New 30d +17-85 is ; Not happy :(

[CycleLife]

Have just looked at my first crop of shots from my 30d, on zooming in the pics do not appear to be as sharp as those from my G6 !!

Is there any test I can do to check the lens?

could it just be me not being used to it any settings to alter?

The poor light here at this time of year?

[gcobb]

That's a kit lens. Make sure you're focusing on what you think too. The kit lens works, but isn't sharp to me at all.

[05Xrunner]

That's a kit lens. Make sure you're focusing on what you think too. The kit lens works, but isn't sharp to me at all. your thinking of the 18-55 kit lens. The 17-85 can be bought as a kit but its a fairly expensive lens and should give pretty good results. Remember your G6 does alot of in cam sharpaning and post processes and saturation. DSLR are not as aggressive at in cam process.

[PeaPicker]

Try posting a picture with EXIF data.
I felt same way two years ago with the 300D. Takes some learning.
Wouldn't go back to P&S now for the world. :D

[adas]

Maybe it's just that you've been used to the P&S "all in focus" type of image. Remember that DSLRs have shallower depth of field than P&S, due to their optics bigger physical scale (sensor, lens, focal lenght etc).
The simplest test (without going through focusing charts) is to aim the active focus point to an object and shoot. Then check that area for sharpness.

[dsze]

Your P&S was doing all the processing in-camera and giving you a one size fits all image straight out of camera. Your 30D is intended to produce images that will need at least a little bit of processing in my opinion. Post some samples of what you're talking about.

That body and lens combo is used my many people here including several pros who produce amazing images. More than likely, you just need more practice. It takes time.

[basroil]

and don't forget, in the end, the wide side of the 17-85 is fairly weak in sharpness. f11 and 35mm it gets pretty good though

[ScottyMac]

The 17-85 I had was very sharp...far better than the 18-55.

[picturecrazy]

You can get some great shots with the 17-85. I loved mine!

And yes, these DSLRs do a heck of a lot less processing and in-camera sharpening... having one requires YOU to do more work after you take the shot.

Which is why I still have my A40, for when I'm too lazy to edit each file afterwards...

[CycleLife]

Ok, read what is being said and will go out today and shoot some pics in hopefully decent light.

How do you get the EXIF data?

Later last night I took some shots with my 16 year old Canon 70-210 off my EOS600 - at 70mm the detail is better than the 17-85 at 70mm?

I am new to this as you can tell but not convinced by this individual lens - is there are definitive test I can do to check it?

[iamtimmm]

Go to the photo, right click on it, click Properties, then Summary

[iamtimmm]

Argh, wont let me edit it. But I forgot to write click on Advanced after summary

[dsze]

Just post some samples as straight jpgs, (NOT save for web) and we can see the exif.

[sandro9mm]

hey there... I don't understand why u are so unhappy with the combo... probably ur inexperienced and this is ur first DSLR - dont worry about ur gear, practice and u'll soon realize how powerful ur tools are!

ur 17-85 is very soft at 17-30 range, practically its useless on that range! Photos on that range are blurry, no crispness - in other words it sucks! But beyond 30-35 it can produce some outstanding photos! at 85 its on par with some L, I just love the way that lens draws at the long end!

check out some samples, I din't think 17-85 IS can get crisper than this in low light situations! notice: range 56mm, F5.6 no light in the room, +flash
http://images6.theimagehosting.com/_MG_0952.th.jpg (http://server6.theimagehosting.com/image.php?img=_MG_0952.jpg)


and in bright sunshine (which is rare in this ****en country):
85mm
http://images6.theimagehosting.com/_MG_0678.th.jpg (http://server6.theimagehosting.com/image.php?img=_MG_0678.jpg)


those are both 100% crops, 30D + 17-85 IS

[bufferbure1]

100% crop wat 17mm F8 from 30D Standard Picture Style, no PP.
http://static.flickr.com/131/318693986_8f7f1b2827_b.jpg

The whole Picture:
http://static.flickr.com/121/315453893_d49d0fcb23.jpg

[Saudidave]

The 17-85IS is a mixed bag of a lens. I have a love/hate relationship with mine. Sometimes I think it is brilliant, sometimes a disaster. The range is perfect for me but the IQ isn't that good considering the price. It's better than the kit lens, but not by a huge margin. I am waiting for the reviews on the Pentax K10D and if they are any good I may get one of those with a Sigma 17-70. More or less the same range, but a much sharper lens for less money, yet I would still have IS

[sandro9mm]

Saudidave
same here, that is my primary lens right now - but I'm planning on fixing 17-40 range with good L, as for the remaining range 17-85 is great. I do street photography, so that is perfect for me.

[Littlefield]

ur 17-85 is very soft at 17-30 range, practically its useless on that range! Photos on that range are blurry, no crispness - in other words it sucks!

Re post 14

Here are my pics at 17mm - and 24mm- sharp I think

17mm
http://img315.imageshack.us/img315/682/img20060609046601ip2.jpg


24mm
http://img222.imageshack.us/img222/1035/img20061101021701copyca5.jpg

[sandro9mm]

Littlefield
100% crops? it may well be that my copy is not good... but I think its generally known issue with it, when I was buying that lens, I read couple of reviews and the previouse owner also noted that softness.

here is the 17mm sample, looks okay unless croped 100% :) believe me u don't want to see how crippled it is.
F9, iso100, tripod / 20sec

http://img299.imageshack.us/img299/1006/mg0819smff3.jpg

[basroil]

ur 17-85 is very soft at 17-30 range, practically its useless on that range! Photos on that range are blurry, no crispness - in other words it sucks!

