Image Stabalization Problem?

I just switched a bad copy of a 24-105mm F/4L lens for a new 70-200mm f/4 L lens in the last couple of days. I also bought a new 7D. I was getting much sharper pictures with the new lens, but there were times when even the pictures from the new lens looked soft.

Details:

Tonight I was shooting pictures of a bag with text on it.
Approximately 15 feet away.
Flash on.
FL=200mm
AV mode
Shutter Speed used was 1/60 and 1/250 @ f/4

In all shots taken the pictures are very sharp with no image stabaliztion and very soft (comparably speaking) when I turn it on.

So my quesion is, is there ever a situation where the image stabalization is more detrimintal than helpful? I have never heard of a case except on lenses that cannot be tripod mounted with IS on. I am hand holding in this case for all pictures.

Any information / knowledge would be very helpful. I'm going back to the dealer again tomorrow but this has gotton completely out of hand. One bad camera and two bad lenses. Maybe I'm not suppose to take pictures. lol

Bill

post the pictures...they're worth a thousand words...sometimes the stabilization needs a half a second to start up...

I'm falling asleep. I 'll see about getting some up tomorrow. I always wait for the IS to kick in after pressing the shutter half way, so I know that's not it, but thanks, the is the exact kind of information I'm looking for. Maybe someone will hit on something I'm not doing I should be and I'm just missing it. I doubt it, but maybe.

Thank You

Bill

Note that they always say "up to x stops of stabilization." They say this because it's not always 4 stops, but in certain situations can be.

It all depends on the person. Someone with really steady hands could probably pull off 5-6 stops with the same lens that someone with shaky hands can only get a stop or two out of.

That said, I find pretty much all lenses are good to at least half of their advertised stabilization amount in any situation.

Hitthespot wrote in post #12159911
Details:

Tonight I was shooting pictures of a bag with text on it.
Approximately 15 feet away.
Flash on.
FL=200mm
AV mode
Shutter Speed used was 1/60 and 1/250 @ f/4

In all shots taken the pictures are very sharp with no image stabaliztion and very soft (comparably speaking) when I turn it on.

Bill, when you are using flash for the lighting (assuming it completely overpowers the ambient light), you can typically use very slow shutter speeds and not have any camera/lens motion blur. That's because the duration of the flash output is so short that it is like using a very fast shutter speed. Thus, Image Stabilization does virtually nothing for you when using flash.

I suspect that you have focusing problems, but posting your photos will help us figure that out. Chances are good that the problem is operator error of one form or another.

Thanks Skip,

now that it's day time I will run some more tests without flash. I'm figuring operator error also but my luck has been to get bad equipment. I'm beginning to think my local camera shop is a junk shop.

Here is some samples I took today. While the problem seems directly related to the IS and flash, during some outside testing I noticed that with the IS on the camera will completely miss the focusing point. The red box will show on an item but the camera will focus somewhere completely different. No where near the red box.

In both the photos below I am focusing directly on the F in fresh Step with spot focusing. All EXIF info should be identical in both photos.

This does not happen everytime. Outside 95% of the time the IS works like it is suppose to. But every now and then I get the below results or the focusing in the wrong spot problem.

I am completely confused!

Bill
without is

you can put your camera into live view...use the 10X zoom, and half depress the shutter with IS both on and off...you should see it stabilize with it on fairly easily...you probably don't notice it outside because you're shutter speeds are high enough that IS has no effect at all...take a shot without flash at 1/50 @ 200mm...if the IS on one isn't sharper, something is wrong

DreDaze thank you for your comments. When I place the lens in IS mode you CAN in fact see it stabalize the picture. But every now and then I get the results above, especially with the flash on. I'm not saying it is a problem but the camera/lens definitely takes better flash pictures most of the time with IS off. The above photo's proves it. I don't know why and was hoping someone here would have an explanation. If I understand IS correctly it should definitely never make the picture worse, but it does time and time again.

Again thank you for your comments, I'm hoping someone knows the answer or if I have a faulty camera / lens, AGAIN!

Bill

Bill - what sort of setup are you using for focus control? I don't know your camera but, in my 20D, I can choose from "one shot"/"AI focus"/"AI Servo" settings. I can also choose the focus point, and I always use the center point.

I'm using a 7D, one shot. Lens is set to autofocus, IS mode 1. I am using spot focus center point.

Maybe I'm just gun shy since my first purchase of the 7D and 24-105mm f/4L lens was both bad. I've replaced them both since I purchased them the beginning of March. I just took over 100 pictures flash on, off, and outside pictures and in every case the IS is working beautifully and the pictures are much sharper than anything I ever got with film and non-L lenses.

I don't know what is causing the problem above every now and then. I stated it happened most of the time but that was all last night. This morning most pictures are fine with the exception of a few like the example above. It may just be me shaking real bad with the IS on vs not shaking no where near as bad with the IS off. The funny thing is though, in the example above the IQ is also better setting focus aside. Contrast and exposure is also better and these pictures were taken seconds apart with the same settings except the IS being turned off. Anyway, I went back and looked at the photo that had focused completey wrong compared to the red focus point, and though I feel completely stupid now, I believe it was because I shot it through a double pane, tinted window filled with gas between the panes. DUH. Hardly a picture to use as an example for improper focusing. However I did shoot some ducks a couple of days ago and had one picture completely out of focus with the Red square perfectly on target, and one picture tack sharp with the Red square 2 feet behind the duck and a aperature of f/4. These camera's are all software driven now and I just think everynow and then they get confused and make mistakes. As long as it's only 1 picture in a 100 I'm not going to worry about it.

If you can think of anything, even if it seems simple don't be shy about hurting my feelings, I'm more interested in solving a problem than worrying about an insinuation I'm not knowledgeable enough.

Thanks a lot Skip, and everyone who's tried to help. I appreciate it.

Bill