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
Forums  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear
Guest
Forums  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon Lenses 
Thread started 16 May 2010 (Sunday) 19:31
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links (only for non-logged)

DOF at long ranges ??

 
tkbslc
Cream of the Crop
24,604 posts
Likes: 45
Joined Nov 2008
Location: Utah, USA
     
May 17, 2010 13:02 |  #31

egordon99 wrote in post #10196509 (external link)
I have no idea....

Canon needs proof that YOU purchased the item NEW from an authorized retailer.

9/10 they don't really care that your name is on the invoice, so really it is just the receipt showing purchase date. I have bought used things that include the receipt which is actually useful for warranty purposes. Other brands like Tokina require the receipt AND warranty card.


Taylor
Galleries: Flickr (external link)
EOS Rp | iPhone 11 Pro Max

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
ed ­ rader
"I am not the final word"
Avatar
23,395 posts
Gallery: 4 photos
Likes: 578
Joined May 2005
Location: silicon valley
     
May 17, 2010 13:05 |  #32

coeng wrote in post #10196477 (external link)
Then why do people include a "blank warranty card" in the item description when selling a used lens?

send it in. canon has warrantied at least one secondhand lens for me and i didn't have a card or receipt.

ed rader


http://instagram.com/e​draderphotography/ (external link)
5D4 x2, 16-35L F4 IS, 24-70L II, 70-200L F4 IS II, 100-400L II, 14L II, sigma 15 FE, sigma 28 f1.4 art, tc 1.4 III, 430exII, gitzo 3542L + markins Q20, gitzo GT 1545T + markins Q3T, gitzo GM4562

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
coeng
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
Avatar
986 posts
Joined Nov 2002
Location: NJ
     
May 17, 2010 14:50 |  #33

ed rader wrote in post #10196554 (external link)
send it in. canon has warrantied at least one secondhand lens for me and i didn't have a card or receipt.

ed rader

Curious if they also repair cosmetic things. There are some scratches on the barrel that would be nice to have taken care of.


5D2, 600 EX-RT, STE-3, 24-70L, 70-200L f/2.8 IS II, 50 f/1.4, 85 f/1.8

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
DreDaze
happy with myself for not saying anything stupid
Avatar
18,407 posts
Gallery: 49 photos
Likes: 3433
Joined Mar 2006
Location: S.F. Bay Area
     
May 17, 2010 15:10 |  #34

coeng wrote in post #10197195 (external link)
Curious if they also repair cosmetic things. There are some scratches on the barrel that would be nice to have taken care of.

they fixed a scratch on my 40D when i sent it in to have the shutter repaired...just painted it a little though..


that doesn't look right at all...also you say it's not the filter, but i've heard canon filters aren't the best


Andre or Dre
gear list
Instagram (external link)
flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
coeng
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
Avatar
986 posts
Joined Nov 2002
Location: NJ
     
May 17, 2010 15:16 |  #35

DreDaze wrote in post #10197324 (external link)
...also you say it's not the filter, but i've heard canon filters aren't the best

Not following what you mean there. I took the filter off and repeated the test shots and achieved the same result. That took the filter out of the equation as being the source of the problem.


5D2, 600 EX-RT, STE-3, 24-70L, 70-200L f/2.8 IS II, 50 f/1.4, 85 f/1.8

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
DreDaze
happy with myself for not saying anything stupid
Avatar
18,407 posts
Gallery: 49 photos
Likes: 3433
Joined Mar 2006
Location: S.F. Bay Area
     
May 17, 2010 15:22 |  #36

coeng wrote in post #10197357 (external link)
Not following what you mean there. I took the filter off and repeated the test shots and achieved the same result. That took the filter out of the equation as being the source of the problem.

i know you established it's not the cause of the problem...i'm just saying after you do get it fixed, you might want to make sure it doesn't cause any problems then...yeah it may not make a difference when the shot is bad from the lens to start...but i'd check it after you get it fixed to make sure it won't affect a good shot straight from the lens


Andre or Dre
gear list
Instagram (external link)
flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
toxic
Goldmember
3,498 posts
Likes: 2
Joined Nov 2008
Location: California
     
May 17, 2010 15:28 |  #37

coeng wrote in post #10196477 (external link)
Then why do people include a "blank warranty card" in the item description when selling a used lens?

Because people think it has value. It doesn't.

You need the original receipt. The name doesn't matter, Canon just wants to know the purchase date. If the date code is UX05 or later, you can probably talk to Canon and argue that it has to be under warranty and get away without a receipt.

Technically, only the original owner has warranty coverage, but I don't think Canon really cares.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Ok_Student3368
Senior Member
767 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Aug 2009
     
May 17, 2010 15:48 |  #38

toxic wrote in post #10197429 (external link)
Because people think it has value. It doesn't.

You need the original receipt. The name doesn't matter, Canon just wants to know the purchase date. If the date code is UX05 or later, you can probably talk to Canon and argue that it has to be under warranty and get away without a receipt.

Technically, only the original owner has warranty coverage, but I don't think Canon really cares.

This is interesting. Most computer products have an associated purchase date with it right? I've returned dozens of HDs for RMAs due to damage and they usually already have a warranty date associated with the serial. I guess it's interesting Canon doesn't do this and requires a damn receipt. Quite annoying although its ridiculous 1 year policy makes it somewhat easier. If we had 3 year, 5 year warranties, asking me to keep all these receipts would be annoying.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
jacuff
Goldmember
Avatar
2,581 posts
Likes: 2
Joined Apr 2008
Location: Searcy, AR
     
May 17, 2010 16:31 |  #39

Can you manually focus on something static to get an in focus image? Try at 200mm at 6 ft away, then 10 ft away, then 50ft, etc.


