Blurry Images with 75-300mm Lens

Well, I'm going to jump in here because I have a similar experience with a 70-300mm "L" lens.

As a bit of background, I grew up with Speed Graphic and Linhof 4X5 cameras, so I KNOW what SHARP is. When 35mm became popular I shot with Nikon film cameras and medium zoom lenses.

A number of years ago I made my foray into digital photography by buying a Rebel Xsi (450D) with the 18-55mm "kit" lens. I then bought a 55-250mm "kit" lens for my sports photography.

I was never really satisfied with image sharpness, but just attributed it to the "cheap" camera and "kit" lens.

I have been thinking about upgrading my body for some time but was waiting for the 7D upgrade (it's the only one Canon has not yet upgraded). In the meantime, I thought I might try an "L" class lens. After much thinking about what I wanted to get I thought the 70-300 would be great for my soccer and lacrosse photos.

Well, I took delivery of the lens yesterday, slapped it on my Rebel, attached my B&W UV filter and excitedly headed for the field.

Imagine the SHOCK that greeted me when I opened iPhoto. Out of 800 images I shot at the game, less than 10% were what I would consider "acceptable". Soft, out of focus images were the norm. Of the ones I kept the best I can say is that the images are "soft". In fact, in many of the images I can't even find a point of focus. Yet I could hear the motor (very quiet, BTW) churning away in auto-focus mode.

I have to agree with the responder who wasn't satisfied with the higher shutter speed "solution" proposed by another responder. I shot all these images in Tv/AI Servo/Multiple shot mode @ 250sec. Most of the images were F11 or better @ ISO 800 or 1600. Short of moving the game to the surface of the sun I'm not sure how much more I can do with camera settings??

I am beginning to believe that the only way to achieve sharpness in photos is to move to a $50,000 Hasselblad - because I HAVE seen sharp images in magazines. I don't know, maybe it's not POSSIBLE to get sharp images with less expensive digital cameras - maybe it's a limitation of the technology?

How much money do I have to spend to get great photos - you know - the Ansel Adams kind? I've certainly seen great quality photos on the web, but maybe that's a limitation of the medium - just like the newspaper medium tolerates "soft" images.

And don't talk about sending the lens to Canon for "recalibration" - you mean they sell crap, but will "fix it". I can't tell you how prevalent that mindset is today. Do an OK job, and then come back and fix the problems until you get it right. Whatever happened to get it right the first time? Maybe that went out the window with the jobs that got sent overseas?

I'm beginning to rethink my preorder of the 6D. Maybe I'd just better start saving MORE money to throw at a Hasselblad.

Gonzofan wrote in post #15018016
Well, I'm going to jump in here because I have a similar experience with a 70-300mm "L" lens.

I'm beginning to rethink my preorder of the 6D. Maybe I'd just better start saving MORE money to throw at a Hasselblad.

The Hassleblad will be great for action sports I bet!

Try using 1/1000th second shutter speed and learning how to photograph action with what you already have.

is it possible that the problem might be the autofocus system and not the lens

i think this camera has seven possible points for autofocus

perhaps if the center focus point was the only one selected ( switching from auto focus points to manual focus points) and then retest the lens

it might be possible for your processing software to show you where your camera selected as the point of focus i only know Aperture 3 and this software will show where my camera selected as the point of focus

OP, which focusing method do you use: automatic or manual?

Gonzofan wrote in post #15018016
Well, I'm going to jump in here because I have a similar experience with a 70-300mm "L" lens.

As a bit of background, I grew up with Speed Graphic and Linhof 4X5 cameras, so I KNOW what SHARP is. When 35mm became popular I shot with Nikon film cameras and medium zoom lenses.

A number of years ago I made my foray into digital photography by buying a Rebel Xsi (450D) with the 18-55mm "kit" lens. I then bought a 55-250mm "kit" lens for my sports photography.

I was never really satisfied with image sharpness, but just attributed it to the "cheap" camera and "kit" lens.

I have been thinking about upgrading my body for some time but was waiting for the 7D upgrade (it's the only one Canon has not yet upgraded). In the meantime, I thought I might try an "L" class lens. After much thinking about what I wanted to get I thought the 70-300 would be great for my soccer and lacrosse photos.

Well, I took delivery of the lens yesterday, slapped it on my Rebel, attached my B&W UV filter and excitedly headed for the field.

Imagine the SHOCK that greeted me when I opened iPhoto. Out of 800 images I shot at the game, less than 10% were what I would consider "acceptable". Soft, out of focus images were the norm. Of the ones I kept the best I can say is that the images are "soft". In fact, in many of the images I can't even find a point of focus. Yet I could hear the motor (very quiet, BTW) churning away in auto-focus mode.

I have to agree with the responder who wasn't satisfied with the higher shutter speed "solution" proposed by another responder. I shot all these images in Tv/AI Servo/Multiple shot mode @ 250sec. Most of the images were F11 or better @ ISO 800 or 1600. Short of moving the game to the surface of the sun I'm not sure how much more I can do with camera settings??

