Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Photo Sharing & Visual Enjoyment Weddings & Other Family Events 
Thread started 18 Aug 2012 (Saturday) 08:33
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

70-200 focus?

 
jameswillett
Member
Avatar
48 posts
Joined Aug 2010
Location: Louisville
     
Aug 18, 2012 08:33 |  #1

So...I had an e-session and am wondering if some of you may be able to help me figure this out. This is my first time using the 70-200 2.8 IS and the attached image is at 200mm f2.8 and it seems OOF to me, especially in lightroom. Not looking for critiques on the image as I dont really like this shot, just trying to figure out why a lot of them at 200mm are OOF. Is 2.8 too shallow at this distance? Shots taken at 70mm look tack sharp. Thanks for any ideas! Im going to try and take some more images today and see what happens.


HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
rick_reno
Cream of the Crop
44,642 posts
Likes: 134
Joined Dec 2010
     
Aug 18, 2012 10:13 |  #2

looks good here, what happens if you crop what you were focusing on?




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
jcolman
Goldmember
2,651 posts
Gallery: 17 photos
Best ofs: 2
Likes: 528
Joined Mar 2008
Location: North Carolina
     
Aug 18, 2012 12:02 |  #3

Are you using the mk I or mk II version of this lens? My old mk I was soft at 2.8. My mk II is quite sharp wide open.


www.jimcolmanphotograp​hy.com (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
charlie ­ z
Senior Member
865 posts
Likes: 34
Joined Jun 2010
     
Aug 18, 2012 12:22 |  #4

Can I ask did av point at that subject cos it seems to me that the focal length has just took the whole image rather than just the subject in question I have never had this issue at 200 so I am a bit bemused t why it wouldnt b super sharp....on ur subject...




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
jameswillett
THREAD ­ STARTER
Member
Avatar
48 posts
Joined Aug 2010
Location: Louisville
     
Aug 18, 2012 13:57 |  #5

looks good here, what happens if you crop what you were focusing on?

Crop makes it look pretty bad. I can post a cropped image if you like?

Are you using the mk I or mk II version of this lens? My old mk I was soft at 2.8. My mk II is quite sharp wide open.

MK II :(

Can I ask did av point at that subject cos it seems to me that the focal length has just took the whole image rather than just the subject in question I have never had this issue at 200 so I am a bit bemused t why it wouldnt b super sharp....on ur subject...

Not sure I follow your question, but I changed the AV point to hit the subject instead of focusing and recomposing.

Thanks everyone!




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
pyro1
Goldmember
Avatar
1,237 posts
Gallery: 64 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 398
Joined Feb 2012
Location: Meridian, MS
     
Aug 18, 2012 14:01 as a reply to  @ jameswillett's post |  #6

Looks like the AF point might have been on her arm and the softness is a result of the shallow DOF. Her arm and leg look in focus to me. Just my $.02


Twin 1DX, 5D mk III - EF 16-35 f/2.8L II USM - EF 24-105 f/4L IS USM - EF 70-200 f/2.8 L IS USM II - EF 100-400 f/4.5 L IS USM - EF 100 f/2.8 L Macro IS USM - EF 85mm f/1.2 L II USM - Tam 24-70 f/2.8 Di VC - 580EXII - Einsteins & CyberSync System - Vagabond Mini -
My smugmug (external link) My Facebook (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
erikfig
Goldmember
Avatar
2,151 posts
Likes: 200
Joined May 2012
Location: Orlando, FL
     
Aug 18, 2012 14:11 |  #7

2.8 should be fine at that distance. However, where are you placing your focus point? At 2.8 is you focus with the center point and then recompose to move your subjects to the right, your focus will move with the focus point used, meaning you will loose focus. Just use the right focus point.

