Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 
Thread started 04 May 2005 (Wednesday) 05:43
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

17-40L Focustest (replace or not)

 
Reservoir_Dog
Member
Avatar
148 posts
Joined Apr 2005
Location: Belgium
     
May 04, 2005 05:43 |  #1

Hi all

I just have bought a 17-40L Lens for my 20D.
Did some focustests, and i notice a backfocus...
What do u think?
Here are the links

FOCUSTEST (external link)

Then an aspirine box, Focused on the R, with both lenses (17-40 and kitlens)

17-40L (external link)

Kitlens (external link)

Seems to me that the kitlens is dead-on (confirmed with testchart)
What should i do?

Opinions much appreciated!




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
Reservoir_Dog
THREAD ­ STARTER
Member
Avatar
148 posts
Joined Apr 2005
Location: Belgium
     
May 05, 2005 11:39 |  #2

Thank u all for the informative answers!




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
felix21685
Goldmember
Avatar
1,371 posts
Likes: 4
Joined Mar 2005
Location: Arizona
     
May 05, 2005 12:25 as a reply to  @ Reservoir_Dog's post |  #3

seems like the L lens backfocuses a little and the kit lens front focuses a little..
how many pictures did you take like that..were all the results consistent?


---------------
50D, Rebel XT, EF-S 17-55 f/2.8 IS, 28-135 IS,430EX, AT858
Everything you wanted to know about aftermarket batteries

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
blue_max
Goldmember
Avatar
2,622 posts
Joined Mar 2005
Location: London UK
     
May 05, 2005 12:25 as a reply to  @ Reservoir_Dog's post |  #4

I was going to answer tonight, but I guess you got personal messages.

Glad you got it sorted.

Graham


.
Lamb dressed as mutton.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Reservoir_Dog
THREAD ­ STARTER
Member
Avatar
148 posts
Joined Apr 2005
Location: Belgium
     
May 06, 2005 09:52 as a reply to  @ blue_max's post |  #5

blue_max wrote:
I was going to answer tonight, but I guess you got personal messages.

Glad you got it sorted.

Graham

???
Got no personal messages




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
pierrot
Senior Member
Avatar
611 posts
Joined Jan 2005
Location: Versailles, France
     
May 06, 2005 12:02 |  #6

I can't understand where the problem is, or what you call backfocus.

You focussed dead on the "focus here" text of the chart, right? Then you notice that there are more millimetric lines in acceptable focus behind the target than in front of it. Is it your point?

If yes, it is not at all a matter of backfocus or whatever, but just a very basic optical law of the depth of field:
When somethoing is in focus, the depth of field (the distance in which out-of-focus objects will appear as "in acceptable focus") is parted 1/3 in front of and 2/3 behind the focussed target.

In other words, imagine that your distance-aperture combination gives you a DoF of 3 feet when shooting your old grand aunt from 10 feet away ; everything situated 1 feet in front of her face and 2 feet behind will also appear as well focussed. This means that you'll get a perfectly focussed picture of your dear auntie, including her legendary welcoming breasts and her not less legendary huge backside.

That's what I can see from your test pictures, not more. ;)


Eos 5D + Eos 7D + Eos 20D + f/1:1 L eye-glasses

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Cadwell
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
7,333 posts
Likes: 2
Joined Jan 2004
Location: Hampshire, UK
     
May 06, 2005 12:39 as a reply to  @ pierrot's post |  #7

What pierrot said. No focus problems there.


Glenn
My Pictures: Motorsport (external link)/Canoe Polo (external link)/Other Stuff (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
aam1234
Goldmember
Avatar
4,132 posts
Likes: 1
Joined May 2004
     
May 06, 2005 13:02 as a reply to  @ Cadwell's post |  #8

Reservoir_Dog, I didn't see your test but would like to state a general opinion. It's not about your question or your lens.