I am beginning to believe that the only way to achieve sharpness in photos is to move to a $50,000 Hasselblad - because I HAVE seen sharp images in magazines. I don't know, maybe it's not POSSIBLE to get sharp images with less expensive digital cameras - maybe it's a limitation of the technology?

How much money do I have to spend to get great photos - you know - the Ansel Adams kind? I've certainly seen great quality photos on the web, but maybe that's a limitation of the medium - just like the newspaper medium tolerates "soft" images.

And don't talk about sending the lens to Canon for "recalibration" - you mean they sell crap, but will "fix it". I can't tell you how prevalent that mindset is today. Do an OK job, and then come back and fix the problems until you get it right. Whatever happened to get it right the first time? Maybe that went out the window with the jobs that got sent overseas?

I'm beginning to rethink my preorder of the 6D. Maybe I'd just better start saving MORE money to throw at a Hasselblad.

I agree with the other poster, shooting action sports at 1/250 and f11 is major fail! seriously, you need to increase the shutter speed and lower the aperture for anything moving. With a high enough shutter speed and reasonable aperture it's is almost impossible not to get a sharp pic with the 55-250 and the much more expensive 70-300L

random pic -
XSi (450D)
Canon 55-250IS
1/1000
f5.6

Gonzofan wrote in post #15018016
Well, I'm going to jump in here because I have a similar experience with a 70-300mm "L" lens.

As a bit of background, I grew up with Speed Graphic and Linhof 4X5 cameras, so I KNOW what SHARP is. When 35mm became popular I shot with Nikon film cameras and medium zoom lenses.

A number of years ago I made my foray into digital photography by buying a Rebel Xsi (450D) with the 18-55mm "kit" lens. I then bought a 55-250mm "kit" lens for my sports photography.

I was never really satisfied with image sharpness, but just attributed it to the "cheap" camera and "kit" lens.

I have been thinking about upgrading my body for some time but was waiting for the 7D upgrade (it's the only one Canon has not yet upgraded). In the meantime, I thought I might try an "L" class lens. After much thinking about what I wanted to get I thought the 70-300 would be great for my soccer and lacrosse photos.

Well, I took delivery of the lens yesterday, slapped it on my Rebel, attached my B&W UV filter and excitedly headed for the field.

Imagine the SHOCK that greeted me when I opened iPhoto. Out of 800 images I shot at the game, less than 10% were what I would consider "acceptable". Soft, out of focus images were the norm. Of the ones I kept the best I can say is that the images are "soft". In fact, in many of the images I can't even find a point of focus. Yet I could hear the motor (very quiet, BTW) churning away in auto-focus mode.

I have to agree with the responder who wasn't satisfied with the higher shutter speed "solution" proposed by another responder. I shot all these images in Tv/AI Servo/Multiple shot mode @ 250sec. Most of the images were F11 or better @ ISO 800 or 1600. Short of moving the game to the surface of the sun I'm not sure how much more I can do with camera settings??

I am beginning to believe that the only way to achieve sharpness in photos is to move to a $50,000 Hasselblad - because I HAVE seen sharp images in magazines. I don't know, maybe it's not POSSIBLE to get sharp images with less expensive digital cameras - maybe it's a limitation of the technology?

How much money do I have to spend to get great photos - you know - the Ansel Adams kind? I've certainly seen great quality photos on the web, but maybe that's a limitation of the medium - just like the newspaper medium tolerates "soft" images.

And don't talk about sending the lens to Canon for "recalibration" - you mean they sell crap, but will "fix it". I can't tell you how prevalent that mindset is today. Do an OK job, and then come back and fix the problems until you get it right. Whatever happened to get it right the first time? Maybe that went out the window with the jobs that got sent overseas?

I'm beginning to rethink my preorder of the 6D. Maybe I'd just better start saving MORE money to throw at a Hasselblad.

It would be helpful if you posted some sample images that clearly show the issue, and include complete shooting data. Also, I'd recommend that you test your focusing under controlled conditions as discussed in this thread:
https://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthre​ad.php?t=857871

Well, I plan to do some extensive testing today - my 30 days is counting down before I can return the lens. I'm going to do focus tests and comparison tests with my 55-250 and the 70-300. I do find it hard to believe that 125th is not fast enough to capture action. Seriously, those kids aren't moving that fast. My concern was that you'd end up pushing the aperture beyond which the lens was capable. I guess testing is the only way to know for sure. I am glad to see, watt1000, that your camera is the same as mine. I SUSPECTED the body is not as important as the lens.

Here's a link to the images I uploaded to Flickr (which I'm not happy with, but consider "acceptable"). I'll put together some of the more egregious photos and post them as well.

