70-200 f/2.8L IS II underwhelming

[HenryS]

Hi guys,
A little over a year ago I acquired the 70-200 2.8 IS II "dream lens" and was kinda disappointed since it wasn't so exceptional as expected.

The images were ok but were not justifying the 2000 Euro Price Tag. But I needed the range and thought that poor images are more likely to result from a user error than from a highly regarded lens so I kept the lens and tried to improve. Soon I found out that this lens is a beast to handle on a 5d2, since its really difficult to focus at 200 2.8 with the outer focus points in low light, even in fairly good light. So I found a workaround and soon I was able to get really good concert and event shots with this lens on a 5d2 even with some more static sport as table tennis. But flowers and wildlife were still unacceptable.

Being desperate I diged out my first DSLR lens, a sigma 18-200 DC Sony a mount mounted it on a Sony alpha 300 and compared it to the 70-200 2.8 II on a 40D both at f/6.3. Surprisingly the sigma was much better!

I couldn't believe my eyes so I sent the lens to cps and the changed pretty much the entire inside of the lens, some optical elements, the barrel and the IS. After that it was on pair with the sigma but I am still not convinced that I have to spend nearly 2000 Euro on a lens to get equivalent IQ as a 120 Euro lens. Initially I intendet to use the 70-200 with extenders to get some tele for occasional use but currently i assume that would be a waste of money.

So I am asking you for help: what am I doing wrong?

For you to judge I took some images to illustrate the issue: https://skydrive.live.com/redir?resid=9A24089482BEBF7A!1547

The strange glow is the issue that bothers me. I know that these are macro lens subjects and usually I use my 100L for that but sometimes I just don't have it with me, so the 70-200 has to fill the gap.

Thank you in advance and sorry for bad language
I follow this forum for quite a while and you are great guys

 

[pwp]

It's not without its stellar performance reputation and extremely consistent build quality that the EF 70-200 f/2.8isII has found it's way into just about every Canon professional's bag on the planet. From this point it's frequently stated as being a "most-used" lens. So what's happening for you?

There is a chance that it is a very rare poor copy, it's in serious need of AFMA adjustment, there is comprehensive user-error or the unlikelihood of you being a malicious troll. I doubt this is the case!

Read up on AFMA (auto focus micro adjustment in case you were unsure) and do the adjustments as a start point.

This tends not to be a lens that disappoints. If you bought second hand, there are the occasional copies that have been dropped/damaged and badly repaired, then dumped into the hands of a trusting, unsuspecting buyer. As with anything pre-owned, YMMV.

-pw

 

[HenryS]

Thanks for your answer,
I am definitely not a malicious troll, I am a 18 year old German student who tries to get into the photography business and loves canon and the equipment they make.

I started taking snaps at the age of 5 with an analog point and shoot, upgraded to a powershot a450, and in 2008 finally a DSLR a Sony alpha 300 with sigma 18-200 DC lens. With this camera I learned a lot and found out my passion is macro photography. So I got myself a sigma 50 2.8 macro in 2012 but I was not happy with the direction sony went with the slts and evfs. So i switched to canon because my powershot nerver let mit down and got myself a 5d2 with the 50 compact macro. Half a year later the 100L and another half year later the 70-200L II. I love my equipment and would never dare to do something maleficent to Canon wich provides me with firs class Equipment and never lets me down. (all of these three were bought new from a local store)

As stated in my post I assume that poor images result from a faulty user. So I was hoping that one of you might be able to tell me what I have to improve so I get the same stellar results from that lens as just about every canon professional photographer.

As to AFMA I know about that, but without a professional setup or software I don't think its possible to do that accurately and being a student I am currently not able to afford that. If that's wrong please tell me I read and joined this forum to learn.

I am very sorry if this didn't become clear in my first post
Henry

 

[tomscott]

I agree with the above, although I just bought one and it has a manufacture defect with some sort of large particle inside I will be receiving a new copy. So I was pretty disappointed after forking out nearly £2k for it.

http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=21145.0

But in comparison to my 70-200mm L F2.8 MKI it is sharper and the IS is amazing huge difference. I have a plethora of L zoom glass (check my sig) and this is by far the best sharpest zoom L lens I have ever used. Infact it is stated as one of the, if not the sharpest zoom lenses ever made albeit the 24-70mm MKII.

Sorry to hear you are having issues. The images looks ok to me, the halo you speak of just looks like backlit bokeh, and the in focus areas look pretty sharp to me…

I would have a go at having you camera and lens calibrated or have a go yourself with Focal?

Because your using a 5DMKII are you having focusing issues? The centre point is pretty good but the surrounding points aren't really that accurate.

 

[HenryS]

Thank you for your reply,
Yes that lens is pretty sharp, after having it repaired That's alright, just the "halo" bothers me as my other lenses don't do that or don't do that as strong as this. I will examine that further, thanks for the advice I really appreciate that

 

[tomscott]

No problem

One thing I have noticed is that all the focus areas in your images are off centre, which makes me think you are using either the edge focus points on your 5DMKII and 40D or focus recompose.

