Invertalon wrote in post #16735719
I have used/tried a few of these, and there is copy variation (like any lens). I have had ones that were pretty soft wide open, others very sharp. If you get a well centered copy though, that is the important part!
Your copy does look a bit on the softer side, though.
Thank you. I agree that being centered is more important than slight softness wide open.
Thank you. Your picture does look good.
single_track wrote in post #16735762
My 17-40 is pretty darn sharp: good colors and contrasty. Especially in the center. It is a great lens. Stopped down, it is my sharpest lens, beating the 24-70, and even the sigma 50mm 1.4.
I cannot say if your 14mm is soft but you may be comparing it against a great lens.
Could be. I do like the 17-40L.
Talley wrote in post #16735803
Looks like you are wide open and missed focus. The yellow pole seems to be sharper than the vehicle and especially the trees in the background.
I believe the focus is good. If you want, I can upload the full image. I have gotten similar results several times.
xpfloyd wrote in post #16735813
The focus scales on them are usually off so make sure you focussed correctly when testing. I find my copy to be not great at f/2.8 but very sharp from f/4 onwards
Thank you. I didn't use the focus scale. I focused using live view.
I have also noticed that the focus is different at the same point on the focus scale when I'm coming from infinity or the MFD.
titi_67207 wrote in post #16735846
Maybe your copy focuses not enough far. Try to turn the ring to the maximum distance, and check the image at f/2.8, are far objects enough sharp or not ?
PS: My Samyang 14mm is sharper at f/2.8 than my 17-40MM at f/4. After f/5.6, they are very sharp without sharpness differences (except corners where the 14mm is better)
Thank you. My copy does focus past infinity, so I don't think that that is the problem.