Canon 24-70F2.8 expectations

oakfieldphotography.com

Just bought my first pro Canon lens second hand. Mabey its me but i dont find it as sharp as my nifty fifty. Even when i use manual focus. Ok mabey this is a poor copy but if i get it serviced should this problem be sorted? It has uv 0912 code on the lens. i think this means it is 4 or 5 years old. The glass is perfect as regards dust. Any help would be appreciated.
Kind regards
Patrick:D

ThatCanonGuy

The lens was made in 2007. Did the seller give you example shots before you purchased it?

Put the camera with the 24-70L on a tripod, take a picture of a tree or something. Make sure the setup is solid, and use a remote/cable shutter release or the self-timer to reduce shake. Post the photo here, some dgrinners will be able to tell.

oakfieldphotography.com

ThatCanonGuy wrote: »

The lens was made in 2007. Did the seller give you example shots before you purchased it?

Put the camera with the 24-70L on a tripod, take a picture of a tree or something. Make sure the setup is solid, and use a remote/cable shutter release or the self-timer to reduce shake. Post the photo here, some dgrinners will be able to tell.

I tried it on a tripod and found it was not a great day for taking pictures here but i will upload something soon as i am in the middle of an article at the moment.
Patrick:D

rhommel

this is a common problem on aged 24-70 and just get it re-calibrated and it should be good

oakfieldphotography.com

I phoned up my local dealer and it looks like it will have to be sent away to be calibrated with the camera. Not good news for me as i will not have it back for the wedding i have to photograph. Renting a lens is not an option as the camera has to go back to cannon aswell. i will take some pictures and you can see my problem. This leaves me with my 40d and nifty fifty.
Patrick

oakfieldphotography.com

For most of us buying a second hand lens has its trials and tribulations. Is the lens a good copy. When is sharp sharp. For me it was daunting. I knew little or nothing about the Canon42-70 F 2.8 only that it is held in great esteem through the many forums out there.
After looking closely at it and taking a few shots with my 5D2 i handed over the money.
Brought it home and to say the least was dissapointed with the sharpness of the lens. A quick run through my menu system let me fine tune the sharpness or in my case it made no difference at all.
I immediatly phoned up the main Canon dealership and was told to send the lens and camera into them for a few weeks. Unfortunatly i have a wedding to do before the lens and camera would come back to me. Stuck with a 40D and a nifty fifty the hair pulling commenced and i was not a nice wee lad towards anyone who came near me in my hour of need.
So i finally contacted this forum. From what i sumise, i expected too much and got more than what i paid for. I find the pictures i took in my backgarden rich and sharp in whatever places i put up the focus points. Travelling through my sparcely flowered garden (at this time in the season) i took some shots using my 580ex2 flash. The whole pictures came to life.
Well i hear you say...did he learn his lesson. Yes it did. If anything i have learned that each lens you buy has a different learning curve and it looks like i will have to spend some more time under the tutalage of this one.
Short of getting a new brain i feel that the older you get the harder it is for things to stick inside that old grey matter. But thank you to all who tried to help me here on this forum and whenever i get the chance i will post some of the many nice pictures i am about to take with this awesome piece of kit.

Kind Regards
Patrick

oakfieldphotography.com

Hi Everyone.
Finally i got into my garden to take a few pictures. Have a look and let me know what you think of them.

IMG_9354 by OakField Photography, on Flickr


IMG_9304 by OakField Photography, on Flickr

Kind regards
Patrick.:D

Stuart-M

oakfieldphotography.com wrote: »

Hi Everyone.
Finally i got into my garden to take a few pictures. Have a look and let me know what you think of them.


Kind regards
Patrick.:D

are these 100% crops?

Qarik

Stuart-M wrote: »

are these 100% crops?

go on..you say it 1st.

oakfieldphotography.com

Stuart-M wrote: »

are these 100% crops?

Qarik wrote: »

go on..you say it 1st.

I did have to straighten the second picture but none of these are 100 percent crops. I did have to sharpen them in raw first as it was hard to get a good shot when they were waving around in the breeze. Should they have been tack sharp out of the camera? If so this is only going to confirm my earlier suspicions.
Kind Regards
Patrick

Qarik

oakfieldphotography.com wrote: »

I did have to straighten the second picture but none of these are 100 percent crops. I did have to sharpen them in raw first as it was hard to get a good shot when they were waving around in the breeze. Should they have been tack sharp out of the camera? If so this is only going to confirm my earlier suspicions.
Kind Regards
Patrick

even though they are waving around in the breeze the flash should have "frozen" it. the focus doesn't seem bad but not all that great either.

ziggy53

We need access to the full resolution originals, or 100 percent crops of the critical focus areas, in order to make any focus or sharpness assessments.

