70-200 F4 IS bad batch

Moderated by: guardian

Visit the FM Store · Image Upload · Buy & Sell
FM Forum Rules
Canon SLRs, primes, and zooms lenses reviews

FM Forums | Canon-mount SLRs | Join Image Upload
1 2

4 5 6 end

Daan B
Offline
Image Upload: Off

p.3 #1 · 70-200 F4 IS bad batch

yauyi wrote:
I was about to send this lens back for a replacement or refund on Monday, but decided to test it in the field again, I did not even bother to try MFD at 200mm knowing it sucks anyway, but the performance in any other focal range is pretty darn good.

Color reproduction, contrast, and bokeh quality of this lens is very nice, I might just keep it and deal with the MFD problem at 200mm.

I came to the same conclusion and never regretted it for one bit. Besides the 200mm MFD "issue" this is a very fine lens

May 04, 2008 at 08:27 AM

mfurman
Offline
Buy and Sell: On

p.3 #2 · 70-200 F4 IS bad batch

mendofr:
How does this look? Does this mean I have an acceptable copy?

The only way to see how this lens performs at 200 mm and MDF is to compare 135 and 200 mm shits (both at MFD). This type of image, you included, is difficult to access but I do not find it as sharp as I would find acceptable for this zoom, at 135 mm. It is probably more typical for 200 mm and MFD.

May 04, 2008 at 09:02 AM

mfurman
Offline
Buy and Sell: On

p.3 #3 · 70-200 F4 IS bad batch

To yauyi:

I looked at your tests and I think that your 100-400 f/4.5-5.6 L IS is very good

My 70-200 f/4.0 L IS with 1.4x TC and 8 feet was much sharper than my 100-400

May 04, 2008 at 09:09 AM

mendofr
Online
Image Upload: Off

p.3 #4 · 70-200 F4 IS bad batch

I will do another test. MFD 135 & 200

May 04, 2008 at 05:01 PM

mendofr
Online
Image Upload: Off

p.3 #5 · 70-200 F4 IS bad batch

To yauyi:

Looked at your pictures and I the shootout between 70-200 and 100-400 look the same to me. I guess I'm not much help. : )

May 04, 2008 at 05:26 PM

mendofr
Online
Image Upload: Off

p.3 #6 · 70-200 F4 IS bad batch

Here's another simple test I did for my lens.

Focused on the '0' of '70'.

200mm, mfd, f4, 1/320, spot, no pp.
This image is copyrighted by the owner

Cropped.

135mm, mfd, f4, 1/400, spot, no pp

This image is copyrighted by the owner

cropped.

Do the pictures have acceptable sharpness for this lens? Do I need to send this to Canon? Thanks for your help again.

Edited on May 04, 2008 at 05:59 PM

May 04, 2008 at 05:31 PM

yauyi
Offline
Image Upload: On

p.3 #7 · 70-200 F4 IS bad batch

mfurman wrote:
To yauyi:

I looked at your tests and I think that your 100-400 f/4.5-5.6 L IS is very good

My 70-200 f/4.0 L IS with 1.4x TC and 8 feet was much sharper than my 100-400

mendofr wrote:
To yauyi:

Looked at your pictures and I the shootout between 70-200 and 100-400 look the same to me. I guess I'm not much help. : )

In that series of test when subject was 9ft away, here is what I found:

At 135mm, my 100-400 did not catch up in sharpness till f/8.0.

At 200mm, no matter which f-stop the 70-200 simply can not touch 100-400.

But the 70-200 has better bokeh, and I think it has a tiny bit more punch in color reproduction than the 100-400 as well. It's hard to pick which is a better lens, they both complimented each other very well.

May 04, 2008 at 07:13 PM

mendofr
Online
Image Upload: Off

p.3 #8 · 70-200 F4 IS bad batch

To yauyi:

So is this the 70-200 that you were complaining about initially? Are you now keeping your lens?

May 04, 2008 at 07:26 PM

mfurman
Offline
Buy and Sell: On

p.3 #9 · 70-200 F4 IS bad batch

mendofr:
Do the pictures have acceptable sharpness for this lens? Do I need to send this to Canon? Thanks for your help again.

I think that your 200 mm at MFD is fine and that 135 mm could have been somewhat better. I have to admit that I have a better feel if the lens is sharp when I am testing myself.

Have a look at some of my tests (for comparison):

http://mfurman.smugmug.com/Photography

in folder "Canon EF 70-200 f/4.0 L IS - tests"

Click on "photo info" to see what focal length etc, it was.

