Am I expecting Too much??!??!

[embdaw]

Okay, I just recently purchased a Canon 75-300mm f/4.0-5.6 II USM....I know it is not the BEST lens (after reading all the L raves:lol:)..but I would expect at least some decency out of the lens. However, I am completely dissatisfied with the images. I am taking RAW images and when I download the pics into PS, when you have them at a 16% view or about up to 75%, they look great, but if I zoom into 100%, they look poor. Either slighly blurred or somewhat grainy. I have shot both by hand and on a tripod w/remote...am I just expecting too much out of this lens....

If so, i'm going to be pretty agitated until I raise the funds for my L :lol:


Thanks!

[cmM]

the universal answer "it depends"
On shutter speed, on aperture, and so on...

Here are some 100% crops from a Canon 75-300 f/4.0-5.6 III USM:
http://www.cmuntean.net/files/crop1.jpg
http://www.cmuntean.net/files/crop2.jpg
http://www.cmuntean.net/files/crop3.jpg

**Edit: BTW, these are wide open (f/5.6) @ around 300mm. If you wanna see the full pics they;re on my website in the wildlife gallery.

[ssim]

Can the images be made better with USM in photoshop or equivalent. As Cmm says you need to give us a little more information.

BTW - nice shots Cmm

[Dubsta]

I have seen some great shots with that lens, and a 20D...I was impressed by them.

[Kennymc]

You should view them at print size as that is what they will be printed at...

[roanjohn]

It's the lens........not you.

How do I know?? I don't.........but you seem pretty experienced with the tripod and all.

.............and plus, this lens is not exactly one of Canon's most well regarded lens.

Ro1

[ayotnoms]

I feel your pain. LOL Since I purchased mine, the "keeper" ratio has been around 1:3. The non-keepers are for the reasons you mention. Only my non-professional skills keeps from totally blaming the lens.

Short of busting the bank and taking the "L" plunge, don't know how much margin for improvement there is. At`least for yours truly anyway... :-)

[RockOne]

I have the non-USM version of this lens, and find that it has several flaws - notably chromatic aberration is very noticable, AF is slow and has a tendancy to hunt when photoographing moving objects, and the pictures are always a little soft.
But occasionally the lens will surprise me, and It will give a half decent result....but I'm itching to get my hands on some L glass too (100-400 :-) ).

[ron chappel]

As the others have said-it's a lens that will rarely give outstanding results.
You have the right plan-just make the best of it 'till you can buy something better :)

Avoiding using it at the long end wide open (when possible) helps.
Here are some examples i have online-
http://members.dodo.net.au/~l8r_ron/

[Maureen Souza]

I have that lens but with IS and I find it is a little soft on both ends but can be fairly sharp with the right settings. Try not to open it all the way to 300mm and stop down your aperture one further than you expect to need it. It took a bit of practice & frustration but I am starting to get the hang of it....LOL.

[joeseph]

I too have a 75-300, but it has sat on my desk unused & unloved since I bought my 100-400 L
Still, it gave me a couple of years service - and lots of photos I wish I'd taken with the new lens...

[Redbird_xo]

The following pic was taken using the 75-300mm MK III handheld at 1/800 sec, f/8, ISO200 with minimal PP (contrast and USM). This lens has its limitations, but with some planning, it can produce decent results. Please also see the 100% crop.

Forgot to mention it was at 300mm.

[JusSmith]

Looking at the quality per £/$, you cannot complain at those pics!

[joeseph]

Just don't try and photograph anything that moves!
:-]

[ron chappel]

My pics linked above are all of moving objects-but really they are the exception that prove you right
...i threw so many away that day,the vast majority for focus errors

[jfred]

I agree with previous posters. This lens is ok when going downhill with the wind behind it! I've had far too many shots that needed throwing away for focus/sharpness issues that I couldn't satisfactorily iron out with PS.

[Moostyman]

I was having the same problem so to correct it I went and bought the 100-400mmL which arrived yesterday, cant wait for the weekend to have a play....

However I still intend to hang onto the 75-300mm as a travel zoom as the 100-400 will just be a little heavy when travelling overseas. :D

[embdaw]

Thanks for all the responses!! I feel alot better knowing that it wasnt all me :) Now I just have to save up for my L and all my troubles will go away...haha..

[embdaw]

The following pic was taken using the 75-300mm MK III handheld at 1/800 sec, f/8, ISO200 with minimal PP (contrast and USM). This lens has its limitations, but with some planning, it can produce decent results. Please also see the 100% crop.

Forgot to mention it was at 300mm.

Those look great...I think of all the pics I have taken at 300mm...maybe 1 or 2 have comeout that clear...:lol:

[Duradrum]

All taken with a 75-300 USM. Maybe I got a real good copy, but mine when in focus come out nice and sharp. These are all handheld, with a little photoshop USM but i'm happy with the sharpness. i would be disappointed with the results you are getting.


http://server2.uploadit.org/files/duradrum-IMG_1361.jpg



http://www.uploadslut.com/showimg.php?code=10e60af29e38feb82e3e2d9b5e695c16


http://www.uploadslut.com/showimg.php?code=9a835c17ebac8fa31e3677e7835e32ee

[embdaw]

100% crop

[cfcRebel]

May I know the exif of this pic? Thanks.

