Focus/Sharpness Expectations

Ok, looking to see if my expectations are too high or if I am correct in thinking there is an issue.

Also posting these to see if anyone can possibly spot if it is front or back focusing as I was struggling to verify - although I think it is severe front focusing (explanation further in)

https://drive.google.c​om …VDBVcXd6TEE&usp​=drive_web

Here is a sample of a few shots I have taken in the last week. The ones all in the living room were after I started to notice the perceived issues and trying to see if there was a specific remedy. I was using a 17-55 2.8, 70D, and a 270exii with a stoffen diffuser, some shots bouncing off the ceiling others directly aimed.

The living room shots were so I could compare the sharpness at different focal points and distances. I checked this after this past Easter weekend I noticed practically all of the pictures I had taken of my daughter flying a kite looked the same as the on I have at the link (yes I know it was a bad focus point but even on frames that the focus point was better placed the results look the same - would post others but these are the only ones I have available at work).

There is also a random shot in there of my youngest daughter while we were on a train car...

Now the majority of the shots and reason I have this lens is because I need wide angle shots in low light (regularly using this flash and shooting at 2.8). I wouldnt have noticed this issue until now because previously I only had the 50mm attached to the body full time and most of my other focal ranges are on the telephoto end. When shooting with the 17-55 any zoomed in shot I take is crystal clear, crisp and in well focus (if not a minor amount of front focus).

Now I have run through some MFA on both ends and spent time taking other shots at the wide end. No matter what MFA I put in the shots taken all stay looking blurry, although some less blurry than others (I have settled in at around +8 as the MFA for wide angle). Why there? Because I at one point of frustration decided to take the lens and stand at minimum focus distance and was suddenly getting crystal clear and perfectly sharp shots (specifically at that MFA adjustment). But then when I would step back even 1 full adult step and take pictures everything in frame looked soft...

Granted I recognize the lighting is poor in almost all these shots but should it be affecting the results this much? I just want someone elses eyes to look at them and confirm I am not crazy before I send the camera and lens off to Canon and await the resulting cost of whatever they assume it might be...and to correct me on is this the infamous "softness" people talk about when wide open or is this actually bad focus...

Front/back focusing is not the only reason a lens produces blurry photos.

I always recommend using a target designed for the task AND a proper tesdting process.

You can get a target from this site for free. Print it and glue it on heavy posterboard to avoid distortions/inaccuracy​.

Read their testing procedure and understand/apply it.

Use the procedure only in good natural light.

http://www.peleng8.com …k-focus.html#.U1kSTo_ANa​g

It also helps to know exactly what part of the scene you have focused on. I would do as above stated and do some controlled tests. I would also move the MFA back to zero before starting my tests.

MakisM1 wrote in post #16857712
Front/back focusing is not the only reason a lens produces blurry photos.

I always recommend using a target designed for the task AND a proper tesdting process.

You can get a target from this site for free. Print it and glue it on heavy posterboard to avoid distortions/inaccuracy​.

This is a good tool and I have used it to quantify front/back focus issues. I know a lot of people question the relevance of lab results but in situations like this you have to have a repeatable test to identify the exact issue before you can proceed to resolve it. In my experience, once I have isolated a focus issue and implemented MA to address it, the pictures have definitely improved as a result. In some cases the issue was not MA and I was able to find out the real cause by eliminating the lens focus per se as a problem.

GregDunn wrote in post #16858367
I know a lot of people question the relevance of lab results but in situations like this you have to have a repeatable test to identify the exact issue before you can proceed to resolve it. ...

You should have seen the thread where I posted the results of my (faulty) first EF 24-70 MkII!... People were about to lynch me for not going out to the real world to shoot (I did, that's how I got clued that something was wrong with it), accusing me of trying to calibrate a delicate instrument with a sledgehammer (yeah right, my EF 70-200 MkII AND my nifty were spot on...), not knowing how to experiment (spent a career in R&D, including model simulations and model testing).

Of course, nobody bothered when the replacement EF 24-70L MkII arrived and the results showed it spot on...

Thanks for the link. I will try that one out later. I have already tried calibrating with dot tune, one of those high contrast charts with the patterns on it and my tripod, 20 pictures at each interval focal length using live view and OVF etc. Unfortunately my eyes were more blurred than the results on my monitor (1920x1200 but not an ips calibrated thing). All those pictures though are at home while I am at work.

I definitely will run it through the tests patterns and method mentioned though as I cant to get it down. I just wanted to put up a few real world shots to see what the general feedback was and or if my expectations of what is sharp is off (since there is a difference for at least my eyes when looking at was is sharp on a chart vs sharp in a real world subject).