IMO, the best test one can do to a lens is a real world test. The person ought to go out and take the pics he/she normally take. if they come out good...all good & dandy. If the person notices an obvious problem (after making sure it's not an operator's error) then the lens is kaputt.

That's just my opinion of course.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
ed2day
Senior Member
633 posts
Joined Jan 2005
Location: Boulder, CO
     
May 06, 2005 17:01 |  #9

Looking at your focus test charts, the line where it says "focus here" looks perfectly focused to me. That should be sufficient IMO. That's supposedly the criteria Canon uses. People will complain that the DOF is off-center from the focus point by a mm or two which is ridiculous. The 1/3-2/3 rule doesn't hold at close focus distances--approaches 50/50. As for the aspirin box picures, the experiment doesn't look controlled well enough to draw conclusions. The DOF looks different. They are framed differently. Was the distance the same? The target is too cluttered. You don't know what the camera actually picked to focus on--lots of high contrast content in the focus field. Did you use a tripod and remote shutter release(or timer)? If not, throw the test away. Make sure lighting is bright. Take multiple shots since focus will vary slightly shot-to-shot. Shallow DOF experiments at close focus range are very hard to control and interpret. Better yet, just take the camera out and use it like you intend to use it and see how it turns out.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Tom ­ W
Canon Fanosapien
Avatar
12,747 posts
Likes: 24
Joined Feb 2003
Location: Chattanooga, Tennessee
     
May 06, 2005 17:39 |  #10

From what I can see, the 17-40 looks good - focus is well within the range of tolerance on the chart. You could try reversing the chart so that the top part is closer to the camera than the bottom and see what happens.

It is often difficult to get an accurate test when you're shooting at an angled object like that because the actual autofocus points are much larger than the indicators in the camera show. The box images aren't a real good test since the camera could have chosen a number of high-contrast boundaries on which to determine focus.

I really think that this lens is fine.


Tom
5D IV, M5, RP, & various lenses

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
JulianL
Member
215 posts
Joined May 2005
Location: San Diego, CA
     
May 06, 2005 23:13 |  #11

You have some nasty lens shadow in those pics....


Canon 30D w/BGE2
Canon 50mm f/1.4
Canon 17-40mm f/4L
Canon 70-200mm f/4L
Canon 580EX Speedlight

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
pierrot
Senior Member
Avatar
611 posts
Joined Jan 2005
Location: Versailles, France
     
May 07, 2005 05:45 as a reply to  @ ed2day's post |  #12

ed2day wrote:
The 1/3-2/3 rule doesn't hold at close focus distances--approaches 50/50.

You're right, I made it short for a quick "understanding" purpose.
1/3-2/3 rule applies when setting the lens at the hyperfocal distance ;)


Eos 5D + Eos 7D + Eos 20D + f/1:1 L eye-glasses

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Reservoir_Dog
THREAD ­ STARTER
Member
Avatar
148 posts
Joined Apr 2005
Location: Belgium
     
May 07, 2005 12:43 as a reply to  @ pierrot's post |  #13

Ok
Thank u all for the answers, and yes, it was all taken on a tripod.
Now i know i must not worry with this lens.
Indeed, every day pics are nice sharp, and has nice colors!
Greetings




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
SeanH
Goldmember
2,055 posts
Likes: 10
Joined Nov 2004
Location: San Diego, CA.
     
May 07, 2005 13:16 as a reply to  @ Reservoir_Dog's post |  #14

Honestly, I have not seen one of those test that I would consider the be spot on. Some times it bugs me too when I get a shot I thought should be sharp and it's not, but overall I think I get many more sharp shots than I did in the manual focus days. However I think a split/microprism screen would be vey cool to have on my 20D. Anyone know if they make them for auto focus cameras???


7D ......waiting on the 5D3
10-22, 17-40 4.0 L, 24-70 2.8L, 70-200 2.8L, 2 X 580EX's

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

1,947 views & 0 likes for this thread
17-40L Focustest (replace or not)
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is Overdoer
817 guests, 208 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.