Front focus and back focus are confirmed by a flat target.

1) A tripod shot of a brick wall, taken at a suitable distance (at least twice MFD) is a good starting point. If the brick wall is not in focus, there is definitely a problem. Brick walls are nice in that it's fairly easy to see alignment and brick texture gives the AF section plenty to latch onto.

AF position and distraction accuracy of more typical subjects follow:

2) A fence line or similar, shot at an angle to the subject. Put a singular strong-contrast target on the top of the middle post and use a single focus point in the camera to focus against the target. This shows focus accuracy and/or how easily distracting for/aft objects influence AF accuracy (compared to the above wall shot). It also shows bokeh tendencies at different aperture settings.

3) A focus target/chart like in the following:

http://regex.info/blog/photo-tech/focus-chart

I do recommend testing these charts at twice minimum focus distance or greater. Most lenses, especially most zoom lenses, do not do their best at MFD. True macro lenses are the major exception.

4) A US stop sign, or similar very high contrast signage, both centered and off center and to the side and/or corner. This can show chromatic errors and off-axis errors.

5) A spectral highlight at night. (Point source ideally, but a street light at some distance will do.) Try to avoid "blooming" of the source but allow some white clipping. This shows internal reflections and dispersion problems. Again, test both in the center and with the subject at the sides or corners.

6) Now just shoot "typical" subjects for your use of the lens(es). It's important that the lens perform correctly for your intended uses.

Feel free to use JPGs and just give image links or directory links, but any significant issues and comparisons you may want to add inline to a post describing particular issues. These may be crops and display 100 percent if you wish. 100 percent crops aren't really fair unless you intend to print "very" large, but it can be easier to display comparisons for examination and to demonstrate problems.

oakfieldphotography.com

ziggy53 wrote: »

We need access to the full resolution originals, or 100 percent crops of the critical focus areas, in order to make any focus or sharpness assessments.

Front focus and back focus are confirmed by a flat target.

1) A tripod shot of a brick wall, taken at a suitable distance (at least twice MFD) is a good starting point. If the brick wall is not in focus, there is definitely a problem. Brick walls are nice in that it's fairly easy to see alignment and brick texture gives the AF section plenty to latch onto.

AF position and distraction accuracy of more typical subjects follow:

2) A fence line or similar, shot at an angle to the subject. Put a singular strong-contrast target on the top of the middle post and use a single focus point in the camera to focus against the target. This shows focus accuracy and/or how easily distracting for/aft objects influence AF accuracy (compared to the above wall shot). It also shows bokeh tendencies at different aperture settings.

3) A focus target/chart like in the following:

http://regex.info/blog/photo-tech/focus-chart

I do recommend testing these charts at twice minimum focus distance or greater. Most lenses, especially most zoom lenses, do not do their best at MFD. True macro lenses are the major exception.

4) A US stop sign, or similar very high contrast signage, both centered and off center and to the side and/or corner. This can show chromatic errors and off-axis errors.

5) A spectral highlight at night. (Point source ideally, but a street light at some distance will do.) Try to avoid "blooming" of the source but allow some white clipping. This shows internal reflections and dispersion problems. Again, test both in the center and with the subject at the sides or corners.

6) Now just shoot "typical" subjects for your use of the lens(es). It's important that the lens perform correctly for your intended uses.

Feel free to use JPGs and just give image links or directory links, but any significant issues and comparisons you may want to add inline to a post describing particular issues. These may be crops and display 100 percent if you wish. 100 percent crops aren't really fair unless you intend to print "very" large, but it can be easier to display comparisons for examination and to demonstrate problems.

I will try to print out that focus the focus chart and work from there. I did have my lens on F2.8 when i was focusing on the flower in front of the brick wall. It will be tomorrow before i post up some full resolution pictures for you all to examine. Lets hope i can get the fine focus to work in camera.
Kind regards
Patrick.:D

borrowlenses.com

You can rent a camera and a lens As far as that lens goes though, there are soft copies out there. Hopefully the calibration gets it back in action and working for you soon.

oakfieldphotography.com

ziggy53 wrote: »

We need access to the full resolution originals, or 100 percent crops of the critical focus areas, in order to make any focus or sharpness assessments.

Front focus and back focus are confirmed by a flat target.