Thanks for the responses!

kfreels wrote in post #16858327
It also helps to know exactly what part of the scene you have focused on. I would do as above stated and do some controlled tests. I would also move the MFA back to zero before starting my tests.

Honestly I had various points in the scenes. Some were on the dog's eyes, some were on the fake flower, some were on a doll on the floor, some were on a ball on the coffee table etc. I didn't strip out the exif for anyone that wanted to open it in DPP. But definitely understand where you are coming from - will likely post up the test results when I run them in the coming days.

MakisM1 wrote in post #16858408
You should have seen the thread where I posted the results of my (faulty) first EF 24-70 MkII!... People were about to lynch me for not going out to the real world to shoot (I did, that's how I got clued that something was wrong with it), accusing me of trying to calibrate a delicate instrument with a sledgehammer (yeah right, my EF 70-200 MkII AND my nifty were spot on...), not knowing how to experiment (spent a career in R&D, including model simulations and model testing).

I bail on those threads after it turns into a sniping contest. I have an engineering degree and many years experience designing and testing both hardware and software, so I feel your pain. When you see an issue, quantifying it is the first step toward fixing it. I ran Dot Tune on my 70-200 f/2.8 and after adjustment was delighted to see it split the center of the DOF in live tests. This is the crazy lens that requires about -9 MA on the 7D; if that hadn't fixed it I was fully prepared to send it in for repair... It's no wonder it performed badly wide open on my 550D, which does not have MA; I was getting severe backfocus on both bodies.

As a side note to the OP, make sure that your tests and live photos are done with similar lighting! It's a little-recognized fact that some cameras focus differently with fluorescent, tungsten and daylight; even if the lens is not defective you may see a noticeable tendency to misfocus with some types of lighting. I have a MA chart for each lens which indicates the appropriate values for common lighting types.

Anyone else having trouble with the OP's link? All I get is a Google Drive logon screen.

GregDunn wrote in post #16859662
I bail on those threads after it turns into a sniping contest. I have an engineering degree and many years experience designing and testing both hardware and software, so I feel your pain. When you see an issue, quantifying it is the first step toward fixing it. I ran Dot Tune on my 70-200 f/2.8 and after adjustment was delighted to see it split the center of the DOF in live tests. This is the crazy lens that requires about -9 MA on the 7D; if that hadn't fixed it I was fully prepared to send it in for repair... It's no wonder it performed badly wide open on my 550D, which does not have MA; I was getting severe backfocus on both bodies.

As a side note to the OP, make sure that your tests and live photos are done with similar lighting! It's a little-recognized fact that some cameras focus differently with fluorescent, tungsten and daylight; even if the lens is not defective you may see a noticeable tendency to misfocus with some types of lighting. I have a MA chart for each lens which indicates the appropriate values for common lighting types.

I opened the thread to ask whether my (documented with photos) observations about erratic performance were common, or I had just hit the jackpot... The hostility was amazing... Anyway...

To the OP:

I'd like to emphasize the guidance Greg offered above. I would go a step further to recommend that you do your tests in good daylight.

Apart from the fact that some lenses react differently to artificial lighting, you also have to deal with the cycling nature of the fluorescent lighting (classic or CFL) which may affect both the light level and the AF performance.

John from PA wrote in post #16860265
Anyone else having trouble with the OP's link? All I get is a Google Drive logon screen.

I changed the link just now - let me know if still a problem...

MakisM1 wrote in post #16860292
I opened the thread to ask whether my (documented with photos) observations about erratic performance were common, or I had just hit the jackpot... The hostility was amazing... Anyway...

To the OP:

I'd like to emphasize the guidance Greg offered above. I would go a step further to recommend that you do your tests in good daylight.

Apart from the fact that some lenses react differently to artificial lighting, you also have to deal with the cycling nature of the fluorescent lighting (classic or CFL) which may affect both the light level and the AF performance.

Thanks, will definitely do this - just have to wait until a day that I am not loaded with things to do. 2 kids, im a teacher, wife is a teacher, dog is a lab that needs outdoor time and I do the cooking in the house... rare I get daylight hours for the photography lol. Thanks everyone for all the well detailed feedback as I had completely forgotten about the way CFL's act and that I have all 5k temp cfl's in the house could definitely be affecting my results.

John from PA wrote in post #16860265
Anyone else having trouble with the OP's link? All I get is a Google Drive logon screen.

Me too.

Link working for me now.

The link always worked if one took time to log onto his/her google account.