70-200 f/2.8L IS II underwhelming

[tomscott]

The pics look ok, at F2.8 and F4 it looks like it may be very very slightly out, but I can't tell if it is front or back focus because the subject you have chosen is flat. If you choose a subject that is slightly more 3 dimensional it will be more obvious. The box looks like it is not parallel with the lens the left side is closer to the camera and appears sharper which make me think its front focusing very slightly. It may need a little AFMA. But nothing to worry about really.

At F8 the results are absolutely perfect, but thats because the whole flat plane should be at that aperture.

Buy focal its fairly cheap and will help sort everything out for you.

Another test you could do is use the AF to focus then take a shot, then turn live view on and manual focus and check the difference, but easier with something with more depth.

 

[Loswr]

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.

Do you have a filter on the lens? The 70-200 II does have some flare in backlit situations, and in my experience a filter (even a good one like a B+W Nano) can make that flare worse.

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?

Your math is off by an order of magnitude. 25 x 200 mm = 5000 mm = 5 m (~16 feet).

 

[HenryS]

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.

Do you have a filter on the lens? The 70-200 II does have some flare in backlit situations, and in my experience a filter (even a good one like a B+W Nano) can make that flare worse.

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?

Your math is off by an order of magnitude. 25 x 200 mm = 5000 mm = 5 m (~16 feet).

Hello,
I'm honored to have an answer from you. Indeed I use filters on my lenses, on my 70-200 its a B+W 007 mrc nano. Next time I will take some pictures without it and see if it improves. Thank you very much for your advice.

And to the math... very embarrassing...

Tom, thank you for taking your time to help me I really appreciate that

 

[Loswr]

Indeed I use filters on my lenses, on my 70-200 its a B+W 007 mrc nano. Next time I will take some pictures without it and see if it improves.

I think you'll notice a difference…I certainly do, and I do remove the filter when shooting backlit. One more note about the filter - if you're not already, I'd recommend using the XS-Pro mount for the 70-200 II. It's usually not an issue with telephoto lenses, but the regular (F-Pro) mount actually causes a little additional optical vignetting on the 70-200 II on a FF camera (I posted some images here).

 

[HenryS]

Indeed I use filters on my lenses, on my 70-200 its a B+W 007 mrc nano. Next time I will take some pictures without it and see if it improves.

I think you'll notice a difference…I certainly do, and I do remove the filter when shooting backlit. One more note about the filter - if you're not already, I'd recommend using the XS-Pro mount for the 70-200 II. It's usually not an issue with telephoto lenses, but the regular (F-Pro) mount actually causes a little additional optical vignetting on the 70-200 II on a FF camera (I posted some images here).

You are right, did some quick test shots with a flash pointing directly into the camera trough a toy car and after removing the filter there was significantly less flare. Thank you very much for the advice. I hope I remember when shooting outdoor next time To the filter, I already use the xs pro ones

 

[ScottyP]

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

Pretty clear difference. Also NOTE: when you bring those tests up, the Canon is at f/2.8, and the other one is at f/5.0 on the wide end and f/6.3 at the telephoto end (because it can't open any wider).
Most lenses are sharper stopped down a little to f/4 or f/5.6, and it is much harder to be sharp at f/2.8, but the Canon is nevertheless sharper wide open than the other lens, even if the other lens is at f/8.

 

[GammyKnee]

Henry S - give the "dot-tune" method for setting AFMA values a try. I've worked through number of other techniques but "dot-tune" has become my go-to method for its speed and consistency, and the fact that I don't have to fire off a ton of shots as part of the process:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7zE50jCUPhM

You can also get a written description of the procedure if you Google for "dot-tune snapsy" (it resides in a different forum so I won't provide a direct link).

With a zoom remember to get values for both the short and long end, so you know if they're significantly different (you then have the option of going for an in-between value).

 

[jdramirez]

I'm going to ignore the sigma issue for right now.

I have the 100L and the 70-200... and the macro lens is so incredibly sharp... it is exactly what I would hope for from a macro lens... the 70-200 by comparison is remarkably sharp for a zoom lens. It isn't fair to compare the two... especially at minimum focusing distance.

Where the 70-200 shines is in low light with great image stabilization and auto focus motor...

The images are great... but they may not blow your mind at 100%.