I have the 40D and it and the 5DMKII have the same 9 point auto focus system, which is not the best especially the outer points, but the centre isn't bad. Or are you using the centre point to focus recompose? Using focus recompose with a fast lens is very difficult because at say F2.8 the DOF is so narrow that even the smallest movement can create miss focus. It is even worse with faster glass with 1.2 primes etc.

What I would try and do is shoot the same subject throughout the zoom range and at different apertures but use the centre point and centre the subject in the frame as a test and have a look. Back and front focus issues will be blatant, then you can start to narrow down the problem.

Also the halo effect is what is referred to as rim lighting created from lighting behind the subject. Different lighting causes differing sharpness, soft light on a dull day usually creates soft images and hard light gives more contrast therefore sharper images and you get that through front lit scenes where the sun is behind the photographers back, but the subject is facing into the light.

Try a test with a front lit subject as described above and then report your findings and we can help with any obvious issues with the lens.

Hope that helps

Tom

 

[rambarra]

halo in pics, as other said, is generated by the light hitting the subject from behind. nothing to worry about.


In general if you are worried by lens sharpness and/or proper focus try shooting focusing charts instead of random subjects and invest in focal if you need AFMA

 

[HenryS]

Thank you for you replys,
I am so happy having this forum an people to answer my question, you are great!
I will perform the tests as Tom suggested this afternoon and report back
Nevertheless if I remember correctly the 5d2 and 40D don't share the same af module as the 40d has 9 cross-type and the 5d2 only the center point as cross type. Its very noticeable that the 40d focuses better when using the outer points.

I don't use focus and recompose since i am aware of the different focal planes and had bad results using this technique. I would love to have something like Hasselblad true focus. I rather use the outer points and take more pictures hoping one of them to be in focus.

Regarding the Halo I am aware that this is caused by the back lite but its relatively strong with the 70-200 in comparison to the 100L Macro. See this Picture I took with the 100L in a back light situation https://www.flickr.com/photos/henryschulz/12254923205/

Thank you so much for your help! (no irony, I am serious, I really appreciate that)
Henry

 

[HenryS]

halo in pics, as other said, is generated by the light hitting the subject from behind. nothing to worry about.


In general if you are worried by lens sharpness and/or proper focus try shooting focusing charts instead of random subjects and invest in focal if you need AFMA

I am not worried about sharpness, in case of that i would have shot a newspaper Currently I am very short of money but it seems like there is no way around focal so I will purchase that in the furture Thanks for your advice!

 

[Viggo]

I've owned 4 copies of this lens, and one was horrible, it was seriously soft. I adjusted alma at both the Wide end and Tele end to my 1dX, but since I had owned this lens before I knew that it wasn't supposed to be that useless. I sent it in and, long story short, they replaced to AF units, two IS units, realigned two glass elements at tested and it came back with slightly better AF, but the same delay in the IS (from I push until it's full stabilized) and still VERY soft. I sold it for cheap to a guy that I explained it all to, and when he got it he was over the moon, he thought it was great.

I bought another, and it still had the same IS-issue as all other IS-lenses I have owned and used, including my current 200 f2.0, it takes a long time to fully stabilize and sometimes it only starts IS in one direction, either vertical or horizontal. I wait 4 seconds and only then is stabilized. So while people say it's instant, I refuse to believe I have at 15 IS lenses with the same issue, lol, they just are like that.

The poor 70-200 copy also had a strange feel to the zoom ring, like it was stiff from 70-100 and loose at 135 and then stiff at 200, a really bad copy all over.

But the other three, apart from the IS, has been completely EPIC for sharpness all through the range, and would destroy pretty much any other lens for sharpness and IQ and AF. Only lens I have used that surpasses it is the 200 f2, and that's a no brainer.

 

[sanj]

It is obvious that you are not trolling. It is also obvious that this is a zoom lens. It is a great lens but not the best lens. I personally have a problem with its bokeh.

 

[Hector1970]

You must have received a very bad copy.
It's a tremendous lens. Super sharp and accurate.
At 18 comparing things to Hasselblads is interesting.
You seem to know something about photography and unless you are over complicating how you are taking photos I couldn't see how the problem is you.
A complete beginner would take great shots with a normal version of this lens.
Maybe you should buy a 5D Mark III to pair with it.
At 18 you'd probably be better off buying cheap equipment and making the most out of them.
You'd potentially learn more that way.
Jumping straight to a 70-200mm F2.8 II means maybe you won't every appreciate how good it is (if you had a good copy).
There is too much emphasis on buying gear (I include myself here ) and not enough on improving the actual photos we take. Lack of equipment makes you're innovative and better out technique.
I hope you get your version replaced with a proper version. Hopefully you'll then see what a great lens it is.

 

[Viggo]

While it's not "the best" it comes REALLY close to being that when excluding the super tele's. At least for sharpness, distortion, CA color, contrast AF etc.

But here's a quick look at what it compares to against an 18-200 Sigma.

