Lens Softness.

[Salleke]

If a lens can not focus properly then we can send it back to a Canon Service center.


Can we send a lens back to Canon if it delivery to soft pictures, no color saturation

and no contrast? Can Canon do something about those things?



I have a 24-70 2.8 L and I can't obtain one sharp picture whit it.

Tested on a tripod and on every aperture and range. And it's not a matter of focus.

The pictures are very soft, not vivid like other lenses of witch I see the pictures posted here in other threads..



At this moment there is a thread (from Schmoelzel) of a 35 mm 1.4 L lens whit some pictures and it's stunning what that lens perform!



Why can't I have such sharp and very good pictures whit my expensive L lens?

I have tried everything but it won't work. I have a 28-135 3.5/5.6 that performs better than the expensive L glass.



Thanks for any advice in what to do whit my 24-70 2.8 L lens.

[jfrancho]

A copy of the original and you permission to pick through it and post the results would help. See this thread for details: http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=79770

[ed2day]

I've had my 24-70L for a couple months now and I'm having a hard time warming up to it. I've been trying to give it some time and not jump to conclusions. Eventually I'll probably post some pics for comments. It's not bad, just not what I'd expect for the money where sharpness is concerned. It seems to focus properly, no CA, only slightly worse wide open. I think my 17-40 is sharper where ranges overlap. I've taken some pics that are close to acceptably sharp, and others that are underwhelming. It does sharpen up nicely with USM, as Salleke saw. And the color is glorius. But no picture has blown me away with sharpness out of the camera. I know I can get good pictures with it, but I don't know that's it's worth keeping for me. I too am considering sending it in for calibration, so I guess I'm in the same boat as the poster.

[xstrio]

for the money this lens costs i would be expected to be blown away with its sharpness, as i was when i 1st used the tamron 28-75

[Geo]

I've had my 24-70L for a couple months now and I'm having a hard time warming up to it. I've been trying to give it some time and not jump to conclusions. Eventually I'll probably post some pics for comments. It's not bad, just not what I'd expect for the money where sharpness is concerned. It seems to focus properly, no CA, only slightly worse wide open. I think my 17-40 is sharper where ranges overlap. I've taken some pics that are close to acceptably sharp, and others that are underwhelming. It does sharpen up nicely with USM, as Salleke saw. And the color is glorius. But no picture has blown me away with sharpness out of the camera. I know I can get good pictures with it, but I don't know that's it's worth keeping for me. I too am considering sending it in for calibration, so I guess I'm in the same boat as the poster.

I have the same problems like you but my garantee was expire, so I would like to know if you know something about the price of calibration??? please send me a pm if you know.