1) A tripod shot of a brick wall, taken at a suitable distance (at least twice MFD) is a good starting point. If the brick wall is not in focus, there is definitely a problem. Brick walls are nice in that it's fairly easy to see alignment and brick texture gives the AF section plenty to latch onto.

AF position and distraction accuracy of more typical subjects follow:

2) A fence line or similar, shot at an angle to the subject. Put a singular strong-contrast target on the top of the middle post and use a single focus point in the camera to focus against the target. This shows focus accuracy and/or how easily distracting for/aft objects influence AF accuracy (compared to the above wall shot). It also shows bokeh tendencies at different aperture settings.

3) A focus target/chart like in the following:

http://regex.info/blog/photo-tech/focus-chart

I do recommend testing these charts at twice minimum focus distance or greater. Most lenses, especially most zoom lenses, do not do their best at MFD. True macro lenses are the major exception.

4) A US stop sign, or similar very high contrast signage, both centered and off center and to the side and/or corner. This can show chromatic errors and off-axis errors.

5) A spectral highlight at night. (Point source ideally, but a street light at some distance will do.) Try to avoid "blooming" of the source but allow some white clipping. This shows internal reflections and dispersion problems. Again, test both in the center and with the subject at the sides or corners.

6) Now just shoot "typical" subjects for your use of the lens(es). It's important that the lens perform correctly for your intended uses.

Feel free to use JPGs and just give image links or directory links, but any significant issues and comparisons you may want to add inline to a post describing particular issues. These may be crops and display 100 percent if you wish. 100 percent crops aren't really fair unless you intend to print "very" large, but it can be easier to display comparisons for examination and to demonstrate problems.

Before i start this test i will need to know if go with 24 or 70. I looked at the link you provided for the test chart and i did not see a setup for the 24-70 so i dont know what i should do. I dont want to set it up at 24 and find out it is no good at 70. Can you help please.
Kind Regards
Patrick.

ziggy53

oakfieldphotography.com wrote: »

Before i start this test i will need to know if go with 24 or 70. I looked at the link you provided for the test chart and i did not see a setup for the 24-70 so i dont know what i should do. I dont want to set it up at 24 and find out it is no good at 70. Can you help please.
Kind Regards
Patrick.

Test the lens at several applicable focal lengths on a wall shot first (as much as you desire.) Now is the time to discover the true properties of the lens.

I would perform the wall test at 24mm, 50mm and 70mm, and at f2.8 and f5.6 at each focal length. Remember to be at least twice the minimum focus distance for the lens, which is 1.25' (0.38m). I would shoot at 3 feet or further, depending on my intended use for the lens. You can duplicate the test for closer distances if you wish but the normal shooting distances are your primary concern.

oakfieldphotography.com

ziggy53 wrote: »

Test the lens at several applicable focal lengths on a wall shot first (as much as you desire.) Now is the time to discover the true properties of the lens.

I would perform the wall test at 24mm, 50mm and 70mm, and at f2.8 and f5.6 at each focal length. Remember to be at least twice the minimum focus distance for the lens, which is 1.25' (0.38m). I would shoot at 3 feet or further, depending on my intended use for the lens. You can duplicate the test for closer distances if you wish but the normal shooting distances are your primary concern.

Ok will will proceed with the wall. One thing before i start testing. Should i be square on the wall. ie looking straight onto it with my camera on a tripod.

Patrick

ziggy53

oakfieldphotography.com wrote: »

Ok will will proceed with the wall. One thing before i start testing. Should i be square on the wall. ie looking straight onto it with my camera on a tripod.

Patrick

Absolutely, you need to be as close to perpendicular to the wall as possible (image plane should be parallel to the wall). That lets you gauge the edge and corner performance of the lens.

oakfieldphotography.com

ziggy53 wrote: »

Test the lens at several applicable focal lengths on a wall shot first (as much as you desire.) Now is the time to discover the true properties of the lens.

I would perform the wall test at 24mm, 50mm and 70mm, and at f2.8 and f5.6 at each focal length. Remember to be at least twice the minimum focus distance for the lens, which is 1.25' (0.38m). I would shoot at 3 feet or further, depending on my intended use for the lens. You can duplicate the test for closer distances if you wish but the normal shooting distances are your primary concern.

ziggy53 wrote: »

Absolutely, you need to be as close to perpendicular to the wall as possible (image plane should be parallel to the wall). That lets you gauge the edge and corner performance of the lens.

