks a steadier
hand or faster shutter speed will improve your images. Pics should be sharp right out of the camera with no PP.
forgot to mention, on the previous pic, the shutter speed was 1/800. I know that I need to improve my skill holding the camera with such a heavy lens but still, 1/800 seems fast enough to stop any slight shaking, no?
Put this lens on a tripod, and shoot a few shots with mirror lock-up. If the shots are sharp then the lens is fine, and the shooter needs adjusting. If the shots are still blurry, the lens may need adjusting. ;-)
As you use longer lenses the slightest bit of camera shake, can make your shots look blurry. IS helps, but it's not magic.
This lens is usually sharp and images will pop from the page. If you do see it needs calibrating, Canon usually does a good job with their calibrations.
It is a really sharp zoom lens.You must have sharp images even wide open.Test it in real conditions.Go to a near by park and start shooting(make sure that the light is good).
Put this lens on a tripod, and shoot a few shots with mirror lock-up. If the shots are sharp then the lens is fine.
I could't agree more. I've done this myself many times getting a new lens. You go out and the shots are not "perfect" and I go home and do a battery of tests and low and behold the lenses are just fine. I hear all of these lens calibration horror stories on the forums and it gets me all paranoid. Is my copy sharp? Maybe my copy sucks. I wonder what good copy looks like, etc.etc. Gaaaa... Even the difference between a shot on a tripod with or without mirror lockup can make enough of a difference to make the shot look "soft". So I'd do some more controlled testing before giving up on it.
James,
Nice kitty. As some FMers are still on dial-up, we usually limit our picture to 800 pixel as the longer dimension, and keep the file size as small as possible.
