Out of focus - Canon 70-200 f2.8L IS USM ver 2

twoshadows wrote in post #12152241
No? Considering the shots were both at low isos, I don't really see why not. But that's for another thread .

Google up about pixel density and its influence on the image sharpness.

You're kidding me, right?

How about owning both and seeing that there is virtually no difference frame to frame between them at low isos?

Yeah, I know that the 5Dc may be slightly better in DR and noise and diffraction, but i dare you to show me the difference in a 2 foot by 3 foot print. For that matter, I'm printing out 8 foot wide from my 7d (at iso 1600 no less) and i'm not sure that the 5Dc can keep up at that print size.

Wilt wrote in post #12149227
First, a section of the original, for comparison...

HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'image/gif' | Byte size: ZERO

HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'image/gif' | Byte size: ZERO

I used Paint Shop Pro here, but Elements works similarly, as well as other not-expensive programs (<$100)

Rule of Thumb for handholding the APS-C camera+lens = 1/(FL*1.6)
so this computes to 1/112 for shot 1. Again, some folks might be able to shoot at 1/60 handheld with 70mm lens, but other folks might need 1/250 if they are shakey or have bad technique.

With the 1/FL hand holding rule, it's a bit subjective but a good rule never the less. Some people are able to hand hold to very low shutter speeds. I always advise a 1/fl rule for the max FL of a zoom. The reason is that the lens doesn't get any lighter when zoomed and lens weight plays quite strongly with lens/camera shake. With a light lens like a 70-200/f4 IS L one probably could get away with less shutter speed to FL. But a large lens like a 70-200/f2.8 IS L I would advise that 1/200th sec to be it's slowest shutter speed across it's focal length and without resorting to help from the IS unit.

it's simply soft, don't need to do any PP to prove it like some guys suggested. Have your friend do more shootings and confirm if other pictures are also like this.

most of time, with this lens you don't need to do PP to make it sharper. May need to send it for calibration

auto1 wrote in post #12153839
it's simply soft, don't need to do any PP to prove it like some guys suggested. Have your friend do more shootings and confirm if other pictures are also like this.

most of time, with this lens you don't need to do PP to make it sharper. May need to send it for calibration

Either you shoot jpeg, process Raw's using a converter that is applying sharpening without you knowing it or you're not very picky. Also note that if you shoot jpeg a bit of sharpening is typically added even if you have it set to zero or minimum in the camera. ACR will apply sharpening "out of the box" unless you purposely go into the software and set it to "previews only".

To see the proper sharpness from all lenses you have to apply a small amount of sharpening to overcome the blur from the AA filter. It has nothing to do with the lens, but is to do with the sensor. One of the only manufacturers that doesn't employ an AA filter is Leica, so with something like an M9 you get beautifully sharp images out of the camera (zero sharpening) ... but the images can suffer from moire and jaggies.

If you don't believe me, read page 30 of the Canon booklet at the following link. It's a few years old, but nothing at all has changed:

http://www.usa.canon.c​om …/Handling/EOS_D​igital.pdf

GMCPhotographics wrote in post #12153535
With the 1/FL hand holding rule, it's a bit subjective but a good rule never the less. Some people are able to hand hold to very low shutter speeds. I always advise a 1/fl rule for the max FL of a zoom. The reason is that the lens doesn't get any lighter when zoomed and lens weight plays quite strongly with lens/camera shake. With a light lens like a 70-200/f4 IS L one probably could get away with less shutter speed to FL. But a large lens like a 70-200/f2.8 IS L I would advise that 1/200th sec to be it's slowest shutter speed across it's focal length and without resorting to help from the IS unit.

Correct. However the OP is using a lens with IS, but is taking pictures of a "moving" object (people) at too low a shutter-speed. Children that can fidgit and people standing at a podium that aren't posing should be shot at 1/200s or faster (if without flash) despite the 1/FL rule or the camera having IS. If the speaker is really animated 1/200s may not even be fast enough.

My feeling is that the images posted by the OP show a combination of motion blur and improper sharpening. There could be a problem with the lens, but you can't tell from what's been posted.

