Another IMAGE for Critique from Canon 24-70L Lens

[jimchapin468]

OK guys I have another one here. Please give me your thoughts are sharp, soft, color, etc.. Thanks and have a good day! Jimmy

[buze]

It's really ugly. I mean, I wouldn't have that in my plate, even with fries!

:D

Seriously, Jim. You haven't started enough threads about that your lens yet ? if you are not sure of the results after all this time, you can blame the lens, sure, but the problem might just be further back from the body even.
Please group your posts to the same thread you started please, and also, don't private message people about it; it's limit harrasment/spam.

[blue_max]

Blown out highlights and strangely without an obvious focus.

Do you have any other lenses to compare with?

Graham

[cdhender]

Is this the full image or a crop? It looks like a crop to me.

[jimchapin468]

Buz --- BUzz Off!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Get the message.

[jimchapin468]

CDHender it is a crop. Jimmy

[condyk]

I think you need to test the lens properly and there are several references for how to do this if you do a simple search. Alternatively, take it back and get something else or a new copy. I'm not sure why you keep posting shots and getting the same feedback that it's not delivering the goods.

[buze]

It's still an ugly shot, and an ugly bird too. Without the idea of the original frame, we can't tell if it was suposed to be at the limit of the DoF, or if it's slightly backfocused (the blury beak) and we can't tell if the metering was right in some other place, or if it's just completely off.

Beside, sir, YOU explicitely required MY attention in a spam -- private message --. You've got it! :D

[Simon Spiers]

This image is not a good for testing a lens.
Try somthing with a bit more detail.

[wibbly]

Ok, here are some brick wall tests as a refererece of a kind. All converted from RAW using DPP set to no sharpening. No tweaks.

http://www.camera.fotopic.net/c574855.html

They're not perfect (handheld for a start, but at 1/800 or faster). Focus point was centre frame. Of course there's the possibility I moved after focusing, and the DOF is very narrow at f2.8, but at 10ft away should be a good few inches.

All wide open, and on the wide angle shots there is distinct softening especially towards the frame edges, I think. At other than 24mm they seem to sharpen up reasonably well, considering. They're certainly not pin sharp to my eye, but at f2.8 they're at one extreme of the lens performance curve. I don't know if this is a 'good lens' or not (others have suggested 'typical' based on the other shots on the page), but you can perhaps judge if yours is better (or worse). My only slight disapointment is that on a full frame camera (these were taken on a 20D) I guess they'd look a lot worse on the edges.

I think the key is to decide if the lens is worth it to you FOR A 24-70mm f2.8 lens. Not in abosolute terms. No lens is perfect, as they get wider in terms of zoom range and max aperture, there are more compromises to be made in design and you'll get poorer optical quality. So the question is if you would get better or very near EQUAL optics + spec + build quality at a lower price (3rd party 24-70 f2.8 lens) or with another copy of the Canon lens...

J

[wibbly]

... and finally, you can see how the image sharpens up somewhat in the image here

http://camera.fotopic.net/p16535984.html

An f-stop or two makes quite a difference.

J

[jimchapin468]

BUZ -- Grow up -- Stop acting like a child:D