Gear, Feedback (eBay (external link)), Web (external link), Blog (external link), FB (external link), Twitter (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
coeng
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
Avatar
986 posts
Joined Nov 2002
Location: NJ
     
May 17, 2010 19:48 as a reply to  @ jacuff's post |  #40

Here are the test shots....

First, we have the set up shot to show relative distances. Taken with my Blackberry so forgive the bad IQ.

IMAGE NOT FOUND
HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/png' | Redirected to error image by ZENFOLIO PROTECTED


Note that the exposures below are not very good. I was pressed for time and was only focusing (literally) on testing out the focusing ability at varying apertures. I shot in Av mode and used whatever the camera gave me for shutter speed.

The shots with the tank were on tripod, the rest hand held. No filter was used in any of these shots.

Here's the tank that was furthest from me:

IMAGE NOT FOUND
HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'text/html' | Byte size: ZERO


IMAGE NOT FOUND
HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'text/html' | Byte size: ZERO


IMAGE NOT FOUND
HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'text/html' | Byte size: ZERO


IMAGE NOT FOUND
HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/png' | Redirected to error image by ZENFOLIO PROTECTED


IMAGE NOT FOUND
HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'text/html' | Byte size: ZERO

5D2, 600 EX-RT, STE-3, 24-70L, 70-200L f/2.8 IS II, 50 f/1.4, 85 f/1.8

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
coeng
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
Avatar
986 posts
Joined Nov 2002
Location: NJ
     
May 17, 2010 19:50 as a reply to  @ coeng's post |  #41

Here's the tank that was closest to me:

IMAGE NOT FOUND
HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/png' | Redirected to error image by ZENFOLIO PROTECTED


IMAGE NOT FOUND
HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'text/html' | Byte size: ZERO



IMAGE NOT FOUND
HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/png' | Redirected to error image by ZENFOLIO PROTECTED


IMAGE NOT FOUND
HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/png' | Redirected to error image by ZENFOLIO PROTECTED


IMAGE NOT FOUND
HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/png' | Redirected to error image by ZENFOLIO PROTECTED

5D2, 600 EX-RT, STE-3, 24-70L, 70-200L f/2.8 IS II, 50 f/1.4, 85 f/1.8

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
coeng
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
Avatar
986 posts
Joined Nov 2002
Location: NJ
     
May 17, 2010 19:53 as a reply to  @ coeng's post |  #42

Here's a sign that was nearby. Shot from my car window, handheld.

IMAGE NOT FOUND
HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'text/html' | Byte size: ZERO


IMAGE NOT FOUND
HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/png' | Redirected to error image by ZENFOLIO PROTECTED


IMAGE NOT FOUND
HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/png' | Redirected to error image by ZENFOLIO PROTECTED


IMAGE NOT FOUND
HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/png' | Redirected to error image by ZENFOLIO PROTECTED


IMAGE NOT FOUND
HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'text/html' | Byte size: ZERO

5D2, 600 EX-RT, STE-3, 24-70L, 70-200L f/2.8 IS II, 50 f/1.4, 85 f/1.8

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
coeng
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
Avatar
986 posts
Joined Nov 2002
Location: NJ
     
May 17, 2010 19:56 |  #43

jacuff wrote in post #10197780 (external link)
Can you manually focus on something static to get an in focus image? Try at 200mm at 6 ft away, then 10 ft away, then 50ft, etc.

Here are four shots where I tested manual focus. It was getting late in the day so I really had to bump up the ISO. These were also handheld, no time to setup tripod. I could have done a better manual focusing job if I wasn't pressed for time. But the point I am making here is clear (I think).

IMAGE NOT FOUND
HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'text/html' | Byte size: ZERO


IMAGE NOT FOUND
HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'text/html' | Byte size: ZERO


IMAGE NOT FOUND
HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/png' | Redirected to error image by ZENFOLIO PROTECTED


IMAGE NOT FOUND
HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'text/html' | Byte size: ZERO

5D2, 600 EX-RT, STE-3, 24-70L, 70-200L f/2.8 IS II, 50 f/1.4, 85 f/1.8

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
coeng
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
Avatar
986 posts
Joined Nov 2002
Location: NJ
     
May 17, 2010 19:58 as a reply to  @ coeng's post |  #44

Forgot to mention that I also ruled out the body being the problem this evening. I tried the lens on a Rebel XTi and observed the same results.


5D2, 600 EX-RT, STE-3, 24-70L, 70-200L f/2.8 IS II, 50 f/1.4, 85 f/1.8

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Rubi ­ Jane
Goldmember
Avatar
1,827 posts
Joined Nov 2005
Location: Waterdown, ON
     
May 17, 2010 20:20 |  #45

I wouldn't deliberate any longer. Burn the images to a disk and ship it along with the lens to your closest Canon service centre. That lens isn't focusing correctly, bite the bullet & send it in. You'll be happier when you get it back and it's working great.


Lindsey
Gear - Website (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links (only for non-logged)

11,141 views & 0 likes for this thread, 31 members have posted to it.
DOF at long ranges ??
FORUMS Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon Lenses 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

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

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 2.58forum software
version 2.58 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member was a spammer, and banned as such!
2739 guests, 141 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15,144, 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.