[Andy_T]

Erin,

that pic is not bad at all for a 100% crop.
It looks a bit washed out (too light), but the sharpness is great IMO.

Some questions:
What was the aperture and shutter speed used?
Was it shot in RAW or JPEG? What sharpening did you apply?
And finally ... What more are you expecting?

Best regards,
Andy

[O/confusion]

I have no experience of this lens, but would like to know if the problems people are describing are due to a perceived autofocus inadequacy, or if the lack of clarity also shows itself when using manual focus adjustment--i.e. it just won't focus acceptably at all under any circumstances, even when optimum DOF is properly established by setting the appropriate aperture, and camera shake is ruled out by suitably fast shutter speed selection. Because if that's indeed the case for so many of you, this lens would appear to be severely screwed up.

regards,
Terry

[pradeep1]

Read this: http://www.photo.net/equipment/canon/300_compare/

I found his conclusions to be mostly true. With a such a zoom and a 1.6 FOV factor, you'd need to have very high shutter speeds even with IS on to get crisp images.

[cfcRebel]

Thanks pradeep. I'm so glad you shared that link. Now I know what type of lens i need.

[johndm]

All these shot with the 75-300. Now upgraded to 100-400L though.....

http://www.airliners.net/open.file/667912/L/ (http://www.airliners.net/open.file/667912/L/)

http://www.airliners.net/open.file/668143/L/ (http://www.airliners.net/open.file/668143/L/)

http://www.airliners.net/open.file/705320/L/ (http://www.airliners.net/open.file/705320/L/)

[Bill Ng]

As most of my photography involves headshots ... and I like candid ones from a distance, I had the 75-300 USM (non-IS) as my "default" lens for years. Some points:

Since you set it up on a tripod already, we can rule out user/subject movement, but keep in mind that this lens is slow and any use of it indoors is going to produce blurry photos simply because of a lack of shutter speed.

The lens is really soft wide open. For people, I prefered the soft focus feel of it, but for anything other than people, it could be a little frustrating when blown up to 20"x30" size. If you want to get the most out of this lens, stop it down to between f/8 and f/11.

This lens also produces softness at the extreme ends of it's focal ability. Never use it at 75, never use it at 300. Zoom it all the way out or all the way in and them peddle it back just a few mm to get the most of out it.

Most importantly, and this goes for everyone ... STOP with insistance on "unbelievable sharpness". I've got a cheapo 28-105 on my Elan 7 film body right now that I use for vacations almost exclusively. The lens is definitely not "sharp" by anyone's standards here, but you know what, for the 4x6 prints that I make of my vacations and the occasional 8x10 that I have blown up ... there's no way in hell anyone would be able to tell, its just not blown up large enough to make any difference.

Everytime I read about someone who says, "It's just not that sharp on my screen" ... I laugh. It's not the image on your flat panel that matters unless your idea of photography is sitting in front of a computer. This hobby/profession should be about the prints, about what adorns your walls or what adorns the walls and nightstands of the friends, family, and clients that have made prints off of your negatives. If they're happy, you should be happy.

Bill in Brooklyn

[TommySharp]

Well I'm no expert yet but I went out and bought the 90-300mm which is even cheaper than the 75-300mm so reading threads like this you can imagine what I'm thinking.....

But I have taken on some of the advice that i've seen all over these forums and my images have improved a little....

And like it's been said.... Looking at your photo on a computer monitor is not the same as looking at a printed version... IMHO......

I've printed off one or two that I thought were "okay" and looking at the printed version they look great.....

Doesn't mean I'm going to stop putting lose change into my "better lens piggie bank" though...

[Bill Ng]

Well I'm no expert yet but I went out and bought the 90-300mm which is even cheaper than the 75-300mm so reading threads like this you can imagine what I'm thinking.....

Who makes a 90-300? I searched B&H for something in that focal range and found nothing.

Bill in Brooklyn

[Duncreavy]

I hated this lens when I took it home for a tryout. Wouldn't focus, purple fringing all over the place, nothing was sharp. Then I bought a used 75-300 with IS and there is a world of difference. For the money ($325) I am very happy, esp. at the shorter ends. I get some good pix even in low light.

[Redbird_xo]

Who makes a 90-300? I searched B&H for something in that focal range and found nothing.

Bill in Brooklyn

FYI - Canon has an EF90-300 with or without USM.

[Jon]

Who makes a 90-300? I searched B&H for something in that focal range and found nothing.

Bill in Brooklyn

IIRC it's available in Europe but not in North America.

[Kennymc]

Who makes a 90-300? I searched B&H for something in that focal range and found nothing.

Bill in Brooklyn
It can be viewed here http://www.canon.co.uk/For_Home/Product_Finder/Cameras/EF_Lenses/Zoom_Lenses/EF_90300mm_f4556/