If Canon have got it wrong let me know how........

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

2 end

Fred Lindsey
Offline
Image Upload: Off

p.1 #1 · If Canon have got it wrong let me know how........

I am unsure how I got results this good but the following 72 photos display the test I have done with my Canon gear today in my back yard. I think the results show the absolute potential of this gear and I think the gear I've got is absolutely insane based on these results.

What puzzled me is what I must be doing wrong as I never get results that are as sharp as this ever. In fact what sparked me to do the test was that I thought my 40D or my 70-200 needed calibrating because the results weren't what I thought they should be.

Anyways, if you have any ideas how I can get results like this I'd love to hear from you. Please use the following pictures as a simple resolution test.

All images were processed exactly the same. Exposure was compensated for on all shots and all of the final exposures were an equivalent to 6400 2.8, 3200 4.0, 1600 5.6 , 800 8.0 , 400 11.0
All images shot in RAW and then converted to TIFFs using DPP with a sharpness setting of '3'. For uploading the photos were then converted to JPEGs using a final sharpness setting of '100' in the RGB tool box.
For each focal length the images taken were at wide open, -1 stop, -2 stops. I have taken them on both cameras and all images were downrezzed(only with 40D) to 8.2MP (3504x2336).

All comments welcome, how do you think the gear is performing especially the 70-200 2.8 / 40D combo.

Sigma 10-20mm -

30D

10mm

This image is copyrighted by the owner

Full Size

Full Size

14mm

This image is copyrighted by the owner

Full Size

Full Size

17mm

This image is copyrighted by the owner

Full Size

Full Size

20mm

This image is copyrighted by the owner

Full Size

Full Size

40D

10mm

This image is copyrighted by the owner

Full Size

Full Size

14mm

This image is copyrighted by the owner

Full Size

Full Size

17mm

This image is copyrighted by the owner

Full Size

Full Size

20mm

This image is copyrighted by the owner

Full Size

Full Size

Canon EF-S 17-55mm F2.8 IS USM -

30D

17mm

This image is copyrighted by the owner

Full Size

Full Size

28mm

This image is copyrighted by the owner

Full Size

Full Size

43mm

This image is copyrighted by the owner

Full Size

Full Size

55mm

This image is copyrighted by the owner

Full Size

Full Size

40D

17mm

This image is copyrighted by the owner

[url=]Full Size

This image is copyrighted by the owner

[url=]Full Size

28mm

This image is copyrighted by the owner

[url=]Full Size

This image is copyrighted by the owner

[url=]Full Size

44mm

This image is copyrighted by the owner

[url=]Full Size

This image is copyrighted by the owner

[url=]Full Size

55mm

This image is copyrighted by the owner

[url=]Full Size

This image is copyrighted by the owner

[url=]Full Size

Canon EF 70-200 L F2.8 IS USM

30D

70mm

This image is copyrighted by the owner

Full Size

Full Size

100mm

This image is copyrighted by the owner

Full Size

Full Size

135mm

This image is copyrighted by the owner

Full Size

Full Size

200mm

This image is copyrighted by the owner

Full Size

Full Size

40D

70mm

This image is copyrighted by the owner

[url=]Full Size

This image is copyrighted by the owner

[url=]Full Size

100mm

This image is copyrighted by the owner

[url=]Full Size

This image is copyrighted by the owner

[url=]Full Size

135mm

This image is copyrighted by the owner

[url=]Full Size

This image is copyrighted by the owner

[url=]Full Size

200mm

This image is copyrighted by the owner

[url=]Full Size

This image is copyrighted by the owner

[url=]Full Size

Images being uploaded, full post should be here soonFull Size

Edited on Oct 12, 2008 at 11:13 AM · View previous versions

Oct 11, 2008 at 01:38 PM

jcolwell
Offline
Image Upload: On

p.1 #2 · If Canon have got it wrong let me know how........

Did you use a tripod for the test shots? Do you use a tripod for your normal shooting?

Oct 11, 2008 at 01:41 PM

Fred Lindsey
Offline
Image Upload: Off

p.1 #3 · If Canon have got it wrong let me know how........

I used a tripod and turned IS off but should that matter when shooting at like 1/3200th. It was more to make them align than anything else.

I suppose IS could make an effect in real world shooting but I wouldn't have thought it would be that evident. Especially when all the glass is there anyway even when its turned off.

Oct 11, 2008 at 01:53 PM

PetKal
Online
Image Upload: On

p.1 #4 · If Canon have got it wrong let me know how........

I can not offer anything to help you here because I don't even understand the problem, if there is one. However, being a dedicated brick wall photographer myself, I have enjoyed your abundant images.

Oct 11, 2008 at 08:45 PM

Zander Alberts
Offline
Image Upload: On

p.1 #5 · If Canon have got it wrong let me know how........

Is this a calibration issue?

Oct 11, 2008 at 08:55 PM

EB-1
Offline
Image Upload: Off

p.1 #6 · If Canon have got it wrong let me know how........

I don't understand the point either. Is there some problem with the AF or just a complaint about lens sharpness?

