24-105 L lens IQ.......pics

I'm just a little curious about the IQ of my lens. It seems like some of my shots don't look that great but Im not sure if its me or the lens?
These two pics I took at a Butterfly House in St. Louis. It's hand held with no flash...

Does the 100% crop look ok to you? (I think my expectations of this lens were just too high!?!?)

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

Looks good to me. Looks like you were very close, so DOF is very thin, but the part of the butterfly that's in focus is VERY detailed. I wouldn't expect much better from a 100mm macro at that working distance and f/5.

Reeforbust wrote in post #5240205
I'm just a little curious about the IQ of my lens. It seems like some of my shots don't look that great but Im not sure if its me or the lens?
These two pics I took at a Butterfly House in St. Louis. It's hand held with no flash...

Does the 100% crop look ok to you? (I think my expectations of this lens were just too high!?!?)


100% crop...

try 95mm or less and f5.6. fully extended and wide open (or near) is this lens' weak point.

edit: i think your pic looks fine.

ed rader

Looks fine to me.

Looks good to me, as said above your DOF is very thin in these pics, but the areas in perfect focus are very detailed

So you sayin its user error that I'm seeing.........

And yes, I was pretty close to the subject....as close as it would let me get and still autofocus....

The only user error is your eyes

It looks pretty good. Did you do any sharpening yet? A little USM and i bet it would look fantastic.

looks fine. quit peeping.

i can never understand why people post threads asking OTHERS to judge the lens sharpness. I mean, if it's good enough for you and makes you happy, then it fine. If others think its good, that doesn't change the lens. If you can't tell if its soft, then why does it matter if someobdy else says it is or isn't?

Canon Soldier wrote in post #5240514
i can never understand why people post threads asking OTHERS to judge the lens sharpness. I mean, if it's good enough for you and makes you happy, then it fine. If others think its good, that doesn't change the lens. If you can't tell if its soft, then why does it matter if someobdy else says it is or isn't?

True to a point, but others also have the same lens and have used it a lot and thus can tell if those results are typical or not for the situation.

Grentz wrote in post #5240543
True to a point, but others also have the same lens and have used it a lot and thus can tell if those results are typical or not for the situation.

BINGO!!

When I bought this....After much research, I had visions of majical pictures glistening in my lens and every shot being of perfect quality.
In reality, the quality and build of the lens is nice, the pictures that I get are nice as long as the light is there but there are times when I'm a little disappointed for a $900+ lens......

Practice, practice, practice.

elader wrote in post #5240432
looks fine. quit peeping.

+1 :p

Since your lens is so crap, I'll take it off your hand free of charge.

Looks good for 100 crop.

Reeforbust wrote in post #5241248
BINGO!!

When I bought this....After much research, I had visions of majical pictures glistening in my lens and every shot being of perfect quality.
In reality, the quality and build of the lens is nice, the pictures that I get are nice as long as the light is there but there are times when I'm a little disappointed for a $900+ lens......

Practice, practice, practice.

Practice Practice Practice and you will be impressed

I was the same when I got my first L (the 24-105 as well!) and it didnt shoot magical rainbows out of its glass and make everything a magical wonderland. But in use and practice you will soon learn and appreciate how strong the L stuff is and how good its PQ is. Especially in rougher situations and tough situations (flare, CA, etc.) the L's really shine