Job done. I took both raw and jpeg full size. Which type should i upload? I choose the centre focusing point when i started testing so i hope that that is ok.
Patrick

oakfieldphotography.com

oakfieldphotography.com wrote: »

Job done. I took both raw and jpeg full size. Which type should i upload? I choose the centre focusing point when i started testing so i hope that that is ok.
Patrick

uploading jpegs now. will add info under their description.

oakfieldphotography.com

Just got a few pictures befored it poured out of the heavens. Feet wet too. I didnt coveal all of my bases
F 5.6 at 50mm by OakField Photography, on Flickr but here is what i have for now. RTake a look and let me know what you think.

F 2.8 at 50mm by OakField Photography, on Flickr

F 5.6 at 70mm by OakField Photography, on Flickr

F 2.8 at 24mm by OakField Photography, on Flickr

F 2.8 at 70mm by OakField Photography, on Flickr

F5.6 at 24mm by OakField Photography, on Flickr

Sorry but this was a rush job. Here is hoping the weather gets better.
Kind regards
Patrick

oakfieldphotography.com

here is a link to the few photographs i took before a deluge of rain.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/oakfield_photography/
Patrick Mullan

oakfieldphotography.com

here is a link to the photographs i took. I know you wanted to see the original size and they were far too big for here.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/oakfield_photography/
Kind regards
Patrick:D

ziggy53

At 24mm, f2.8 it does appear to be both softer and lower contrast than I would like to see. The 50mm and 70 mm images do seem slightly better.

I suggest trying some micro-adjust-focus, again on the wall, to see if that might improve the situation. If not, it's your choice what to do next, but unless the micro-adjust helps I don't think that I would keep the lens.

You only need to try the micro-adjust at f2.8. It only allows for one setting per lens so you also only need to test at the focal length you feel is most necessary. If you want complete coverage then test at a few focal lengths and choose the best compromise.

This link has some general guidelines for AF but it quickly details the micro-adjust procedure at the end of the article.

http://www.learn.usa.canon.com/app/pdfs/quickguides/CDLC_Accurate_EOS_AF_QuickGuide.pdf

oakfieldphotography.com

Thanks Ziggy.
I have been writing most of the day and could not give much time to this process. Heading out now to a nephews 21 birthday party. I downloaded the chart you recommended and wont be able to try it out until monday due to two shoots tomorrow. I was wondering if you had used the chart before and how far out of whack the microadjustment can recover your focus from.
Kind regards
Patrick:D

ziggy53

I created my own focus target, which was most similar to the link I posted. However, if the micro-focus-adjustments don't help with the wall test, there's no need to proceed with other tests. The other tests are more of a confirmation of how the lens and the camera's AF system work regarding AF point accuracy and scene distractions.

One thing I have done to speed up the process of lens testing on the 5D MKII is to AF on a wall, like what you have done, then switch the lens to manual focus. I switch to Live View and 100 percent zoom in, and then I use the manual focus ring on the lens to see if I can improve on the AF results. Live View really speeds the process of determining front focus and back focus error. Repeat the test several times to confirm accuracy.

I am fortunate in that all of my current lenses have not required micro-focus adjustments. Of course that means that any focus error is my own fault or a misunderstanding/misapplication of the AF system. (I am prone to "senior moments" in that regard. )

My copy of the EF 50mm, f1.8 is prone to focus error at large apertures, but that's fairly typical of that lens. Manual focus with AF assist of that lens is best for me, but I have largely replaced using it in favor of the EF 50mm, f1.4 USM, which is accurate most of the time, even at f1.4.

oakfieldphotography.com

Hi all
Just a few ahots here from an old Dennis Lite 4 Firengine that i am doing an article on. Let me know how the 24-70 performed here. http://www.flickr.com/photos/oakfield_photography/sets/72157627631955301/
Kind regards
Patrick

ziggy53

oakfieldphotography.com wrote: »

Hi all
Just a few ahots here from an old Dennis Lite 4 Firengine that i am doing an article on. Let me know how the 24-70 performed here. http://www.flickr.com/photos/oakfield_photography/sets/72157627631955301/
Kind regards
Patrick

I cannot see images larger than the "Large" size (around 800 pixels on the long side). If you want any real evaluations we need access to the "Original", full-sized images (21MPics for the 6D MKII). I suspect there is a gallery setting to allow originals. Providing a link to the full-sized images, like you did before, will also work.

Alternately, you could provided 100 percent crops of the critical focus areas from the originals.

Full EXIF is also appreciated.