By the way, all the pictures here:

http://mfurman.smugmug.com/gallery/2897322_BdwBF#179799256_bfFyu

were taken with 70-200 f/4.0 L IS

Edited by mfurman on May 04, 2008 at 04:20 PM GMT

Edited on May 04, 2008 at 09:20 PM

May 04, 2008 at 07:56 PM

mfurman
Offline
Buy and Sell: On

p.3 #10 · 70-200 F4 IS bad batch

yauyi:
It's hard to pick which is a better lens

It was easy for me

You either have an outstanding 100-400 or not so good (at 200 mm) 70-200 f/4.0 L IS

Edited by mfurman on May 04, 2008 at 04:32 PM GMT

Edited on May 04, 2008 at 09:32 PM

May 04, 2008 at 07:59 PM

yauyi
Offline
Image Upload: On

p.3 #11 · 70-200 F4 IS bad batch

mendofr wrote:
To yauyi:

So is this the 70-200 that you were complaining about initially? Are you now keeping your lens?

Yup this is the same lens that I was complaining about the MFD softness at 200mm, I probably would keep this lens knowing that it is pretty good from 70 to about 180mm. I bought this lens for outdoor portraiture and candid so I think it's going to do well for my need, I guess I can think of it this way...when I wanted to do some dreamy portraiture all i needed to do is get within the MFD range, zoom in to 200mm and POW....instant soft focus effect!!

mfurman wrote:
yauyi:
It's hard to pick which is a better lens

It was easy for me

You either have outstanding 100-400 or not so good (at 200 mm) 70-200 f/4.0 L IS

I think it's both, my 100-400 is excellent and the 70-200 4 IS sucks at 200mm.

Edited by yauyi on May 04, 2008 at 08:45 PM GMT

Edited on May 04, 2008 at 08:45 PM

May 04, 2008 at 08:37 PM

mendofr
Online
Image Upload: Off

p.3 #12 · 70-200 F4 IS bad batch

To: mfurman

Thanks for your help. Your pictures all look sharp to me with good colors. In my case, maybe it's the photographer who I need to send to canon factory for service. Hehe. I may just hang on to my lens and I guess just keep working with canon service to have it tweaked until I am satisfied with the results.

May 04, 2008 at 08:41 PM

yauyi
Offline
Image Upload: On

p.3 #13 · 70-200 F4 IS bad batch

mendofr wrote:
To: mfurman

Thanks for your help. Your pictures all look sharp to me with good colors. In my case, maybe it's the photographer who I need to send to canon factory for service. Hehe. I may just hang on to my lens and I guess just keep working with canon service to have it tweaked until I am satisfied with the results.

at 135mm yours appear to be a bit soft to me, did you use tripod and MLU for those shots? also try liveview and see if there is any improvement at all....at 200mm it looks just like mine.

Edited on May 04, 2008 at 08:55 PM

May 04, 2008 at 08:54 PM

Conner999
Offline
Image Upload: On

p.3 #14 · 70-200 F4 IS bad batch

No bad batch. the 70-200/4 IS, despite it's strengths is known for lousy performance at longer FLs at or near MFD. In short, as you zoom many have to start stepping back. Kinda defeats the purpose of having the zoom in the first place.

If you get a good search here you'll see many complaints of issue. IIRC tests showed that as you get past the 100mm mark or so, getting that famous 70-200/4 IS sharpness required a MFD of 10M or so.

Edited on May 04, 2008 at 09:13 PM

May 04, 2008 at 09:11 PM

mendofr
Online
Image Upload: Off

p.3 #15 · 70-200 F4 IS bad batch

Yep. I used a tripod for all shots. That's why I'm a bit disappointed with the lens I have now because I see some softness in my pics. Maybe it's just me ( the photographer). I have high expectations from this lens as I used to have a super sharp copy. I'm not sure what to do with this lens. If I return it, there's really no guarantee that I will get a good copy. The store may ban me for returning too many lenses : ). I may just send it to canon factory again for some more adjustments.

May 04, 2008 at 09:16 PM

Daan B
Offline
Image Upload: Off

p.3 #16 · 70-200 F4 IS bad batch

mendofr wrote:
Yep. I used a tripod for all shots. That's why I'm a bit disappointed with the lens I have now because I see some softness in my pics. Maybe it's just me ( the photographer). I have high expectations from this lens as I used to have a super sharp copy. I'm not sure what to do with this lens. If I return it, there's really no guarantee that I will get a good copy. The store may ban me for returning too many lenses : ). I may just send it to canon factory again for some more adjustments.

I agree it does look a bit soft to me at 135mm also. Mine is sharp at 135mm MFD.

To rule out possible AF problems do some tests by focusing manually. If you have Live View use it. If you get better results this way the AF may need some tuning. Sent it in. If you don't get any better results, well than this may be all there is. In that case return it if you are unhappy with it.

