Do you "test" your lens after purchase?

I just purchased a Canon 70-200 f2.8 v II lens (arriving tomorrow) and want to make sure I have a good copy that is free from any focusing issues, etc.

Lens Rentals has an in-depth article on testing a lens (http://www.lensrentals​.com …010/11/how-to-test-a-lens).

Do any of you test your lenses, and if you do, what extreme do you go to?

I figure when purchasing a $2,500 lens I would like to know that it is performing as advertised.

Thanks in advance.

Alan

In Spec is a loose term esp with faster lens and thin sensors {compared to thick film}.
Just a few shots with a crisp brick wall for me.
Its Ya or Na and some exam at 400x.

I do test all my lenses and redo/check micro ajust every 6 month's or so ,it nice to know they are working ok so then it'can only be me that is messing thing's up
Rob.

http://www.lensrentals​.com …s-is-soft-and-other-facts

LostArk wrote in post #16466849
http://www.lensrentals​.com …s-is-soft-and-other-facts

Great article. Thanks.

ahender wrote in post #16466749
I just purchased a Canon 70-200 f2.8 v II lens (arriving tomorrow) and want to make sure I have a good copy that is free from any focusing issues, etc.

Lens Rentals has an in-depth article on testing a lens (http://www.lensrentals​.com …010/11/how-to-test-a-lens).

Do any of you test your lenses, and if you do, what extreme do you go to?

I figure when purchasing a $2,500 lens I would like to know that it is performing as advertised.

Thanks in advance.

Alan

The best way to "test" a lens is to use it for the purpose for which it was purchased. A couple of weeks' extensive use will answer all questions. Only real-world exercise will reveal any equipment's strengths and weaknesses (and the photographer's limits as well).

It's useful to note that photo equipment performs best when used to capture images of real three-dimensional subjects.

I agree with DC Fan. I just go out and shoot random stuff in a several environments for a day or 2 and it will become painfully obvious if something is amiss. It also allows me to get familiar with the nuances of the particular lens.

In the past I've done test charts and staggered batteries. I found that I had lenses that passed artificial tests, but had issues in the real world, and vice versa. Easier just to go shoot what you bought the lens to shoot and see how it does.

DC Fan wrote in post #16467205
The best way to "test" a lens is to use it for the purpose for which it was purchased. A couple of weeks' extensive use will answer all questions. Only real-world exercise will reveal any equipment's strengths and weaknesses (and the photographer's limits as well).

It's useful to note that photo equipment performs best when used to capture images of real three-dimensional subjects.

I bought the same lens recently. First thing I did was go out and shoot a football game.

How's a chart going to tell you if the motors and stuff are fast enough to keep up with the camera and action? As for native sharpness, you don't need a chart to tell you that.

LostArk wrote in post #16466849
http://www.lensrentals​.com …s-is-soft-and-other-facts

I like this quote It will be quickly dismissed by many here at POTN

"It is a bad time to be a pixel-peeper. If you look closely enough on a high resolution full-frame camera, chances are you’ll find some minor flaw with every lens you own. If you go through 13 copies and get one that’s just perfect, remember to never, ever upgrade your camera body, because it probably won’t be perfect on the next one. That’s just how it is: manufacturing processes are not up to the lens design and sensor resolution we have at the moment. Put on your Batman undies and cope with it. Or shoot with a Holga for a while and get over it. And stop looking at 100% images on your monitor: not only will it make you go blind, 50% screen resolution is more resolution than your printer can reproduce anyway. Unless you print billboards designed to be viewed from 5 feet away."

i usually just take pictures with it...the only time i do 'test' shot type things is when i feel like i'm missing shots...and a quick tripod mounted test usually establishes that i was the problem...

Yes, I test my lenses for front/back focus, etc.

I do not test my lenses to verify that they are sealed (i.e., waterproof!). I learned at a young age, when testing the strength of a tree house, that when you test something, you need to be prepared for the test to fail. (I'm not kidding, I still have the scars -- that lesson kind of stuck with me).

EL_PIC wrote in post #16466769
In Spec is a loose term esp with faster lens and thin sensors {compared to thick film}.
Just a few shots with a crisp brick wall for me.
Its Ya or Na and some exam at 400x.

You mean 400% or 4X right? Cause I'm not sure what looking at 6 pixels from the picture would help...

I usually go out on a photowalk for a while and take a bunch of pictures. I'll check them on the computer to see if focus is on or not. If focus seems to be off I'll setup a tripod and shoot something like a fence, then change focus and let it AF. I'll check and see if it gets around the same spot everytime or if it is front or back focusing. Then do the MFA and I call it a day.

Usually just an hour or two walking around plus the first 10 test shots in the house before heading out is enough to make me happy.

Having had issues before that I didn't spot until it was too late, I do now check that it is 'reasonable' in terms of sharpness by comparing with other lenses I have. I also check that the corners are all a similar sharpness.

Then shoot with it to check AF (and MFA if it is a prime).

As much as I don't like the idea, the first few shots with a new lens are usually of a brick wall. I don't go nuts on it though, just check that there is nothing obviously bad. For some lenses, like the 50 1.4 I also want to compare with say my 24-105 to see which one I'd rather use for landscapes at f8 (it's a wash). And then for other lenses I want to know any characteristics I should be aware of - like how my sharper is my sig85 or 50 1.4 at f2 than f1.4.

Some things about a lens you can test best with something like a brick wall or chart, others like the field curvature on the TS-E 17mm can only really be seen in real-world shooting, so you definitely want to do both IMO.

Like I said, I never used to bother with this until I came back from Moab will all my 17-40 shots really soft on one side which wasn't so obvious on the LCD.

thanks for the links...