24-70mm Blurry Images Horror Stories

You may very well have had a lens that wasn't up to spec. Unfortunately the examples you posted to illustrate this showed not that the lens was malfunctioning, but rather user error in allowing too slow of a handheld shutter speed. I don't think anyone here is necessarily saying that you didn't have a faulty lens it's just that your examples, and arguments didn't show it.

crn3371 wrote in post #9510820
You may very well have had a lens that wasn't up to spec. Unfortunately the examples you posted to illustrate this showed not that the lens was malfunctioning, but rather user error in allowing too slow of a handheld shutter speed. I don't think anyone here is necessarily saying that you didn't have a faulty lens it's just that your examples, and arguments didn't show it.

After reading through this thread, it seems the OP doesn't want to admit that it just might also be user error. When testing lenses ALL variables have to be taken into consideration, EVEN shutter speed. Canon admitted there was a problem with the lens. Fine. But, user ERROR could also VERY POSSIBLY be a factor but the OP doesn't want to hear it

No matter how much you think you know, there is always something to learn.

crn3371 wrote in post #9510820
You may very well have had a lens that wasn't up to spec. Unfortunately the examples you posted to illustrate this showed not that the lens was malfunctioning, but rather user error in allowing too slow of a handheld shutter speed. I don't think anyone here is necessarily saying that you didn't have a faulty lens it's just that your examples, and arguments didn't show it.

Maybe. Maybe Math does help thinking that 1/20 wouldn't be the best choice of speed for a f/2.8...but from there things started to spin out of control...everybody with a camera and a computer thought that sending me a new way to test the lens was going to erase the nightmare of KNOWING that the lens had, indeed, big problems with AF, electrical...etc.

I MUST be able to use a lens hand held, regardless of anything possible. And if the solution is being stuck with certain shutter speed, or confine myself to a wall or door frame or a tripod, then that lens is not for me...and the ones talking about so much success are, for sure, not telling all the truth, keeping some little "embarrassing" secrets...that's all.

Juan Huerta wrote in post #9510974
Maybe. Maybe Math does help thinking that 1/20 wouldn't be the best choice of speed for a f/2.8...but from there things started to spin out of control...everybody with a camera and a computer thought that sending me a new way to test the lens was going to erase the nightmare of KNOWING that the lens had, indeed, big problems with AF, electrical...etc.

I MUST be able to use a lens hand held, regardless of anything possible. And if the solution is being stuck with certain shutter speed, or confine myself to a wall or door frame or a tripod, then that lens is not for me...and the ones talking about so much success are, for sure, not telling all the truth, keeping some little "embarrassing" secrets...that's all.

It will expose it properly at 1/20th at f/2.8 at your said ISO, but your P mode doesn't account for Focal length of the lens. Here is a good example to compare. Lets say your camera says you should shoot a seen in 2 seconds at f2.8, do you expect the photo to be sharp or blury?

So based on your test. I should be returning my Canon 50mm F1.4 which shot the following shot at 1/20s f3.2 and ISO 200

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/gif' | Redirected to error image by FLICKR

Juan Huerta wrote in post #9510974
Maybe. Maybe Math does help thinking that 1/20 wouldn't be the best choice of speed for a f/2.8...but from there things started to spin out of control...everybody with a camera and a computer thought that sending me a new way to test the lens was going to erase the nightmare of KNOWING that the lens had, indeed, big problems with AF, electrical...etc.

I MUST be able to use a lens hand held, regardless of anything possible. And if the solution is being stuck with certain shutter speed, or confine myself to a wall or door frame or a tripod, then that lens is not for me...and the ones talking about so much success are, for sure, not telling all the truth, keeping some little "embarrassing" secrets...that's all.

This will be the case with every lens. That "certain shutter speed" will depend on other factors, but it is an undisputable limit of photography. Even your IS lenses have a "certain shutter speed" limit. That limit is just expanded, in instances of stationary subjects, by the presence of IS, but it exists nonetheless.

Nothing wrong with wanting to be able to use a lens handheld. Learning your camera, and basic rules of exposure, can go a long way to help with this. You, as the photographer, need to get to the point where if shooting wide open gives you a shutter speed too slow to overcome camera shake that you will know to bump up your iso in order to bump up your shutter speed. Only you can do this, the camera doesn't know any better. Nothing wrong with shooting in P mode, but if the camera decides it wants to shoot 70mm at 1/20 it's not the camera's fault if the shoot turns out blurry nor is it the fault of the lens. It is the fault of the user for not realizing that the camera picked a combination that won't yield good results. Image stabilization may not even help you. In your examples of the basket, image stabilization worked because the subject was static. Image stabilization will not help with moving subjects.

haibane wrote in post #9511043
So based on your test. I should be returning my Canon 50mm F1.4 which shot the following shot at 1/20s f3.2 and ISO 200

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/gif' | Redirected to error image by FLICKR

There's no way you got such crappy photo with those settings. It's obvious you REALLY shook your hands on purpose..

Juan Huerta wrote in post #9511076
There's no way you got such crappy photo with those settings. It's obvious you REALLY shook your hands on purpose..

Point being? That's what happens in the slightest with any shake. I'll grab a quick shot with out shaking it at all

No Shaking of hands on purpose 1/20s f3.2 ISO 200

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/gif' | Redirected to error image by FLICKR

haibane wrote in post #9511043
So based on your test. I should be returning my Canon 50mm F1.4 which shot the following shot at 1/20s f3.2 and ISO 200

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/gif' | Redirected to error image by FLICKR

And this is exactly what I am talking about with regard to this "knowledgeable" people...they are willing to even fake it to prove their point.

Long ago I said it, let's just say it again...I do understand some folks don't fire on all cylinders...

1- The lens was faulty, Canon said so. Not you, Canon. Not you, the consumer, but Canon, the company who built it...and yes they, Canon, has been wrong before,...they are not God. My "error 99" nightmare is prove of it,...and yes, the body was still under warranty.

2- Somebody said "Apples to Apples" and I just decided to go 1/20 - 1/20 on both lenses...just for the heck of it. I could've try pleasing you with a faster shutter speed, but I wanted to get rid of that crappy, faulty lens so I sent it back.

3- I'll get another one. I will speed it up next time. You'll see.

4- If is still crappy and blurry I will return it and return it and eventually not buy it if it will confine me to a wall, a door frame or a tripod. and then I will say that the 24-70mm USM really sucks and that folks use it cuz there's really no other option out there for the L- series in the f/2.8. Period.

Juan Huerta wrote in post #9511128
And this is exactly what I am talking about with regard to this "knowledgeable" people...they are willing to even fake it to prove their point.

I was not "willing to even fake it". I was merely demonstrating camera shake at 1/20s. If I had done the same thing at 1/100th of a second the shot would have been sharp as a tack.

I think that what is getting everyone so frustrated is your insistence that if the lens confines you to a wall, door frame, or tripod, that it is the fault of the lens. It is not the fault of the lens. It is either the fault of the lighting conditions, or the fault of the user.

haibane wrote in post #9511147
I was not "willing to even fake it". I was merely demonstrating camera shake at 1/20s. If I had done the same thing at 1/100th of a second the shot would have been sharp as a tack.

Please send that 1/100th shot. Keep the tripod in its bag, where you always have it unless the neighbors want a photo of their cat.

Let me see it.

Juan Huerta wrote in post #9511158
Please send that 1/100th shot. Keep the tripod in its bag, where you always have it unless the neighbors want a photo of their cat.

Let me see it.

I don't own a tripod.