Do I need a new walkaround lens

Ok, I asked this question earlier then posted a stupid pic to ask the question. I assure you that I thought I was posting something else..whatever. In any event, here is a brand new image, shot in raw with my 40D with a very popular, non-Canon, 28-70 something f2.8 lens. I processed the photo in DPP and resized it for posting with Paint Shop Photo X2 and nothing else.

Does this lens suck, or am I doing something wrong?

HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.

Looks like a little camera shake.

Could be camera shake, or were you inside the lens' minimum focusing distance? I'm assuming that the center flower was the main focus point, but it looks like the bottom flower is just a bit sharper than everything else (maybe the focus point locked on to this flower). It also looks like the bottom flower is forward of the center flower as well. If so, maybe its a DOF problem...according to EXIF data, you were wide open at 2.8.

Camera shake makes sense to me but I believe that I shot this at 1/800, can shake affect a shutte speed that fast? If that is true, I need to get IS lenses but I don't think that Canon makes a 28-70 f2.8 L IS, do they?

Actually...I forgot that the wind was blowing the flowers a little, sorry about that. Here is one of my motorcycle as I walked back into the house. Same lens, same everything else.

HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.

Looks like the problem was the wind, not the lens, judging from the 2nd picture.

mcneguy wrote in post #4065034
Camera shake makes sense to me but I believe that I shot this at 1/800, can shake affect a shutte speed that fast?

Its not camera shake but moving the camera or subject slightly. You were shooting at f2.8. The DOF at f2.8 is VERY narrow so any movement of the flower or the camera - such as a focus and recompose or a slight body or camera repositioning or some wind moving the flower - can easily shift the focus point so the image will appear a bit out-of-focus.

Looks sharp to me. Bear in mind that the filter over the sensor reduces sharpness so you need a bit of sharpening in PP to get that back. I've read that Canon recommends USM of 0.3, 300, 0.

I applied that to a crop of your tank shot:

HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.

Excellent...Where did you read what Canon recommends as USM settings?

mcneguy wrote in post #4065074
Actually...I forgot that the wind was blowing the flowers a little, sorry about that. Here is one of my motorcycle as I walked back into the house. Same lens, same everything else.

Nothing wrong with this one. Take in account that at 2.8 their is a shallow DOF!

Your discovering the learning curve with f/2.8 and its shallow depth of field, i'm getting the same thing with f/1.8.

Pete-eos wrote in post #4068366
Your discovering the learning curve with f/2.8 and its shallow depth of field, i'm getting the same thing with f/1.8.

As said before... true!

mcneguy wrote in post #4067194
Excellent...Where did you read what Canon recommends as USM settings?

Wish I could tell you. It was somewhere on POTN. One of the POTN gurus was quoting a Canon white paper, methinks.

BTW, the 0.3 setting means the sharpening is mild - when doing PP for prints I often use 1.0 or 2.0 (with much reduced strength) for more sharpening.

-js