I just got a new Canon 70-300 IS, USM 4.5-5.6 lens to replace my 100-300 lens that is about 12 years old without IS. The camera is the Canon 50D. I find that getting older tends to make one shake more, thus I now went for the IS. All these shots were taken at 300mm, 1/400 sec at ISO 400. All the other info is in the EXIF data. The subjects were are various distances. I would like some opinions as to whether these photos are sharp. No PP, just out of the camera in JPEG. I did not use a tripod as I was testing to see if the IS is really helping me out in hand holding. All comments are appreciated. Thanks
Across the Street, over 100 feet Away
Across the street, over 100 feet Away
Roof Tile, about 30 feet away
Yes...they certainly do to me.
clixpix wrote:
I just got a new Canon 70-300 IS, USM 4.5-5.6 lens to replace my 100-300 lens that is about 12 years old without IS. The camera is the Canon 50D. I find that getting older tends to make one shake more, thus I now went for the IS. All these shots were taken at 300mm, 1/400 sec at ISO 400. All the other info is in the EXIF data. The subjects were are various distances. I would like some opinions as to whether these photos are sharp. No PP, just out of the camera in JPEG. I did not use a tripod as I was testing to see if the IS is really helping me out in hand holding. All comments are appreciated. Thanks
I just got a new Canon 70-300 IS, USM 4.5-5.6 lens... (
show quote)
IS will not correct everything. Especially on a 300mm lens. It's big and it's heavy. You should almost always use a monopod or tripod with that lens. Which means that IS is way over rated. It can help with a small bit of shake, but not always enough to make the picture as tack sharp as one might want. Which brings you back to a tripod.
You can try using brust mode on your camera to see if that helps with the sharpness also. You will have to scarfice some light for that, so make the nessecary accomadation on your camera if doing brust mode.
The last picture is sharp, The first two are a little graining, and blurred. The fine details are missing. Go out and try shooting something with a lot of detail, (like a flower) at different distances and see what happens. Pick the same subject. Also may I recommend if you have not already, join the weekly lesson by MWAC. You could learn somethings about your lens there.
good luck! :-D
Fran
Loc: Northeast, United States
Also may I recommend if you have not already, join the weekly lesson by MWAC. You could learn somethings about your lens there.
good luck! :-D[/quote]
What is the name of the weekly lesson? People photography??? Thx
You could be fighting the "old depth of field" issue a 300 mm lens at f5 focused on smething 15 feet away has a dof of .14 feet (1.7") according to an online calculator. At f8 yhr dof is .22 feet. Notice how unforgiving the 300 mm lense is when used close.
When focused a 100 feet and f8 aperture the DOF is 10.2 feet.
Tom
Thanks to all who responded. I appreciate all the help available here on UHH. After more testing and reading the reviews on this lens, I have decided to return it and start over. I still have my non-IS lens that has served me very well for over 10 years so it will keep me going until I decide, once more, to upgrade to an IS lens. I will be searching for, and reading the posts here on UHH as to which lens to explore further.
Regards---Joe
I have and use the lens that you tried. I have it mounted on a 7D. With this camera, I have to microadjust the lens at 300mm to get a sharp picture. I am in the process of replacing the 70-300 with the 100-400L lens.
Gary:
I spoke with Canon about the microadjust feature on my 50D. They do not recommend using that feature with a telephoto lens. I would be interested in your success in using the feature on your lenses.
Joe
clixpix wrote:
Gary:
I spoke with Canon about the microadjust feature on my 50D. They do not recommend using that feature with a telephoto lens. I would be interested in your success in using the feature on your lenses.
Joe
No problem using it on a telephoto.
flyguy
Loc: Las Cruces, New Mexico
clixpix wrote:
I just got a new Canon 70-300 IS, USM 4.5-5.6 lens to replace my 100-300 lens that is about 12 years old without IS. The camera is the Canon 50D. I find that getting older tends to make one shake more, thus I now went for the IS. All these shots were taken at 300mm, 1/400 sec at ISO 400. All the other info is in the EXIF data. The subjects were are various distances. I would like some opinions as to whether these photos are sharp. No PP, just out of the camera in JPEG. I did not use a tripod as I was testing to see if the IS is really helping me out in hand holding. All comments are appreciated. Thanks
I just got a new Canon 70-300 IS, USM 4.5-5.6 lens... (
show quote)
Your lens has a two position image stabilization mode switch on the side as well a one to turn stabilization on and off, it is imperative that you understand when to use this feature.
Not using this in the correct situation can cause some problems with getting good focus.
You might also try using high speed shooting when hand holding. You will get sharper pictures.
clixpix wrote:
I just got a new Canon 70-300 IS, USM 4.5-5.6 lens to replace my 100-300 lens that is about 12 years old without IS. The camera is the Canon 50D. I find that getting older tends to make one shake more, thus I now went for the IS. All these shots were taken at 300mm, 1/400 sec at ISO 400. All the other info is in the EXIF data. The subjects were are various distances. I would like some opinions as to whether these photos are sharp. No PP, just out of the camera in JPEG. I did not use a tripod as I was testing to see if the IS is really helping me out in hand holding. All comments are appreciated. Thanks
I just got a new Canon 70-300 IS, USM 4.5-5.6 lens... (
show quote)
You are falling into the "hand holding " trap. Whats wrong with using a tripod?
clixpix wrote:
I just got a new Canon 70-300 IS, USM 4.5-5.6 lens to replace my 100-300 lens that is about 12 years old without IS. The camera is the Canon 50D. I find that getting older tends to make one shake more, thus I now went for the IS. All these shots were taken at 300mm, 1/400 sec at ISO 400. All the other info is in the EXIF data. The subjects were are various distances. I would like some opinions as to whether these photos are sharp. No PP, just out of the camera in JPEG. I did not use a tripod as I was testing to see if the IS is really helping me out in hand holding. All comments are appreciated. Thanks
I just got a new Canon 70-300 IS, USM 4.5-5.6 lens... (
show quote)
They look pretty good considering they are JPEG. If done in RAW and post processed they would probably knock your socks off with the sharpness. :thumbup:
If you want to reply, then
register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.