As for the sigma.. who wants to shoot at f6? It's fine... but that's not the reason you get the 70-200.

 

[ashmadux]

Sounds like there is a LOT wrong going on with your setup.

This is an exceptional lens, and its pretty bizarre to hear it being compared to that sigma.

Send it and the body together over to CPS and let them optimize for you. My 6d was barely usable until i did that before a very important trip.

 

[alexturton]

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

You can afma easily using the af beep method.

Tripod mount
Manual focus a subject with 10x live view. Preferably a subject some noticeable detail
Set focus to manual.
Set af confirmation to beep.
Adjust afma back and forth and press the shutter button on between each time, noting the point where the beeping stops. Then average the result.

Eg if it stops beeping at -3 and 3 then your lens is spot on.
If it stops beeping at -6 and -2 then set your afma to -4.

Repeat a few times for greater accuracy.

It is quick. Simple and free. I calibrate all my lenses this way. It works great for me. Better than using software

 

[tculotta]

I never post anything here, but thought I would post that I have found my 70-200 L 2.8 II to be simply stunning. I would agree with those who postulate that there is something amiss with your copy, for what my opinion is worth.

Good luck.

Cheers,
Ted C

 

[HenryS]

Where the 70-200 shines is in low light with great image stabilization and auto focus motor...

The images are great... but they may not blow your mind at 100%.

As for the sigma.. who wants to shoot at f6? It's fine... but that's not the reason you get the 70-200.

I did get the sigma as my first lens for my Sony DSLR, to have a superzoom to start with and to find out what I need. I just compared them because I had nothing else in that focal range to compare the 70-200L to and since I was pretty sure there was something wrong with it I found that a legitimate way to become certain. After that I sent it to cps and it cam back repaired as described earlier
In total they are absolutely not comparable and the sigma is far inferior. I just made this comparison to describe the extremely poor performance the L delivered before being repaired
No need to worry

 

[HenryS]

Hello,
it's me again. Following your advice I sent the lens to cps and they returned it "fixed", stating they calibrated IS and the optics. After using it for a while, I found that it improved somewhat, but the results I get are inconsistent. There is definitely some halo. Though sometimes it gives amazing results even at 200mm with 1/15s exposure handhold. I assume that is how the lens is supposed to perform.

This inconsistency makes the lens useless for me since most of my pictures make use of back light and I need my equipment to be reliable. So I am thinking about selling the lens. But I can't square selling a broken lens with my conscience.

So could you be so kind to take a last look at the pictures and tell me if the lens is OK or not. I don't want to scam somebody.

Pictures can be found here: https://skydrive.live.com/redir?resid=9A24089482BEBF7A!1695 (developed in Lightroom 5.4 with default settings)

How does your copy of the Lens perform in backlit situations? Following Neuro's advice I am using the lens without a filter now.

Thank you in advance!

Henry Schulz

 

[Mt Spokane Photography]

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

Henry, Lenses have a tolerance, but so do bodies. In the rare case that the tolerances add up, things can look bad even though each is fine.

Canon mounts and adjusts the lens on a reference body (A 5D MK II, if you told them) and verifies that it is working correctly. If you send in your camera, they do the same but with a reference lens.

You can, and should consider sending both the camera and lens for adjustment. They adjust them separately, then confirm proper sharpness when used together. I've had two different 70-200MK II lenses, and both were wonderful. I had 5 of the MK I version, and they were good but not great. I've also had three of the non IS versions, all were exceptional lenses.

If its not up to your expectations, and can't be fixed, I'd sell it, because you will never be happy with it. First though, have them do the camera and lens both.

 

[skoobey]

I think I see your problem.

You look at other people's images shoot with the same lens and wonder why to their's look so good, while yours are plain.

Well, it's called retouching. You need to develop the film, looking at a negative won't give you the final image.

 

[HenryS]

I think I see your problem.

You look at other people's images shoot with the same lens and wonder why to their's look so good, while yours are plain.

Well, it's called retouching. You need to develop the film, looking at a negative won't give you the final image.

Hello,
of course I am aware of post processing. That's why I upgraded dpp to Lightroom 5. Nevertheless one needs a good basis to start developing. Of course I can simply increase the sharpness in Lightroom. But it's not the sames as if it would be as sharp/clear in first place. Using my 5d2 at iso 6400 for low light concerts would be impossible without PP.

