Is there something wrong with my new lens?
Is there something wrong with my new lens?
Author
Discussion

Typhon

Original Poster:

525 posts

264 months

Friday 2nd February 2007
quotequote all
I bought a 70-200 f/2.8 L IS USM a few days ago. I'm still learning how to use it. I tried to get some pictures of the moon today and they don't really come out sharp at all at 100% crop.

This is the sharpest I could get it, with MF set to infinity. AF gets pretty much the same result. Click picture to enlarge


Should I be worried? Can someone post an example of how sharp it should be, so I can compare it to mine, or is there anything else I can do to check if there's something up with the lens?

Here's a full size picture of the box too www.yousendit.com/transfer.php?action=download&ufid=D0CF9474160AC364
It looks fine at the top bu it seems to get worse towards the bottom. Taken at 200mm f/29 30 second exposure. I took them all with a Hoya UV filter on the lens too

Edited by Typhon on Friday 2nd February 20:43

GetCarter

31,300 posts

309 months

Friday 2nd February 2007
quotequote all
You don't mention which camera - which will make a huge difference. Also, check the setting to make sure you are not softening.

Most important... thats a 30 second exposure, so your tripod needs to be REALLY good and you should be using mirror lock up if you can (and as Gravy keeps point out to me, a cable release).

I'll try and dig out the exif for my last moon shot.

This was spot metered 2" 400 ISO, 5.6 from a 400mm mirror lock up, sharpened and desaturated (taken with a dark blue sky, which I find works best)

www.stevecarter.com/picaday/11.jpg

Sorry if this is a re-post PH seems to be playing up a bit.


Edited by GetCarter on Friday 2nd February 20:58

poah

2,142 posts

258 months

Friday 2nd February 2007
quotequote all
the moon moves. 30s will show motion blur lol

Typhon

Original Poster:

525 posts

264 months

Friday 2nd February 2007
quotequote all
Yeah I should have mentioned, it's on a Canon 20D. I'm not softening, all those settings are untouched.

The 30 second one is a completely different picture of the box the lens came on. The moon was about 1/15 or so

Typhon

Original Poster:

525 posts

264 months

Friday 2nd February 2007
quotequote all
GetCarter said:

This was spot metered 2" 400 ISO, 5.6 from a 400mm mirror lock up, sharpened and desaturated (taken with a dark blue sky, which I find works best)

www.stevecarter.com/picaday/11.jpg

Sorry if this is a re-post PH seems to be playing up a bit.


Edited by GetCarter on Friday 2nd February 20:58

Wow. I'm guessing a trip back to the shop is in order for me cry


Edited by Typhon on Friday 2nd February 21:08

GetCarter

31,300 posts

309 months

Friday 2nd February 2007
quotequote all
Typhon said:
GetCarter said:

This was spot metered 2" 400 ISO, 5.6 from a 400mm mirror lock up, sharpened and desaturated (taken with a dark blue sky, which I find works best)

www.stevecarter.com/picaday/11.jpg

Sorry if this is a re-post PH seems to be playing up a bit.


Edited by GetCarter on Friday 2nd February 20:58

Wow. I'm guessing a trip back to the shop is in order for me cry


Edited by Typhon on Friday 2nd February 21:08



Does the Canon have mirror lock up? If so, try that first (shutter makes a hell of a vibration). And remember I have sharpened mine... and it's taken at the same latitude as Oslo with absolutely no light and bugger all air polution .



Edited by GetCarter on Friday 2nd February 21:14

graham@edinburgh

26,553 posts

255 months

Friday 2nd February 2007
quotequote all
Was the lens wide open? There aren't many lenses that are pin sharp at their widest aperture.

V6GTO

11,579 posts

272 months

Friday 2nd February 2007
quotequote all
GetCarter said:
And remember I have sharpened mine.


Mmmmm...a little too much laugh

Martin.

Typhon

Original Poster:

525 posts

264 months

Friday 2nd February 2007
quotequote all
GetCarter said:
Does the Canon have mirror lock up? If so, try that first (shutter makes a hell of a vibration). And remember I have sharpened mine.

I didn't think it'd make much difference at 1/15 second shutter speed, which is what I shot the moon one at. I'll see

Typhon

Original Poster:

525 posts

264 months

Friday 2nd February 2007
quotequote all
graham@edinburgh said:
Was the lens wide open? There aren't many lenses that are pin sharp at their widest aperture.