EBH

Oct 11, 2008 at 09:00 PM

AGeoJO
Offline
Image Upload: On

p.1 #7 · If Canon have got it wrong let me know how........

Wow, there are sure a lot bricks

but like quite a bit of folks here, I am not sure what the point is.

Oct 11, 2008 at 09:04 PM

jcolwell
Offline
Image Upload: On

p.1 #8 · If Canon have got it wrong let me know how........

My "take" on this post is that Fred is surprised to get really excellent results while shooting the wall, but not so good when shooting in "real life". That's why I asked about the tripod, which tends to give great results, plus working with a tripod gives you time to relax and think about what you're doing. Taking sharp handheld photos is not a trivial pursuit, even with IS and decent shutter speeds. Also, things like curvature of the plane of focus and DOF can interact in ways that provide undesirable results (for sharpness) that are not in line with the photographers expectations.

Oct 11, 2008 at 09:17 PM

Fred Lindsey
Offline
Image Upload: Off

p.1 #9 · If Canon have got it wrong let me know how........

Yeh thats basically my point. I also kinda aimed to show people the potential of the lenses if they were on the edge and to also demonstrate that even with all the Nikon rave going on at the moment Canon still have exemplary IQ.

So how should I go about getting these kind of results when not shooting with a tripod?

I by the way should say that I aim to use a tripod a lot more soon. I have at the moment a Jessops TP327, just about the cheapest tripod money can buy but will soon be upgrading to a Manfrotto system (hopefully a 458B and a 468MGRC2 if santa is in a good mood

) . Can you give me any tips on ballhead QR systems you recommend considering I use a 30D/40D and the above tested lenses on a regular basis.

Thanks everyone, I hope the post provides something as it took ages to do

Oct 11, 2008 at 09:23 PM

EB-1
Offline
Image Upload: Off

p.1 #10 · If Canon have got it wrong let me know how........

Oct 11, 2008 at 09:26 PM

jcolwell
Offline
Image Upload: On

p.1 #11 · If Canon have got it wrong let me know how........

EB - agreed.

Fred Lindsey wrote:
So how should I go about getting these kind of results when not shooting with a tripod?

f/8 and be there, with a tripod.

Seriously, Fred - shoot lots. In moderate and poor lighting conditions, use whatever you have at hand to help keep things steady, lean against a lamp post, lie down on the ground, support your elbow, etc.. Also, try not to pixel peep on shots that you didn't take for that purpose. Practice, practice and practice, and then go out again and take more photos.

Here's one I took today of a fireboat spraying a burning ship in Halifax Harbour. Handheld 600/5.6 (Mamiya 300/2.8 APO with 2xN tc) on 1DII at ISO 800 and 1/5000. It's not the sharpest knife in the drawer, but it gets the idea across.

2008 © jcolwell

Oct 11, 2008 at 09:44 PM

Fred Lindsey
Offline
Image Upload: Off

p.1 #12 · If Canon have got it wrong let me know how........

OK, heres a shot which I would have loved to be critically sharp -

This image is copyrighted by the owner

100% crop

Oct 11, 2008 at 10:03 PM

Fred Lindsey
Offline
Image Upload: Off

p.1 #13 · If Canon have got it wrong let me know how........

All Images now uploaded - full size to come soon

Oct 12, 2008 at 09:00 AM

Steve Spencer
Online
Image Upload: On

p.1 #14 · If Canon have got it wrong let me know how........

Hi Fred,

That is the type of shot that is going to benefit considerably from a tripod. I assume you were using a small aperture (f/8 or so on your cameras would probably be a good starting point), and the best light for these types of shots is typically in the early morning or just before sunset, so naturally you need a slow shutter speed. In a shot like this you also need to make sure that you don't focus too far on the mountains in the distance or you will loose focus on the near foreground. The small aperture will give you a wide area of depth of field, but you have to be careful that the foreground is in focus. Finally, the corners when using a wide angle lens (as in the crop above) are always a challenge. Only a very few, very expensive lenses have no degradation in the corners. So don't expect perfect corners at 100% crops unless you want to spend thousands of dollars. All in all, I think this is a pretty good shot and the sharpness in the 100% crop is not too bad at all. My biggest complaints about the shot would be the composition, which isn't too bad, but the creek in the valley below draws my eye and then leads it to nowhere. I hope this helps.

Oct 12, 2008 at 02:18 PM

Fred Lindsey
Offline
Image Upload: Off

p.1 #15 · If Canon have got it wrong let me know how........

The picture was shot at f16 so I can imagine there was no loss of focus. The lens I used performed flawlessy in the test. I focused on the foreground but the mountains are just the same.

Is it in my processing?

Thanks

Oct 12, 2008 at 02:26 PM

roberto1979
Offline
Image Upload: Off

p.1 #16 · If Canon have got it wrong let me know how........

Holy bandwith Batman!

Oct 12, 2008 at 03:15 PM

dcmiller
Offline
Image Upload: On

p.1 #17 · If Canon have got it wrong let me know how........

