Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS USM
May 22, 2017 12:30:48 #
I recently purchased this lens and am disappointed. At 300mm the image is soft. Has anyone else experienced this or did I just get a dud?
May 22, 2017 14:37:48 #
PHRubin wrote:
I recently purchased this lens and am disappointed. At 300mm the image is soft. Has anyone else experienced this or did I just get a dud?
Can you post a sample with store original box checked?
This review is quite favorable, as is my own casual evaluation - one of my students has this lens and I'd say it's pretty good.
http://www.photozone.de/reviews/200-canon-ef-70-300mm-f4-56-usm-is-test-report--review
The review shows it to be optically quite good, close the L version.
May 22, 2017 15:21:34 #
May 22, 2017 15:22:57 #
May 22, 2017 17:05:15 #
PHRubin wrote:
Can do...
These appear to be hand held and iso varies, as it would appear your distance to the subject.
This is an old lens - I have one - but for the price I have found it to be quite good. Perhaps you need a more structured testing process.
The first is SOOC at 300mm, whether you think it is good enough I don't know, but I've been pleased with this for the money (used $275). At approx 200mm it is sharper.
May 22, 2017 19:10:48 #
They were both hand held but pressed against a door jamb. The distances were similar. The lens was wide open, 1/800 sec, auto ISO. Perhaps I should stop it down to f8.
The flamingo doesn't seem as sharp as the stork.
The flamingo doesn't seem as sharp as the stork.
May 22, 2017 19:41:30 #
PHRubin wrote:
They were both hand held but pressed against a door jamb. The distances were similar. The lens was wide open, 1/800 sec, auto ISO. Perhaps I should stop it down to f8.
The flamingo doesn't seem as sharp as the stork.
The flamingo doesn't seem as sharp as the stork.
The flamingo isn't as sharp, the full 300mm length is softer, but it's an old and relatively inexpensive lens, especially used. I'd like a 100-400 L II, but can't justify the cost right now.
I'd definitely recommend stopping down beyond the widest aperture. Either way, for myself I think this is a decent and usable lens for the money. It's also relatively small and light. 300mm on a T2i is an equivalent field of view of 480mm so the potential for camera shake is quite high.
Perhaps to do a better comparison you should lock the ISO, set the aperture at f/6.3, f/7.1 and f/8 and shutter at 1/500 or preferably higher, and the use different focal lengths to try and minimize the variables on the same subject. Also, try some handheld and some on a tripod with the IS turned off.
May 23, 2017 13:20:26 #
Take some pictures of something with more detail than just leaves. That is not a good example to judge sharpness of an image.
May 23, 2017 14:38:01 #
PHRubin wrote:
I recently purchased this lens and am disappointed. At 300mm the image is soft. Has anyone else experienced this or did I just get a dud?
That lens is known for to be soft at the long end!
May 23, 2017 19:09:43 #
Here is a shot in lower light, hence a high ISO and some graininess. I made it slightly lighter, otherwise ROOTC.
May 23, 2017 20:03:33 #
Early this spring I brought one home from my local store, everyone here said I had thee greatest lens ever. But the pictures turned out to be as soft as the Tamron I wanted to replace, no bargain and no better and more money. Took it back and the search continues for a replacement.
Ken
Ken
May 24, 2017 06:02:32 #
PHRubin wrote:
I recently purchased this lens and am disappointed. At 300mm the image is soft. Has anyone else experienced this or did I just get a dud?
I have the newer version (II) and it's pretty sharp. Can't tell if it's much sharper than the version you have, but it's definitely not too far behind the L version.
May 24, 2017 12:25:56 #
PHRubin wrote:
Here is a shot in lower light, hence a high ISO and some graininess. I made it slightly lighter, otherwise ROOTC.
The high ISO is why it's so grainy. The T2i isn't known for having a good high iso sensor. That's the first camera I had and you ought to keep the ISO at or below 400. Sometimes you just need to come back on a better day to take pictures if the light isn't good.
May 24, 2017 14:06:00 #
jeep_daddy wrote:
The high ISO is why it's so grainy. The T2i isn't known for having a good high iso sensor. That's the first camera I had and you ought to keep the ISO at or below 400. Sometimes you just need to come back on a better day to take pictures if the light isn't good.
I agree with that observation. T2i and T3i have the same sensor I believe. Not much changed sensor wise until the T6i / T6s. Not knocking either camera, they were good for their time, but technology keeps improving, including Canon sensors and lenses.
May 24, 2017 20:56:57 #
PHRubin wrote:
I recently purchased this lens and am disappointed. At 300mm the image is soft. Has anyone else experienced this or did I just get a dud?
My copy of this lens is much sharper especially in the periphery, even wide open. There is something going on here. Have you inspected the front and rear elements? Is this a new lens? If so, it needs to be returned.
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.