I shot it at f/32

V6GTO

11,579 posts

272 months

Friday 2nd February 2007
quotequote all
Typhon said:
graham@edinburgh said:
Was the lens wide open? There aren't many lenses that are pin sharp at their widest aperture.

I shot it at f/32


Lenses tend to go a bit softer at the extremes, at both ends. You'd probably be best taking it:-

1) With the mirror locked up
2) With a remote/cable release
3) At f13 or f16
4) On a sturdy tripod with extra weight hanging from the center tube.
5) On a windless night.

Martin.



Edited by V6GTO on Friday 2nd February 21:34

Typhon

Original Poster:

525 posts

264 months

Friday 2nd February 2007
quotequote all
V6GTO said:
Typhon said:
graham@edinburgh said:
Was the lens wide open? There aren't many lenses that are pin sharp at their widest aperture.

I shot it at f/32


Lenses tend to go a bit softer at the extremes, at both ends. You'd probably be best taking it:-

1) With the mirror locked up
2) With a remote/cable release
3) At f13 or f16
4) On a sturdy tripod with extra weight hanging from the center tube.
5) On a windless night.

Martin.
Edited by V6GTO on Friday 2nd February 21:34

Thanks Martin. I'll try it out and see what I get
Edit: I'll turn IS off too

Edited by Typhon on Friday 2nd February 21:43

V6GTO

11,579 posts

272 months

Friday 2nd February 2007
quotequote all
I forgot number 6...With IS turned OFF.

Martin.

J111

3,354 posts

245 months

Friday 2nd February 2007
quotequote all
Looks like camera shake to me.

A diagnosis is simple. Go out tomorrow, find something you can shoot at manual infinity at f32. If it's sharp, it's you. If it's not it's the lens.

The self timer is an adequate substitute for a cable release if your subject isn't going anywhere. Hand triggering a shot on a tripod somewhat negates the benefits of a tripod.

Typhon

Original Poster:

525 posts

264 months

Friday 2nd February 2007
quotequote all
Ok, here's another attempt! From a bit of an awkward position, trying to aim in between the scaffolding and the roof, through my window. I can see a significant improvement. This is an unedited 100% crop again, taken at f/8, ISO 200, so I guess it was the fact that the other was at f/32 that was the main problem. No IS, and shutter speed of 1/250. I obviously didn't use a tripod this time, I just wanted to see if changing the aperture would make a big difference.


And I need to remember to resize it for this site next time banghead

This makes me feel much better about the lens, do you guys think it can get even sharper if I get all the settings on the camera right?

mr noble

6,538 posts

263 months

Friday 2nd February 2007
quotequote all
You are still likely to get camera shake on a 200mm shot at a 250th.

enerally, if you double the focal length of a shot, thats about the minimum that most humans can handhold a shot.

So, if ye shooting at 18mm, you should get a sharp shot at 1/40th.

If yr shooting at 200mm you should only handhold above 1/400th.

just repeating what I've been told about my recent troubles with the same lens (nikon version).
Greg

Zad

13,022 posts

266 months

Friday 2nd February 2007
quotequote all
Plus the maximum exposure for the moon should be 1 second, unless you have a tracking mount.

Typhon

Original Poster:

525 posts

264 months

Saturday 3rd February 2007
quotequote all
Okay, last attempt for the night

f/11, 1/500 sec, ISO 800, unedited 100% crop. I'll give it a go with a tripod another night

graham@edinburgh

26,553 posts

255 months

Saturday 3rd February 2007
quotequote all
NOthing to add, since I'm a tad wankered, but what Martin said - that's what I was driving at, the vagaries (I don't use that word sober...wierd) of results at each end of a lens's aperture range. f13 is generally the best idea for a moon shot.

UKBob

16,277 posts

295 months

Saturday 3rd February 2007
quotequote all
The moon really does move fast. I took some shots with my old point and shoot plus a monocule thingy (gave me roughly 1200mm) but didnt have a tripod so propped the camera up on stacks of books, set the timer, composed the shot, and was just about to run away* when Id notice that the moon had moved so much it was time to adjust the stacks of books and recompose again. What fun.

*had to run away to ensure I didnt ruin the photos by making vibrations near the camera.

Sigma does a 300-800mm zoom lens for £5k, which was curiously nicknamed the sigmonster




More moon shots here