Nevertheless thank you for taking the time to spent time studying my problem and to prepare a response.
Henry

 

[Skulker]

Hi Henry

You should be able to PP decent image files in DPP. Some prefer it to LR, but of course it is much much more than just a raw converter.

Your images are interesting but not the sort of thing that is best for checking lens or camera. A vertical target and an inclined ruler will do fine for setting up auto focus. My favourite way is to photograph a single flower on the lawn looking down at about 45 degrees. You can soon see if the grass either side is in focus and so see if you are front or rear focusing. I have recan but never use it now.

If you check focus and set it right but still don't get images you think are sharp enough you should try a tripod and or a bean bag.

If you still can'tget Iimages you like talk to an experienced photographer. There are lots of us about. And most are quite willing to help a youngster understand and progress. Who knows they might even say the problem is your lens. That's not likely but it certainly could be.

I hope this helps your development as a photographer and gives you no offence. As you do seem rather dismissive of the help offered so far.

 

[HenryS]

Hi Henry

You should be able to PP decent image files in DPP. Some prefer it to LR, but of course it is much much more than just a raw converter.

Your images are interesting but not the sort of thing that is best for checking lens or camera. A vertical target and an inclined ruler will do fine for setting up auto focus. My favourite way is to photograph a single flower on the lawn looking down at about 45 degrees. You can soon see if the grass either side is in focus and so see if you are front or rear focusing. I have recan but never use it now.

If you check focus and set it right but still don't get images you think are sharp enough you should try a tripod and or a bean bag.

If you still can'tget Iimages you like talk to an experienced photographer. There are lots of us about. And most are quite willing to help a youngster understand and progress. Who knows they might even say the problem is your lens. That's not likely but it certainly could be.

I hope this helps your development as a photographer and gives you no offence. As you do seem rather dismissive of the help offered so far.

Hello,
first of all I apologize for appearing dismissive, that's not what I intend to be. I assume that results from the struggle of getting taken serious as an 18 year old. Of course that's no excuse, I am deeply sorry. I value this forum and the people taking their time to help others. I learned a lot from reading this forum for about two years. Thank you!

To the lens, I found out that the lens backfocuses at both of my bodies, so I will take my camera and all my lenses to the local cps repair center and get the lens calibrated to the camera. That won't be coming cheap but I need a reliable setup since it's summertime the most profitable time for me.

I will continuing to use this lens for the summer, despite being not fully satisfied. Most clients won't notice the difference anyway. For my personal stuff I will stick to my 100L and 50CompactMacro. After the summer I will reevaluate the situation as to keep the lens, make the move to primes, try to get a different copy etc.

I am very grateful for advice about how to use this lens properly as I think it's very likely that user errors are involved. I tried using this lens on a tripod successfully after figuring out that I have to turn the IS off manually since there is not tripod detection or it doesn't work or whatever. For long exposures of night architecture it's great. It's not so great as a macro lens used with the 25mm extension tube compared to the 100L and 50 CompactMacro.

I still have to figure out how to use it properly as a portrait lens as I still fail to get the eyes in Focus at 100mm+ f/2.8 using the 5d2. Focus/Recompose doesn't work and the outer focus points are a bit hit and miss. Surprisingly the outer Points work well when using this lens and camera for table tennis shots. Strange. I hope somebody can explain that to me...

Please accept my apology.
Looking forward to further advice

Henry

 

[Skulker]

Hi Again Henry.

If you hadn't mentioned your age we wouldn't know how old you are. Anyway it has nothing to do with the advice I have given, and I didn't notice anyone else taking any notice. Apart from you that is ;D

But you do seem to be missing the point of my post. I was saying it is quite easy to do the AFMA with nothing other than the camera and the lens. You don't need any fancy software, and you don't need to send them back to Canon. Unless you run out of adjustment, and I have no idea how often that happens.

If you do it yourself you will learn about your camera and lens as well as saving some money. Give it a try its quite easy.

 

[CanonOregon]

Sharpest zoom I've used. The 'color' of images is what catches my eye. Can you go back to the dealer and try another in the store? Also, try focusing on an object from an angle and see if it's a 'focus point' issue- is the area in front of or behind sharper than where you set the focus? It should be about the best lens you've ever used, love mine.