Refresh Image wrote in post #12152207
The edited image is plainly ugly, oversharpening cannot make a good photo, with exception of some special cases.

The point was not to optimize the photo in aesthetic appeal, the point was to clearly demonstrate what sharpening (in this case what Unsharp Mask) could to to eliminate the complaint of fuzziness in the photo, thereby proving that it was neither missed focus nor subject motion nor camera motion...simply lack of sharpening (which would not fix any of the three mentioned potential causes of blurriness).

I will ask him to shoot more pictures and see what happen. Thanks for your input and recommendation. It is a lesson to be learn everyday.

Bob_A wrote in post #12154056
Correct. However the OP is using a lens with IS, but is taking pictures of a "moving" object (people) at too low a shutter-speed. Children that can fidgit and people standing at a podium that aren't posing should be shot at 1/200s or faster (if without flash) despite the 1/FL rule or the camera having IS. If the speaker is really animated 1/200s may not even be fast enough.

My feeling is that the images posted by the OP show a combination of motion blur and improper sharpening. There could be a problem with the lens, but you can't tell from what's been posted.

This is a perfect example of why I prefer to use brighter lenses than f2.8 lenses with IS units. A faster shutter speed is needed to freeze the motion of the mobile lad, an IS unit if fine for stabilising the photographer, but it can't prevent motion blur.

chenga732 wrote in post #12155062
I will ask him to shoot more pictures and see what happen. Thanks for your input and recommendation. It is a lesson to be learn everyday.

One thing I can tell is lot of times operator issue also come into play. Not sure about your friend. Does he/she get super sharp shots with other lenses?

A while back there was a lady here on this forum who picked up cnaon 300mm f2.8 IS and her shots were way soft that what that lens can do. She was shooting 1dmk2, no AF issues, just soft images. Me and her did side by side testing using my 1dmk2 and my 300mm f2.8 IS against her. We also swapped camera/lenses. In the end no problem with her lens or the camera. Her shots were still soft and mine with both setups were like they should be. She had to work on her technique part.

twoshadows wrote in post #12153508
You're kidding me, right?

How about owning both and seeing that there is virtually no difference frame to frame between them at low isos?

Yeah, I know that the 5Dc may be slightly better in DR and noise and diffraction, but i dare you to show me the difference in a 2 foot by 3 foot print. For that matter, I'm printing out 8 foot wide from my 7d (at iso 1600 no less) and i'm not sure that the 5Dc can keep up at that print size.

Agree that guy doesn't know anything so don't worry about him. Maybe he just picked up a camera a little while back. My side my side testing of 5dc and 7d I was amazed at 7d picture quality.

1/125th is more than fast enough to freeze motion of a kid who is barely moving. I photograph people much slower than that without issues.

Quizzical_Squirrel wrote in post #12157617
Is there a filter on this lens?

There is a filter, B+W 77mm Ultraviolet (UV) Filter

http://www.bhphotovide​o.com …ltraviolet_UV_F​ilter.html

Take the &$#@ filter off!!! If you ever were paying attention in science (I often wasn't, but I do remember this) you must eliminate all potential possibility for error in testing a lens to find out if it is OK...

GMCPhotographics wrote in post #12153535
With the 1/FL hand holding rule, it's a bit subjective but a good rule never the less. Some people are able to hand hold to very low shutter speeds. I always advise a 1/fl rule for the max FL of a zoom. The reason is that the lens doesn't get any lighter when zoomed and lens weight plays quite strongly with lens/camera shake. With a light lens like a 70-200/f4 IS L one probably could get away with less shutter speed to FL. But a large lens like a 70-200/f2.8 IS L I would advise that 1/200th sec to be it's slowest shutter speed across it's focal length and without resorting to help from the IS unit.

I agree with this wholeheartedly. I've noticed that since i've been shooting with the 70-200 mk II, i've had a much harder time handholding because of the girth and weight of the lens. my 70-200 f/4 IS was much easier to handle, and subsequently i could shoot at slower SS's. sometimes i wonder if the 2.8 is really worth it, hah.