Pixel-peepers, how soft should the 24-70mm L be at f/2.8?

[NickSimcheck]

So the brown truck came by my house today, and left me a 5D and a 24-70L...You'll find a link below that shows a test picture, I thought that it's be a bit sharper then this on the edges. But I understand you can't have everything. No post processing. EXIF goes like this;

@ 70mm
ISO 100
1/400 Second
F2.8
AWB

http://img120.imagevenue.com/loc299/th_74061__MG_0015.jpg (http://img120.imagevenue.com/img.php?loc=loc299&image=74061__MG_0015.jpg)

[Elton Balch]

Hmmmm......the box part looks concave against the surface it's sitting on. I base that on the line in the (I assume) wood surface it's on. Since it's not "flat" the edges should be a tad out of focus.

[DocFrankenstein]

Holy shmokes! I hope it's not pincushion distortion but the box... If it is - 24-70 is useless!

the box looks as if it's concave in...

[mbze430]

here are 2 shots....

16-35 @ 24mm f/2.8 the box looks curve is because of the high pin-cushion on this lens. The box is flat against the edge of a square table.

http://mysite.verizon.net/turbo2/16-35-24-wide-test.jpg

24-70 @ 24mm f/2.8

http://mysite.verizon.net/turbo2/24-70-24-wide-test.jpg

24-105 @ 24mm f/4


http://mysite.verizon.net/turbo2/24-105-24-wide-test.jpg

you can decide from there if you have a bad copy or not.

[NickSimcheck]

Upon further inspection, the box sits flat - but it's frontal surface isn't straight, it is twisted ever so slightly. Which explains any OOF areas, but does not explain the barreling at the bottom. Edit - pincushioning is what I wanted to say.

[nitsch]

Upon further inspection, the box sits flat - but it's frontal surface isn't straight, it is twisted ever so slightly. Which explains any OOF areas, but does not explain the barreling at the bottom.

That is indeed, as Doc pointed out, pincushion distortion.

Mbze's 2.8 example is more the sort of performance I would hope for.

[NickSimcheck]

And again...Now you can see the pincushion at the top aswell:

[NickSimcheck]

I love Photoshop, about 30 seconds later...

[condyk]

I love Photoshop, about 30 seconds later...

Maybe Canon should give away a free copy in the box eh :p

[Sleepyd]

Not liking the CA on the first shot!

[Lord_Malone]

here are 2 shots....

16-35 @ 24mm f/2.8 the box looks curve is because of the high pin-cushion on this lens. The box is flat against the edge of a square table.

http://mysite.verizon.net/turbo2/16-35-24-wide-test.jpg

24-70 @ 24mm f/2.8

http://mysite.verizon.net/turbo2/24-70-24-wide-test.jpg

24-105 @ 24mm f/2.8


http://mysite.verizon.net/turbo2/24-105-24-wide-test.jpg

you can decide from there if you have a bad copy or not.

You have a great copy of the 16-35L. As we already told you here http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=153170 Dude, seriuosly. Why don't you just sell the damn thing and spare everyone your ongoing campaign to discredit a fine lens? Plus, we're talking about the 24-70 here.

[Andy_T]

I take your 24-105/2.8 any day...

:wink:

Best regards,
Andy

[calicokat]

Looks fine, enjoy the new camera and lens, no more worries

[NickSimcheck]

Not liking the CA on the first shot!

Me either, but it was the lighting. The first image was like #20 so I was kinda rushing the testing. Guess you worry more when you spend a lot on camera stuff.

[chuckandbob]

Go outside Nick -
I've had a 5D for two days, with the 24 - 70 2.8. Finally took some outdoor shots,
and it's quite an setup! Congrats!

[mbze430]

You have a great copy of the 16-35L. As we already told you here http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=153170 Dude, seriuosly. Why don't you just sell the damn thing and spare everyone your ongoing campaign to discredit a fine lens? Plus, we're talking about the 24-70 here.

I am not complaining about per say. I am just saying that it has flaws. It IS NOT as godly as everyone play it up to be. I just don't want people to think that it is THE lens. There are good comments about the lens, and there should be bads. Nothing is ALL GOOD.