Edited on May 04, 2008 at 09:23 PM

May 04, 2008 at 09:21 PM

mfurman
Offline
Buy and Sell: On

p.3 #17 · 70-200 F4 IS bad batch

mendofr:
Thanks for your help. Your pictures all look sharp to me with good colors.

My most recent copy of 70-200 f/4.0 L IS was very good (prime sharpness and good color) at 135 mm and up to 160 mm if I wanted to be at MFD.
All the pictures in that folder were taken with having that restriction in mind. After my initial tests (and returning one copy), I never used this zoom at focusing distance < 3 m (9-10 feet) when at 200 mm.

I think that the the strength of this lens is an excellent IS

(I hope that you do not mind religious subject) this one is at 1/20 s

http://mfurman.smugmug.com/gallery/1505903_ZZSK8#217005944_pfCM3-XL-LB

Edited on May 04, 2008 at 09:32 PM

May 04, 2008 at 09:29 PM

mendofr
Online
Image Upload: Off

p.3 #18 · 70-200 F4 IS bad batch

to: mfurman

It's like 3d. Wow. You are lucky to have a good copy. What is the date code of your lens?

Edited on May 04, 2008 at 10:01 PM

May 04, 2008 at 09:55 PM

mfurman
Offline
Buy and Sell: On

p.3 #19 · 70-200 F4 IS bad batch

mendofr;
What is the date code of your lens?

It is an excellent lens (with some problems, I talked about). The data code is: UV0403. I tested three copies made in the span of two months (March - April) and they were quite similar.

May 04, 2008 at 10:12 PM

RobertLynn
Offline
Buy and Sell: On

p.3 #20 · 70-200 F4 IS bad batch

mendofr wrote:
Yep. I used a tripod for all shots. That's why I'm a bit disappointed with the lens I have now because I see some softness in my pics. Maybe it's just me ( the photographer). I have high expectations from this lens as I used to have a super sharp copy. I'm not sure what to do with this lens. If I return it, there's really no guarantee that I will get a good copy. The store may ban me for returning too many lenses : ). I may just send it to canon factory again for some more adjustments.

There's no reason that store should ban you for returning a defective, or sub-par product. For the amount these lenses cost, I think it's absolutely okay for you to ditch it to get a better copy.

When I order my 70-200 2.8, if that thing even gives me an inkling it's going to be a sub-par performer, it's ass is going right back to wherever I buy it. Same with the 24-70 I'll buy to be it's friend.

May 04, 2008 at 10:17 PM

mendofr
Online
Image Upload: Off

p.3 #21 · 70-200 F4 IS bad batch

To RobertLynn:

I know what you mean but I hate returning items. I just wonder why Canon has so many quality control issues. Are nikon camera's and lenses better? I might just convert. : )

May 04, 2008 at 10:36 PM

yauyi
Offline
Image Upload: On

p.3 #22 · 70-200 F4 IS bad batch

I did a few more test to find out where the sweet spot is on this lens, if I must shoot at MFD (4ft) I would have to stay between 70 to 135mm, sharpness is excellent even at wide open within this focal range.. 6~8ft I can use only up to 160mm which is very sharp even wide open. 200mm is going to require at least 12ft to be acceptable regardless of what f-stops I used. Like someone else said, in a way it kinda defeat the purpose of having a zoom where I would have to constantly remind myself of such restriction...

85mm 1.8 + 135L prime are looking more and more attractive to me.

Edited on May 05, 2008 at 04:11 AM

May 05, 2008 at 04:08 AM

mendofr
Online
Image Upload: Off

p.3 #23 · 70-200 F4 IS bad batch

Yauyi. I'm thinking of the same. : ) But then, I have to investigate wether bad copies exist on those models as well. hehe.

May 05, 2008 at 04:52 AM

Jammy Straub
Offline
Image Upload: On

p.3 #24 · 70-200 F4 IS bad batch

yauyi wrote:

85mm 1.8 + 135L prime are looking more and more attractive to me.

You definitely won't have problems at 200mm with that combo

May 05, 2008 at 05:54 AM

RobertLynn
Offline
Buy and Sell: On

p.3 #25 · 70-200 F4 IS bad batch

It'd be interesting to see the difference of an image at 8ft 160mm, and 12ft 200mm.

would it yield the same image, or would the 200 (or even the 160) be closer?

Also, those images of the box...am I the only one that thinks they are acceptable, especially with no PP?

May 05, 2008 at 06:08 AM


FM Forums \| Canon-mount SLRs \| Join Image Upload 1 2 3 4 5 6 end