First outing with 7D+70-200 2.8 II

[llie19]

Unfortunately did not turn out as stellar as I thought it would. I used manual mode, 1/1000 shutter speed at f/2.8, af expansion around center point. The background blur is there, which is nice, but somehow the sharpness just does not come close to what everybody makes it out to be. I was expecting the pictures to be razor sharp, but they don't really look that much superior to the other pictures I took with a 550D+55-250 (1/10 the price of 70-200 2.8 II). I am baffled. As much as I am aware of my photographic incompetence, I really want to be assured that my newly purchased lens is a good copy.

I also posted these on the lens sample thread, and someone mentioned that the overcast lighting may have contributed to the (perceived) lack of sharpness. I really just hope it's my poor shooting, or me being paranoid, not anything wrong with the lens.

[llie19]

These are some previous shots with 550D+55-250 posted here. Putting aside the lighting differences for a moment, I can't really tell much difference in pure image quality, and I thought upgrading from 55-250 to 70-200 II would make the difference between night and day.

http://photography-on-the.net/forum/...d.php?t=950270

http://photography-on-the.net/forum/...d.php?t=953176

http://photography-on-the.net/forum/...d.php?t=946332

http://photography-on-the.net/forum/...d.php?t=936974

[canonnoob]

upgrading lenses doesnt make up for technique. your images show focus being off and you have too slow of a shutter speed. White Balance is also off as well as the images being a tad dark. Just because you got a new lens doesnt mean that you are now going to get the most amazing shots ever. I tried looking for some settings to get an idea of what you were shooting at, but alas, no setting information.

[llie19]

Thank you. I completely agree that the photographer makes the biggest difference in picture quality, but if you read what I wrote I am not putting any blame on the lens, in fact I want all the blame to be on myself, thus the lens is working fine.

Somehow all the pictures lose their exif after being uploaded into flickr. Here is one set of basic info, and most pictures should have the same:

Exposure 0.001 sec (1/1000)
Aperture f/2.8
Exposure Program Manual
White Balance Auto

Originally Posted by canonnoob

upgrading lenses doesnt make up for technique. your images show focus being off and you have too slow of a shutter speed. White Balance is also off as well as the images being a tad dark. Just because you got a new lens doesnt mean that you are now going to get the most amazing shots ever. I tried looking for some settings to get an idea of what you were shooting at, but alas, no setting information.

[LiberationFrequency]

In soccer I like to keep shutter around 1/2000, and whatever the iso ends up being, thats what it is. I regularly end up shooting iso400 during daytime to keep the shutter up (clouds depending) and leaning to the right a touch. It might seem excessive but the noise is basically non-existent if you frame it right.

[canonnoob]

ISO? I would assume you didnt have the ISO pushed too much, these are at least 1/3rd stop or so underexposed. That is contributing to the issue.

[DHMN]

I can't really tell much difference in pure image quality, and I thought upgrading from 55-250 to 70-200 II would make the difference between night and day.

This kind of does sound like blaming the lens though....

The biggest problem in your comparison is.. the shots with the 55-250 were shot in sunlight.. these all look like late afternoon and cloudy so I doubt that ISO 400 even at F2.8 would be enough in the given situation.

[pprice]

Underexposed for sure is one of your issues (as said), and I agree you need a fester shutter speed for these (maybe due to the fast action, camera shake, who knows).

It is pretty easy to tell if you have a sharp copy just by throwing it on a tripod and taking some controlled shots.

[chrisg19]

I have found that if it isn't absolutely necessary I try not to use the 2.8 with the lens for best sharpness as well. It seems when it is opened all the way up it is not as sharp. When you have to use it for indoors or something, then the 2.8 is great, but if I am able to, I use something higher.

[llie19]

I see. Part of my mistake must be that I am still doing things the old way by not setting shutter speed high enough (55-250 has a max aperture of 5.6 on the long end, and I don't like high ISO if I don't absolutely need to), and the results is some motion blure especially on the ball. That makes sense, will raise the shutter speed next time. I guess with f/2.8 doubling the shutter speed from before is not a problem.

Originally Posted by LiberationFrequency

In soccer I like to keep shutter around 1/2000, and whatever the iso ends up being, thats what it is. I regularly end up shooting iso400 during daytime to keep the shutter up (clouds depending) and leaning to the right a touch. It might seem excessive but the noise is basically non-existent if you frame it right.

Originally Posted by canonnoob

ISO? I would assume you didnt have the ISO pushed too much, these are at least 1/3rd stop or so underexposed. That is contributing to the issue.

[llie19]

I used evaluative metering for these, should I have looked at the photos and decide to up the exposure compensation? I raised the exposure and brightness in LR, but I agree some still look underexposed. How do you all set the metering on a cloudy day? Thanks.

Originally Posted by canonnoob

ISO? I would assume you didnt have the ISO pushed too much, these are at least 1/3rd stop or so underexposed. That is contributing to the issue.

[SuzyView]

I haven't read if you did any sharpening to the final images. There is always some USM needed even if you shoot 1/1000. I shot at 1/2000 yesterday with my 7D and 70-200 2.8 IS Ver I and the images turned out fine, but I still needed some tweaking. It's normal to do that. Also, ISO was at 100-200 as it was very bright. Wide open, f2.8 is great, go to 4.0 and it's really great. Your shots are acceptable. It's really in how you are capturing the images and how you're sharpening after.

[Dennis Valet]

Also, any post processing on these? Doesn't look like you sharpened them in LR or PS

[llie19]

OK, that part I was questioning the lens performance, but I was really just worried. In hindsight I guess if you want 1/2000 shutter speed at 2.8, you might have to bump ISO to as high as 800? I shot in manual mode, and set the shutter speed and aperture, and let ISO be automatic, is this a good way to shoot under this condition?

Originally Posted by DHMN

This kind of does sound like blaming the lens though....

The biggest problem in your comparison is.. the shots with the 55-250 were shot in sunlight.. these all look like late afternoon and cloudy so I doubt that ISO 400 even at F2.8 would be enough in the given situation.

[SuzyView]

I set my ISO as low as it can get, around 100-400 outdoors, 5000 on my 7D the other night for football. Aperture makes a huge difference for sharpness and speed, so f2.8 is really pushing it. I only shoot 2.8 in extreme conditions, not in bright light, but at night, don't have much of a choice. Still, I shoot M as well, speed is what I adjust most of the time.