The perception being proceed with an all canon forum is that all the user is quick to defense anything bad about their gear. For me on the other hand, I like to look at it from all the angles. Of course, I don't need to talk up a lens on this forum, since EVERYONE does it for me. So I portrait the pessimistic body of the board.

Finally I am NOT ranting about the 16-35. I know... I been through 3 copies. This is perhaps the best copy I have by far.

[NickSimcheck]

Go outside Nick -
I've had a 5D for two days, with the 24 - 70 2.8. Finally took some outdoor shots,
and it's quite an setup! Congrats!

Exactly what I did today, it was 75F here in Michigan. That's like 110 in Florida, or 50 in Alberta, anyway you cut it - it was hot. Found a flower patch off the side of a dirt road and took some shots of the flowers and bees. Here is a 100% crop of a shot...NO POST PROCESSING WHAT SO EVER, please excuse the motion blur on the bee;

[ed rader]

>>You have a great copy of the 16-35L. As we already told you here http://photography-on-the.net/forum/...d.php?t=153170 Dude, seriuosly. Why don't you just sell the damn thing and spare everyone your ongoing campaign to discredit a fine lens? Plus, we're talking about the 24-70 here.<<


ah ah ah. there you go defending a lens :).

ed rader

[tdaugharty]

Canon is wonderfull about fixing any issue with the glass. Just got my 24-70 back for Color (Coating) issues and it's now perfect. Call 'em up and send it in. Took 5 days from door to door.

[tdaugharty]

Your a long time member ... It's earth made glass and is subject to QC issues. Got an issue, send the thing back. For 1K+ there is only one answer from Canon ... "We will make it right" ... Thus far I'm a fan of the professional manner in which these guys fix problems.

I am not complaining about per say. I am just saying that it has flaws. It IS NOT as godly as everyone play it up to be. I just don't want people to think that it is THE lens. There are good comments about the lens, and there should be bads. Nothing is ALL GOOD.

The perception being proceed with an all canon forum is that all the user is quick to defense anything bad about their gear. For me on the other hand, I like to look at it from all the angles. Of course, I don't need to talk up a lens on this forum, since EVERYONE does it for me. So I portrait the pessimistic body of the board.

Finally I am NOT ranting about the 16-35. I know... I been through 3 copies. This is perhaps the best copy I have by far.

[Lord_Malone]

ah ah ah. there you go defending a lens :).

ed rader

Yeah, I know. I was mostly drunk when I typed up that rant. Now I'm sober and I'm contradicting myself. Ed, you're a good friend. And friends don't let friends slip up on the forum. I owe you a beer. ;)

[Lord_Malone]

I am not complaining about per say. I am just saying that it has flaws. It IS NOT as godly as everyone play it up to be. I just don't want people to think that it is THE lens. There are good comments about the lens, and there should be bads. Nothing is ALL GOOD.

The perception being proceed with an all canon forum is that all the user is quick to defense anything bad about their gear. For me on the other hand, I like to look at it from all the angles. Of course, I don't need to talk up a lens on this forum, since EVERYONE does it for me. So I portrait the pessimistic body of the board.

Finally I am NOT ranting about the 16-35. I know... I been through 3 copies. This is perhaps the best copy I have by far.

Whoever made it "Godly"? Everyone I've ever heard talk about the 16-35L was more along the lines of "I'm happy with mine" or "I love mine" or "No complaints here.". If you want to talk about "Godly" lenses, look at how the 35L, 85L, 135L, 200L, 300L, 70-2000L IS, etc. is praised as being "magical" or "can walk on water" or "serves me breakfast in bed". The 16-35L doesn't get anywhere near that kind of respect around here. I swear to God I'm not defending this lens from you anymore. ;)

[mbze430]

LOL, trust me... I can go out and really find flaws on those primes. Unfortunately I don't have my contact anymore to make those as fact claims. BUT that doesn't mean if the opportunity doesn't show up, I won't take it.

Stay tune, I might just go find those primes from the other manufactures....