new 70-200 AF issues??

bohdank are you talking about using a tripod doing a focus test or to always shoot that way? I will send it back before I carry a tripod to a kids Bday party to take candid shoots for what I gave for this thing. Especially when I have been doing it for a year in a half with no problem with a lens that cost 1/6 the price.

I know it sounds like I am winning a bit but dang gumit guys I can't believe that Canon charges more for less. I am a little ticked that I lost more shots with this in one shooting then almost the whole year and half using 17-85 f4.0-5.6 is.

Not saying I didn't mess things up on some pictures, and I agree I might need to relearn with this lens but my goodness I think any one would be a little ticked to drop that much cash and feel the way i do right now.

Deep breaths ok I will do some testing with IS off and try to get to bottom of it.

Thank you guys so much for putting up with my ranting.

BigAlz1 wrote in post #7614235
Thank you for your thoughts I don't care to get beet up as long as I get to the bottom of it. I am still at a loss on how an L series lens needs time to "settle" ans I have never had anything like that happen and all my lenses so far have had IS. But ill take it for what it is and try and count before taking my shots.

IS needs time to settle, period. It is just much more obvious with longer lenses. I got home from a long evening trekking through a foot of mud for a mile with my Bigmos when I first figured this out. I had about 150 crap shots that should have been fine, except that I had the OS on and was simply pressing the shutter straight through.

If you look in your user manual, it will tell you how long the IS needs to be fully effective. Even half a second is enough to let it settle a bit (although not fully), but simply pushing the shutter button down will do more harm than good.

The minimum distance thing was more directed towards the bedroom shots you described earlier. If you say the focusing swicth being set wrong would have caused everything to be out of focus, then that would tell me you were very close to minimum focus distance.

I'm talking about the focus limiting switch, not the AF/MF switch.

I will play with it some more and do some test shots.
I found some shoots where the AI focus AF was enabled on the camera and the shoots are as bad as those above.

HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'image/gif' | Byte size: ZERO

AI Focus is a terrible mode to use ( it just doesn't make good decisions). That could be a part of your problem. Only use AI servo or one-shot.

The above shot suffers from the same things I mentioned about the second shot. Notice how her belly and the top of her swimsuit bottom isn't as "OOF" as her head? That is because those parts of her body aren't moving much and the ambient exposure isn't blurred as much.

BigAlz1 wrote in post #7614304
bohdank are you talking about using a tripod doing a focus test or to always shoot that way? I will send it back before I carry a tripod to a kids Bday party to take candid shoots for what I gave for this thing. Especially when I have been doing it for a year in a half with no problem with a lens that cost 1/6 the price.

I know it sounds like I am winning a bit but dang gumit guys I can't believe that Canon charges more for less. I am a little ticked that I lost more shots with this in one shooting then almost the whole year and half using 17-85 f4.0-5.6 is.

Not saying I didn't mess things up on some pictures, and I agree I might need to relearn with this lens but my goodness I think any one would be a little ticked to drop that much cash and feel the way i do right now.

Deep breaths ok I will do some testing with IS off and try to get to bottom of it.

Thank you guys so much for putting up with my ranting.

Its understandable! I hope you don't think we're beating on you, we're really trying to help. I'm not always the most eloquent, so I can come across a little rougher than I mean to sometimes.

I'd go to sleep and get up in the morning, head outside in the bright sunlight with the 40D and that beautiful lens you've got and see what happens. If it works good in the bright daylight, we can go from there. If it doesn't send it back and get a replacement.

Just be sure to shut off IS or give it a second to settle. I would shut it off and keep your shutter speed over 1/500s.

Great stuff man you got me feeling better. Maybe I was to close and may I really did screw all those shots up. Never hurts to to get knocked down, I'll crawl back up even stronger
Thank you.

Now i don't want to stretch my welcome lol but WTF happened here? The CENTER AF point is square in the middle of her right cheek but look at her shirt left shoulder/arm. How did it focus on something far away from the AF point and further away? I just never had issues like this before and maybe I have a lot more to learn.

HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'image/gif' | Byte size: ZERO | PHOTOBUCKET ERROR IMAGE

DDCSD wrote in post #7614343
I'd go to sleep and get up in the morning, head outside in the bright sunlight with the 40D and that beautiful lens you've got and see what happens. If it works good in the bright daylight, we can go from there. If it doesn't send it back and get a replacement.

Just be sure to shut off IS or give it a second to settle. I would shut it off and keep your shutter speed over 1/500s.

Oh I know it does ok outside. Did have a few failed shots but not near as many. But I will try again with IS off. Let me look at some of those failed outside shots and see if I can find what happened.