Gonzofan wrote in post #15018251
Well, I plan to do some extensive testing today - my 30 days is counting down before I can return the lens. I'm going to do focus tests and comparison tests with my 55-250 and the 70-300. I do find it hard to believe that 125th is not fast enough to capture action. Seriously, those kids aren't moving that fast. My concern was that you'd end up pushing the aperture beyond which the lens was capable. I guess testing is the only way to know for sure. I am glad to see, watt1000, that your camera is the same as mine. I SUSPECTED the body is not as important as the lens.

Here's a link to the images I uploaded to Flickr (which I'm not happy with, but consider "acceptable"). I'll put together some of the more egregious photos and post them as well.

Well, the 70-300L is a bloody sharp lens, for action and stills alike. So either you have a bad copy, or something is wrong on your end. And BTW I would never use 1/250 for action. You'd be lucky at that shutter speed, but Id always give myself a safety net of 1/400 at least (if using at the 300mm end), and up from there. That said, the IS of this lens is awesome. For still shots, I've gone to 1/30th and slower and had perfectly sharp images from it. Bring down your f-stop! You don't need f/11 for action. Bring it down to f/4 or f/5.6 (depending what end of the focal length you are on) which will greatly boost your shutter speed.

Gonzofan wrote in post #15018251
Well, I plan to do some extensive testing today - my 30 days is counting down before I can return the lens. I'm going to do focus tests and comparison tests with my 55-250 and the 70-300. I do find it hard to believe that 125th is not fast enough to capture action. Seriously, those kids aren't moving that fast. My concern was that you'd end up pushing the aperture beyond which the lens was capable. I guess testing is the only way to know for sure. I am glad to see, watt1000, that your camera is the same as mine. I SUSPECTED the body is not as important as the lens.

Here's a link to the images I uploaded to Flickr (which I'm not happy with, but consider "acceptable"). I'll put together some of the more egregious photos and post them as well.

it's a wonder any of your action shots were not blurry in that flickr link, why shoot at f11 and 1/250 in all the pics? Check out the outdoor soccer threads in the sports section here and note the settings
https://photography-on-the.net/forum/forumdis​play.php?f=30
(for sharp photo purposes) kids are moving faster than 1/1600 of a second!

for sports, the higher the shutter speed, the better !

XSi (450D)

1/4000 of a second

Gonzofan wrote in post #15018251
Well, I plan to do some extensive testing today - my 30 days is counting down before I can return the lens. I'm going to do focus tests and comparison tests with my 55-250 and the 70-300. I do find it hard to believe that 125th is not fast enough to capture action. Seriously, those kids aren't moving that fast. My concern was that you'd end up pushing the aperture beyond which the lens was capable. I guess testing is the only way to know for sure. I am glad to see, watt1000, that your camera is the same as mine. I SUSPECTED the body is not as important as the lens.

Here's a link to the images I uploaded to Flickr (which I'm not happy with, but consider "acceptable"). I'll put together some of the more egregious photos and post them as well.

I took a look at a couple of them and nothing was in clear focus, including the non-moving grass, so it's more than just subject movement causing this issue. I'd strongly suspect camera movement, but the IS should have taken care of that at the shutter speed you were shooting, so I'm not sure what's going on. When shooting in AI Servo, are you ensuring that the camera has acquired initial focus before shooting? Do you have your AI Servo custom functions set up so that focusing and tracking have priority over shutter release?

In any event, you won't really have much idea what's causing this until you do some controlled test shots, as noted above. Please let us know the results of your tests.

Sorry, I should have said 1/250sec. But maybe that's still not enough?

Gonzofan wrote in post #15018372
Sorry, I should have said 1/250sec. But maybe that's still not enough?

For running kids? Not at all. For action, unless you are wanting some motion blur for artistic effect, the faster the shutter the better. With kids I would start at somewhere around 1/1600 at least.

stsva wrote in post #15018361
... nothing was in clear focus, including the non-moving grass...

Yeah, that's what frustrated me. I used AIServo, spot metering center/single point focus.

I guess I just expected too much out of the box.

Gonzofan wrote in post #15018407
* * *

I guess I just expected too much out of the box.

Maybe, maybe not. See what the test shots do.

Christina.DazzleByDesi​gn wrote in post #15018392
For running kids? Not at all. For action, unless you are wanting some motion blur for artistic effect, the faster the shutter the better. With kids I would start at somewhere around 1/1600 at least.

OK, Field Hockey this afternoon - I'll give it a shot and post the pics tonight. I'm not afraid to eat humble pie. I haven't posted my review on Amazon, YET.

Try shooting some non-moving high-contrast targets in single shot mode where you get focus confirmation, just to compare to the shots you're getting in AI Servo. I'm suggesting this because, as implied in one of my posts above, you can shoot in AI Servo even though the camera has not locked focus, which could result in the nothing-in-focus you're getting in at least some of your shots.

One final thought, are you using a single selected focus point or letting the camera select the focus point?