Somebody correct me if I'm wrong :P


Who cares about my gear?
FlickR (external link)
Facebook (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
charlie ­ z
Senior Member
865 posts
Likes: 34
Joined Jun 2010
     
Aug 18, 2012 14:21 |  #8

pyro1 wrote in post #14874993 (external link)
Looks like the AF point might have been on her arm and the softness is a result of the shallow DOF. Her arm and leg look in focus to me. Just my $.02

Yeah I agree buddy this is why i said about av point :)




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
charlie ­ z
Senior Member
865 posts
Likes: 34
Joined Jun 2010
     
Aug 18, 2012 14:22 |  #9

erikfig wrote in post #14875014 (external link)
2.8 should be fine at that distance. However, where are you placing your focus point? At 2.8 is you focus with the center point and then recompose to move your subjects to the right, your focus will move with the focus point used, meaning you will loose focus. Just use the right focus point.

Somebody correct me if I'm wrong :P

Nope correct :) sometimes u can get away with it other times u dont like above :)




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
charlie ­ z
Senior Member
865 posts
Likes: 34
Joined Jun 2010
     
Aug 18, 2012 14:24 |  #10

jameswillett wrote in post #14874984 (external link)
Crop makes it look pretty bad. I can post a cropped image if you like?

MK II :(

Not sure I follow your question, but I changed the AV point to hit the subject instead of focusing and recomposing.

Thanks everyone!

Just watch where u hit the subject like this situation I would of made sure it would of hit her/his face :) the lens is just grabbing the nearest point imo which is the body which is closest to you :)




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
auroraskye
Goldmember
Avatar
2,445 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Nov 2007
Location: Plano, TX
     
Aug 18, 2012 15:41 |  #11

Her legs look in focus, like someone else said. It looks like they're angling backwards which is pushing their heads out of focus. You could easily stop down on the 70-200 at 200 and get plenty of bokeh.


I am super cool n' stuff.
http://www.brandithomp​sonphotography.com (external link)
Like Me On Facebook (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Sparkeyluv
Member
62 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 2
Joined Oct 2006
Location: Jackson, MS
     
Aug 19, 2012 01:58 |  #12

I agree the focus look s as if it was on her arm. Where did you focus?




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
jameswillett
THREAD ­ STARTER
Member
Avatar
48 posts
Joined Aug 2010
Location: Louisville
     
Aug 19, 2012 08:46 |  #13

Thanks everyone. I did switch my focus point to hit their faces prior to running out in the street but its possible I recomposed or something in a hurry since traffic was busy. Going to toss this up to poor skills on my part since shots I took yesterday seem fine....sigh




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
dmward
Cream of the Crop
9,083 posts
Gallery: 29 photos
Likes: 1526
Joined Jun 2009
Location: Metro Chicago
     
Aug 19, 2012 12:04 |  #14

What we seem to forget is the DoFocus is half in front and half in back of the focus point.
An on-line DoF calculator says that DoF at 20 ft for a 200mm F2.8 on 5DII is .5ft and at 30Ft its 1.14ft. If half is in front and we are focused on the front of the subject that effectively halves the DoF. Which in this case won't get their faces in focus.


David | Sharing my Insights, Knowledge & Experience (external link) | dmwfotos website (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
dmxsoulja3
Member
56 posts
Joined Jan 2008
     
Aug 20, 2012 07:32 |  #15

I'm with dmward on this one, I have the 70-200 II IS 2.8 and while the 2.8 seems great in theory, you really have to have a DoF calculator or look at one prior to your shoot with basic values you think you might encounter, I too ran into this same issue where I couldn't figure out why this "holy grail" of a lens was producing these soft pics, and especially when you have people side by side, it would get the first person but if the other person was slightly behind them, soft. I recently went to a surfing event and was using the lens at 3.2/4 and my keeper % was probably double what I get when I'm shooting 2.8, it really takes experience to use this lens at 2.8 and 200mm. Keep shooting!




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

2,825 views & 0 likes for this thread
70-200 focus?
FORUMS Photo Sharing & Visual Enjoyment Weddings & Other Family Events 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is rono258
858 guests, 229 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.