At 70mm.

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=491&Camera=474&Sample=0&FLI=4&API=0&LensComp=687&CameraComp=453&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=0

at 200mm

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=491&Camera=474&Sample=0&FLI=7&API=1&LensComp=687&CameraComp=453&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=3&APIComp=0

 

[tomscott]

The link to the other image you have photographed is a controlled environment with no background and it was shot at F16 not F2.8, you don't get the same dreamy bokeh as F16 gives a lot more DOF.

The images you have posted with the Halo effect are all busy situations and you will find the 100L will produce a similar effect those images in the same situation. That images and what you originally posted are unfortunately not comparable.

Try comparing the both at the same focal length in the same situation.

By the way looking at your images on flickr, they are brilliant congrats, nice eye.

 

[HenryS]

You must have received a very bad copy.
It's a tremendous lens. Super sharp and accurate.
At 18 comparing things to Hasselblads is interesting.
You seem to know something about photography and unless you are over complicating how you are taking photos I couldn't see how the problem is you.
A complete beginner would take great shots with a normal version of this lens.
Maybe you should buy a 5D Mark III to pair with it.
At 18 you'd probably be better off buying cheap equipment and making the most out of them.
You'd potentially learn more that way.
Jumping straight to a 70-200mm F2.8 II means maybe you won't every appreciate how good it is (if you had a good copy).
There is too much emphasis on buying gear (I include myself here ) and not enough on improving the actual photos we take. Lack of equipment makes you're innovative and better out technique.
I hope you get your version replaced with a proper version. Hopefully you'll then see what a great lens it is.

Tank you for your reply

Generally I have the same aproach focus on skills rather equipment but there is another one: buy cheap buy twice, so I decided that after jumping ship to canon I wont start with a superzoom but with a cheepisch prime which taught me a lot. I love that litte 50 compact macro!

I don't put emphasis on buying gear I don't have that much money. I just want to buy quality gear which lasts as long as possible. I bought a cheap tripod, it broke. I bought a cheap laptop, it brok after 1.5 years. Lesson learned

Currently I focus on understanding light and don't buy new gear since skills are more important. Currently my lite equipment has limitations, much limitations, but its useful and good fun to learn how to lite a subject with usual lightbulbs an one 430EX.

Henry

 

[Random Orbits]

The difficulty in focusing with the outer points in fair to poor light is a 5DII "feature" and not a lens issue. Wide open, I had to use the 5DII's center point only (frame more loosely) and crop in post. The 5DIII has a much better AF system. I used the lens on a 5DII for less than a year before upgrading to a 5DIII.

And you should definitely AFMA your body/lens combination. You don't need a professional setup to do AFMA. Set up a high contrast target vertically and set a ruler slanted, stand at around 25x the focal length. Take a few pics of the target and note where the focus plane is on the ruler and adjust accordingly until the average is at 0 (at the target plane).

I don't have any problems using the lens near MFD. Because of it's relatively high max magnification spec, it's the lens I use for close stuff if I don't have a macro with me. It's not as good as the 100L, but it's better than other lenses.

 

[HenryS]

The link to the other image you have photographed is a controlled environment with no background and it was shot at F16 not F2.8, you don't get the same dreamy bokeh as F16 gives a lot more DOF.

The images you have posted with the Halo effect are all busy situations and you will find the 100L will produce a similar effect those images in the same situation. That images and what you originally posted are unfortunately not comparable.

Try comparing the both at the same focal length in the same situation.

By the way looking at your images on flickr, they are brilliant congrats, nice eye.

Hello,
I will try that as soon as I am home again where my 100L sits on its shelf
Thank you for your compliment, really appreciate that
Henry

 

[tomscott]

Your certainly not wrong!

Wish I could have had access to the gear at 18 tho! At 26 now think my first L the 70-200mm I bought when I was 20 for my 40D as I started doing a few commercial projects at Uni.

I applaud you and your images show great talent and a great career ahead of you.

 

[HenryS]

Back again,
I did some test shots, unfortunately without a ruler since I was done by the time the advice arrived. Camera and lens on a tripod IS turned of, subject about 1.5 meters away, central af point. I uploaded them here:

https://skydrive.live.com/redir?resid=9A24089482BEBF7A!1556

I did not do that before so would you be so kind an judge whether afma is needed or not All pictures are jpgs developed from raw in Lightroom 5.4 with sharpening set to 0. The last two are to illustrate the setup

Thanks in advance

 

[HenryS]

And you should definitely AFMA your body/lens combination. You don't need a professional setup to do AFMA. Set up a high contrast target vertically and set a ruler slanted, stand at around 25x the focal length. Take a few pics of the target and note where the focus plane is on the ruler and adjust accordingly until the average is at 0 (at the target plane).

Thank you for your Advice I will try that. I just don't get this 25x the focal length. So for 200mm I should be 50 Meters away from the target? Isn't that a bit far way? The only possible way to do that is outside but then tere is no controlled environment... Please enlighten me
Henry