Soft 300 f/4L IS?

Bought this thing used of FM a few weeks ago and got it in the mail christmas eve. Immediately I noticed the pics looked soft, but I figured I'd give it a little time, pop off at least a hundred or two shots with it... but now I'm getting worried. Shot some birds today and not a single shot looked sharp.

Here's an example, a cardinal I shot this morning at ISO 400, 1/640th, f/6.3 center focus point right on the cardinal.

Here's the un-touched original;

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

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

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

The fixed version is oversaturated to me, but I think it looks just fine technically. I can't quite tell how much closer that part "to the right of the cardinal" (assuming you mean the branch) is.

Curves might bring it up. Also, it's underexposed some. I think for an un-touched original, it looks good. Maybe you might want to post a 100% crop after you PS'ed it.


Overall, I agree though. They're definitely not "prime" sharp, as I would expect that lens to be.

My question is: Did the seller show You any photos shot with this lens and if so how were they compared to this?

To my eye it looks to have focused on the branch to the right of the Cardinal.

Nope, none from the lens, only of the lens. I've seen other photo's taken with 300L IS's though and they seemed significantly sharper than what mine is achieving.

gyrob, is it really what you typically get with yours? Hm, I'm surprised to hear that. I thought being a prime and all this thing would be razor sharp.

Icecamp, I'd have to agree, butt of the bird looks more in focus than the head as well.

Grrr.....

sorry posted without permision so removed post.
Rob.

I agree, it looks like the lens is front focusing.

gyrob, no problem. I just activated the image editing ok thing. Just hadn't gotten around to it up till today.

I just found a focus testing chart, so I'm gonna go print it out, give it a try, and I'll post the results here.

I was going to suggest that very same thing. It's the only way to reassure yourself. I do believe that many have too high expectations and when it comes to long lenses, IS or not, they misjudge just how much shake and DOF can impact. Your shots look like a decent average effort but also like the bird is actually a small part of the frame. Those kinds of shots never look as vibrant and 'hot' as a frame filler. I hope it's Ok because I think you can do it justice with some work.

well you shot at iso 400 and i find above 200 it sort of adds a little softness for this type of shot also if it was handheld it act's as a 480mm on your 20d 1/640sec should bo ok with IS on but not alway's until your more use to the long focal lenth handling.
Rob.

Can you use a center focus point and try another subject with high contrast to the background?

I do have this lens and am amazed at its' sharpness.

Thanks, I'll remember your suggestions. I'll try filling more of the frame next time, but darn are they skiddish!!! As soon as they see the white lens they fly off. So I open a window, croutch out of sight and stick my lens out the window just enough to get the shot. Then I get swarms of birds to shoot. Should I use IS always? Or look into a monopod?

Anyway, here are the results of my test. I took 6 shots, all focused perfectly on the black line with the center AF point. 1/200th, ISO 400, f/4, tripod mounted, 45 degrees (I eye balled it, looked close enough) used flash and M to get the shutter I wanted. This is also a crop. Does that make a difference..? If it does I'll post the orig. Anyway, all six frames were consistant so I think I did this right....

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

see you put eddit alowed on this is what i came up with, usm,saturation, contrast and run it through noisware, for the size of the bird in the full frame and refrance to my other post its not far off imho.
Rob.

Post the full image test sheet but you can crop it for the web.

I bought FM unseen and copy appears good.

Besides the focus test, shoot something slower moving than a bird, of more frame filling size, and known plane of focus. It looked like you were shooting that bird on a hazy gray day. Nothing looks sharp under low contrast conditions.

I too bought a used 300 f/4L IS on FM in November to do field close-ups. 2003 manufacture. Took it out same day, good light. I knew it was good copy because here's the result, focused just forward and under the eye.
http://aesop.rutgers.e​du …es/Horse_Equine​Center.htm
Sorry for the jpg artifacts from down-rezzing.
Jack

If your copy is indeed mis-focusing, the folks at Canon are really nice about calibration.