Re post 14

Here are my pics at 17mm - and 24mm- sharp I think

17mm
http://img315.imageshack.us/img315/682/img20060609046601ip2.jpg


24mm
http://img222.imageshack.us/img222/1035/img20061101021701copyca5.jpg

sure you can get great shots enven if yours lens isn't pixel peeper sharp. some people just expect so much out of the camera that they forget that it's the photographer that actually takes the shot, not the camera... i know a guy that can take better shots with a finepix p&s than i can with my SLR, just because he's that good (with his normal setup of a 1dmkII+wide assortment of L lenses, he's good enough that all local publications look to him first)

[Littlefield]

Littlefield
100% crops? it may well be that my copy is not good... but I think its generally known issue with it, when I was buying that lens, I read couple of reviews and the previouse owner also noted that softness.

here is the 17mm sample, looks okay unless croped 100% :) believe me u don't want to see how crippled it is.
F9, iso100, tripod / 20sec

http://img299.imageshack.us/img299/1006/mg0819smff3.jpg
No they were not crops and printed sharp at 8x10 .I wish i had a 17-40 too !
But as you can see the 17-85 can be sharp at this range . I use pt lens to correct barrel distortion too ,not on these pic though.
I love the 17-85 for its IS and range . It has good color too .
I got a 70-200 L4 Is coming so after seeing it I will say the 17-85 sucks ;)
Regards
17mm

http://img486.imageshack.us/img486/9854/img20060609050003zp4.jpg

[CycleLife]

Ok, can see what you're all saying! may be it's just me expecting too much! (as usual, my wife would say;).

We had another cr@p weather day here in the UK - so waste of time going out, so i've just been playing with my various lenses (old one's from the EOS600) indoors. The 70-210 (circa 1990) is way sharper at 70-85 than my new lens and thats without IS:oops:

Next weekend is the first race of the Winter DH MTBing season over here so we're off down to Wales, hopefully a nice crisp bright day as it gets a bit dark in places on these forest tracks.

Must save up for something a bit faster.

[CycleLife]

BTW what exactly is a 100% crop? Is it a pic that has been cropped at it's original size or something else?

[StewartR]

BTW what exactly is a 100% crop? Is it a pic that has been cropped at it's original size or something else?A 100% crop is a portion of an image that hasn't been resized. So for that portion of the image we get to see all the pixels that came out of the camera, and only pixels that came out of the camera. No pixels have been added or removed by software such as Photoshop.

[Andy_T]

The 70-210 (circa 1990) is way sharper at 70-85 than my new lens and thats without IS:oops:


That does not surprise me at all.

Normally, a lens will be sharper at the wide end than at the long end.

A 70-200/2.8L is sharper than a 24-70/2.8L at 70 mm as well.

Best regards,
Andy

[CycleLife]

That does not surprise me at all.

Normally, a lens will be sharper at the wide end than at the long end.

A 70-200/2.8L is sharper than a 24-70/2.8L at 70 mm as well.

Best regards,
Andy

Now I am getting confused! Earlier posts state that the 17-85 is poor at the wide angle end but good from 35 upwards?:confused:

[Andy_T]

OK.

Sorry that I confused you. (scratches head)
My best guess is that this does not apply to the very wide angle, that has a lot of complexities in its own.

However, AFAIK many lenses are designed to be sharper in the middle of the focal length and posibly on the wide end and not-so sharp on the long end.

Take a look at the reviews at http://www.photozone.de/8Reviews/index.html. The review of the 17-85 IS (http://www.photozone.de/8Reviews/lenses/canon_1785_456_is/index.htm)(actually a very positive review) shows that it has quite good performance on the wide end, gets even better in the center area and gets a bit weaker on the long end as far as sharpness are concerned.

However, chromatic aberration and distortion do take their toll on the wide end, which is due to the complexity of designing a lens with a long focal range that ranges from ultra wide to short tele.

Hope that helps.

Best regards,
Andy

[elader]

Dude, dont worry about the lens yet. Take some pics in good light outdoors with the camera on Auto at various focal lengths - focus on easy things so the camera is focusing on what you think it is focusing on.

Realize that the DOF is smaller than a point and shoot and the camera does not sharpen the image as aggressively as your P&S.

Learn how to sharpen, learn about selecting AF points, learn how to use Av mode. It's a great camera and a good lens. .. just a learning curve.

[Bill Ng]

Have just looked at my first crop of shots from my 30d, on zooming in the pics do not appear to be as sharp as those from my G6 !!

Is there any test I can do to check the lens?

could it just be me not being used to it any settings to alter?

The poor light here at this time of year?

We need a picture ... until then, no one's response to you so far is useful at all. The 17-85 is an EXTREMELY slow lens. If you were in anything but really good light and you were holding your shots by hand, there a good shot you motion-blurred the photo. Post a picture and we can tell you what's wrong.

Bill