You certainly don't need a tripod to get sharp shots, unless you have shaky hands. What you're really asking is "how do I become a better photographer?".

There's no need to upload so many images. Actually none are needed.

Oct 12, 2008 at 03:24 PM

n0b0
Offline
Image Upload: Off

p.1 #18 · If Canon have got it wrong let me know how........

dcmiller wrote:
You certainly don't need a tripod to get sharp shots, unless you have shaky hands. What you're really asking is "how do I become a better photographer?".

There's no need to upload so many images. Actually none are needed.

It's also useful for people who might be thinking about getting those lenses featured here. Let them see the lens potential, so it's not as useless as you might think.

Oct 12, 2008 at 03:27 PM

Alistair Watson
Offline
Image Upload: On

p.1 #19 · If Canon have got it wrong let me know how........

roberto1979 wrote:
Holy bandwith Batman!

My thoughts exactly!!

Oct 12, 2008 at 04:07 PM

EB-1
Offline
Image Upload: Off

p.1 #20 · If Canon have got it wrong let me know how........

roberto1979 wrote:
Holy bandwith Batman!

I turn off Show images on this huge page.

EBH

Oct 12, 2008 at 04:11 PM

EB-1
Offline
Image Upload: Off

p.1 #21 · If Canon have got it wrong let me know how........

Fred Lindsey wrote:
The picture was shot at f16 so I can imagine there was no loss of focus. The lens I used performed flawlessy in the test. I focused on the foreground but the mountains are just the same.

Is it in my processing?

Thanks

The images looked OK to me, for what you are doing. Shooting at f/8-11 rather than f/16 may help IQ by reducing diffraction. For landscape work you should consider an FF/FX body. Panning/stitching can allow for more detail if subjects are static.

EBH

Oct 12, 2008 at 04:16 PM

ChrisDM
Offline
Buy and Sell: On

p.1 #22 · If Canon have got it wrong let me know how........

jcolwell wrote:
My "take" on this post is that Fred is surprised to get really excellent results while shooting the wall, but not so good when shooting in "real life". That's why I asked about the tripod, which tends to give great results, plus working with a tripod gives you time to relax and think about what you're doing. Taking sharp handheld photos is not a trivial pursuit, even with IS and decent shutter speeds. Also, things like curvature of the plane of focus and DOF can interact in ways that provide undesirable results (for sharpness) that are not in line with the photographers expectations.

Plus atmospheric conditions, subject movement, subject distance, light quality, etc etc etc.... But only if they could all be brick walls.... Don't sweat it, your equipment works fine. Now retire the mental maturation of shooting brick walls and examining them under the microscope, and get back to what matters: Light and composition. If you spend half as much time and effort as you did on the bricks, your photography will improve exponentially more than any microadjustment/calibration you could ever imagine.

Chris M
www.imagineimagery.com

Oct 12, 2008 at 04:46 PM

Fred Lindsey
Offline
Image Upload: Off

p.1 #23 · If Canon have got it wrong let me know how........

EB-1 wrote:
For landscape work you should consider an FF/FX body.

EBH

Cost my friend. I don't have the money the go out and by a FF body. Nor do I have the money to get a FF standard lens or a wide lens - I'd want to get a 5D Mark II and 24-70L and 16-35L II lenses if I went FF. I want the best as after using this gear I don't want anything that is sub excellent.

Oct 12, 2008 at 05:49 PM

Steve Spencer
Online
Image Upload: On

p.1 #24 · If Canon have got it wrong let me know how........

Fred Lindsey wrote:
The picture was shot at f16 so I can imagine there was no loss of focus. The lens I used performed flawlessy in the test. I focused on the foreground but the mountains are just the same.

Is it in my processing?

Thanks

Well if you shot it at f/16 on a crop camera, then I don't think you can expect much better sharpness in the corners. At f/16 diffraction is going to seriously limit the potential sharpness on a crop camera. I also would be worried that with your less than completely stable tripod small movements (perhaps caused by even a light wind) might also be robbing the shot of some sharpness. If you shot that at f/16 it was probably a pretty long exposure. As you get your new tripod and if you shoot such shots at f/8 or so (that would be my advice as you can still get the whole scene in focus) I think you will find better sharpness. I hope this helps.

Oct 12, 2008 at 07:11 PM

Fred Lindsey
Offline
Image Upload: Off

p.1 #25 · If Canon have got it wrong let me know how........

I think it was shot at 1/125th. I suppose diffraction could be something. Do you think it could be destructive editing though. As this shot below is one I took as I normally take them using my 17-55 at 28mm 5.6 and then checking it with the shots above. Absolutely stellar.

Sharpened with default setting of 3 in camera. Shot in RAW. Converted to TIFF with DPP using a sharpening setting of 100 on top of the RAW sharpening. Converted to JPEG using CS3 with a compression value of 12.

This image is copyrighted by the owner

100% centre

This image is copyrighted by the owner

100% corner-ish

This image is copyrighted by the owner

Oct 12, 2008 at 10:43 PM


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