Some Day Canon...

rwellsrwells Registered Users Posts: 6,084 Major grins
edited September 9, 2010 in Other Cool Shots
Some day, I'm going to get a GOOD copy of the 85L f/1.2 lens!

Unfortunately, this is my second copy in a few months, and this one went back also. This particular copy couldn't manage to focus the same 3 out of 5 shots. Back focus, front focus ~ then spot on :dunno

Anyway, they do produce nice images, when their in focus :thumb
Randy

Comments

  • DaddyODaddyO Registered Users Posts: 4,466 Major grins
    edited August 31, 2010
    Understand the frustration with lenses. Sorry your having such a problem
    with that particular highly expensive lens. Must deliver everytime for that
    price.
    While the vet is nice example, shots 2 and 3 are pretty fine. Especially
    pic 2, for me, in this set. thumb.gif
    Michael
  • black mambablack mamba Registered Users Posts: 8,323 Major grins
    edited August 31, 2010
    Yo Randy,

    That's a bummer about the lenses. Statistically, getting one bad copy is not likely, but getting two, back-to-back, is off the charts. Were both of these lenses new?

    In this series, I find the last one especially appealing.

    Take care buddy,

    Tom
    I always wanted to lie naked on a bearskin rug in front of a fireplace. Cracker Barrel didn't take kindly to it.
  • rwellsrwells Registered Users Posts: 6,084 Major grins
    edited August 31, 2010
    DaddyO wrote: »
    Understand the frustration with lenses. Sorry your having such a problem
    with that particular highly expensive lens. Must deliver everytime for that
    price.
    While the vet is nice example, shots 2 and 3 are pretty fine. Especially
    pic 2, for me, in this set. thumb.gif

    Personally, I won't own a lens that doesn't perform admirably. I just don't understand Canon's lack of QC the last 2~3 years. One would think that, on arguably one of their most touted lenses, they would pay special attention to the QC before shipping them out of the factory.

    The 85L has magical qualities, but I think their might be demons also ne_nau.gif

    Thanks for your input Michael
    Randy
  • rwellsrwells Registered Users Posts: 6,084 Major grins
    edited August 31, 2010
    black mamba wrote: »
    Yo Randy,

    That's a bummer about the lenses. Statistically, getting one bad copy is not likely, but getting two, back-to-back, is off the charts. Were both of these lenses new?

    In this series, I find the last one especially appealing.

    Take care buddy,

    Tom

    Hey Tom,

    The first copy I purchased a while back was used, from a reputable dealer. It focused fine, but lens alignment back focused so bad that on my 5D2, I had to micro-adjust to -20. That's the maximum available in camera. It wouldn't work on my other bodies due to no micro-adjustment available on them.

    This latest one was brand-spanking-new. I've never had ANY lens perform so poorly. Much less a $2,000.00 lens!

    BTW, I confirmed that it was not just a camera/lens argument. I used all three of my camera bodies with the same results.

    I guess I'll try again with this lens, but probably not right now, agitated might be a good word here.
    Randy
  • redleashredleash Registered Users Posts: 3,840 Major grins
    edited August 31, 2010
    See what you get for using Canon . . .rolleyes1.gif

    I am sorry you are having so much trouble, but those shots you posted are superb--#2 is the best of the bunch here. I hope you get a 100% working lens so you can post more images like these!

    Lauren
    "But ask the animals, and they will teach you." (Job 12:7)

    Lauren Blackwell
    www.redleashphoto.com
  • InsuredDisasterInsuredDisaster Registered Users Posts: 1,132 Major grins
    edited September 9, 2010
    Nice shots! I agree about the lack of QC on high priced lenses is inexcusable! It should be flawless for that kinda of money.
    My blog
Sign In or Register to comment.