BigAlz1 wrote in post #7614350
Now i don't want to stretch my welcome lol but WTF happened here? The CENTER AF point is square in the middle of her right cheek but look at her shirt left shoulder/arm. How did it focus on something far away from the AF point and further away? I just never had issues like this before and maybe I have a lot more to learn.

You focused on something that has no contrast whatsoever. Next time try the eye (and lashes) or mouth...etc...

You could probably get away with it if you stopped down...masking the problem with more DOF.

BigAlz1 wrote in post #7614350
Great stuff man you got me feeling better. Maybe I was to close and may I really did screw all those shots up. Never hurts to to get knocked down, I'll crawl back up even stronger
Thank you.

Now i don't want to stretch my welcome lol but WTF happened here? The CENTER AF point is square in the middle of her right cheek but look at her shirt left shoulder/arm. How did it focus on something far away from the AF point and further away? I just never had issues like this before and maybe I have a lot more to learn.

HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'image/gif' | Byte size: ZERO

Definitely back-focused, but that may be because of focus mode.

Have you used a longer lens much? You don't have much DOF to work with at 200mm and f/3.2. You (or the camera) can only miss be a few inches and have a ruined shot (especially as close as it looks like you were). You have sooooo much more DOF to work with at f/2.8 and 55mm, and 85mm and f/5.6.

If you are not familiar with the relationship between aperture/focal length and subject distance, plug some numbers into the following DOF calculator

http://www.bobatkins.c​om …chnical/dofcalc​.html#calc

Ok WOW I am learning, here is another one, shot outside, Yes she is moving but I am a lot closer, shooting at 70mm, and I flattened the aperture a lot. Just your thoughts on why it looks like all the other junk I shot lol Is this a product of a NON settled IS? I know 320th of a second is plenty fast enough for how she was moving and it just don't look like motion blur to me. all AF points were on her.

HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'image/gif' | Byte size: ZERO | PHOTOBUCKET ERROR IMAGE

Don't want to sound redundant but I would not have missed this zoomed out to 85MM with my crap-o kit lens..... just saying guys, just saying

Because you don't have enough DOF and she is moving.

BigAlz1 wrote in post #7614304
bohdank are you talking about using a tripod doing a focus test or to always shoot that way? I will send it back before I carry a tripod to a kids Bday party to take candid shoots for what I gave for this thing. Especially when I have been doing it for a year in a half with no problem with a lens that cost 1/6 the price.

I know it sounds like I am winning a bit but dang gumit guys I can't believe that Canon charges more for less. I am a little ticked that I lost more shots with this in one shooting then almost the whole year and half using 17-85 f4.0-5.6 is.

Not saying I didn't mess things up on some pictures, and I agree I might need to relearn with this lens but my goodness I think any one would be a little ticked to drop that much cash and feel the way i do right now.

Deep breaths ok I will do some testing with IS off and try to get to bottom of it.

Thank you guys so much for putting up with my ranting.

No, I meant to test the lens. Put the camera on a tripod.... pick a static subject, focus and take the shot. Shoot with the lens wide open and make sure you are nowhere near the MFD of the lens and the limiter is set properly. Pick a high enough shutter speed. Try for at least 1/250s. If the shots are still OOF then you might have a problem with the lens.

I am not convinced it is the lens. You need to get an appreciation for how a lens behaves at a certain aperture, at a certain focal setting at a certain distance. I am referring to DOF. Try the calculator I posted earlier. Shooting with your current lens (slower aperture) is masking a lot of poor technique, I would guess.

I use the 28-75 at 75mm...usually, for indoor portraits. When I first got it I was wondering if the lens was just focusing poorly when most of my shots were coming out OOF when shooting at f2.8..... it was ME. Just a slight sway will throw the distance off enough that the lens will appear to be front/back focusing.

bohdank wrote in post #7614446
Because you don't have enough DOF and she is moving.

Ok, gunna have to be a stubborn learner I guess because you just sent me that link to calculate DOF (thank you BTW) and at AV 11 & FL of 70mm I had almost 20 inches at the distance she was from me. That is longer then she is wide. So if all AF points are on her, I had AI servo on and TV of 320, you're really gunna have to brain wash me that it's my fault here. maybe I need a little shaking but I am persistent, thats how I learn.
I want to learn. I feel I have just in this thread but 19"DOF is a lot when all the AF point light up red and your subject it only 16" wide, and I didn't get any of her in focus.

But lets go back to the IS settling theory, I don't know how to recognize that since you don't have to worry about that with CHEAPER NON L series lenses. IS this what it would look like?

OMG I JUST REALIZED MY DAUGHTER ONLY HAS FOUR FINGERS ON HER LEFT HAND. SHE CAN"T BE FILMED!! SHE IS NOT FROM OUR SOLAR SYSTEM