 Deborah Liperote |
Back focusing with 24-70 2.8L? I seem to constantly have soft photos with my new lens and seems to be back focusing. Anyone else have this problem or any other problem with the lens. I already sent it in for calibration it it still does the same thing. I never get a tack sharp photo.HELP
|
|
|
|
||
|
Oliver Anderson |
why don't you borrow someone elses 24-70, if the problem still occurs it's the camera or user error. That lens Rocks, its my most used lens besides the 70-200 2.8IS. Have you tried banging on the lens a little bit, you gotta show it who's the boss. JK
|
|
|
|
||
|
Deborah Liperote |
I have been building up my knowlege and equipment over the past 3 years or so. Hso i'm not a completed skilled photographer could you please tell me what you mean by user error. It might be my fault but I just never had a problem like this with any other lens ever!!! I was told that it could be my fault on another forum so i'm completely willing to admit to it but aparently I don't know how to use this lens. do you have some tips for me or knowlege as to why this would be a tricky lens for mr to shoot with. EX: should I be keeping the shutter up more than I would with another lens? Why would I get back focusing? I never do with other lenses? Please help!!!
|
|
|
|
||
|
Jerry Frazier |
This is a known problem with that lens. Get your money back. There are good ones and bad ones, and there's no way to know which is which except to go out and shoot it. You probably have a bad one.
|
|
|
|
||
- Gregory LaGrange Contact Gregory LaGrange Gregory LaGrange's Gallery |
User error means your fault. You using manual focus or auto focus?
|
|
|
|
||
|
Deborah Liperote |
Thanks Greg... I figured that! I'm shooting auto. I've been told by some to shoot manual and this will help but that would still mean there's a focusing problem with the lens and for $1100 for an L lens I shouldn't be having a focusing issue. What I meant by tips in using the lens is meant specifically for this lens. I know how to use a lens for crying out loud. I was hoping that there was something specific I needed to do and know to make this particular lens a success! I know this lens had alot of problems when first released but many owners of the lens say these issues were cleared up by the beginning of this year and I purchased mine in May. I keep getting told it could be how I'm using it but what the heck are they talking about. Is it so different than other lenses other than how fast it is? What should I be doing so different than how I use another lens? I have a 28-135mm I have no focusing issues with it. Any suggestions Greg?
|
|
|
|
||
|
- Gregory LaGrange Contact Gregory LaGrange Gregory LaGrange's Gallery |
It's the first I heard of it being a known problem, but just because you bought yours in May doesn't mean it couldn't be one of the bad ones if it was sitting in a store's inventory. It should still be under warranty. So I guess you'll have to take it back like Jerry said.
|
|
|
|
||
|
Robyn Gwilt |
Sorry to be doff (stupid), but what is a 'back focussing' problem? And I'm also curious to know why an L lens would require special handling or a special way to use it? Surely whether you're using M or Autofocus, this should just be the best thing since sliced bread? I've got the 24-105 L IS USM lens, and the 70-200, and I had problems with the 70-200 to the point that I demanded a new one. With the 24-105 I was getting soft pix, and then we tried it on someone elses 30D (and my 350D), and it was fine - we then discovered the AF in the camera needed replacing, so check that out as well. R
|
|
|
|
||
|
Pete H |
Deborah, The only way to know if you are actually experiencing a "back focus" problem is to conduct some controlled tests. This needs to be done in full manual mode or at least aperture priority. 1) Tripod mount the camera 2) Set at f/8 or f/11 3) Auto focus mode 4) Select a target with some depth..a row of golf balls spaced evenly apart works great. 5) Auto Focus on the center of the golf ball row and make several shots. 6) Repeat; but focus on a different area in the row. Do this in horizontal AND vertical composition. You'd be amazed how some lens elements can get loose in only one orientation. If you have a "back focus" problem, you will have inconsistent results. Lastly, check your "focus priority" Most newer DSLR's have the ability to (select) different focus points. I always set mine to (center) focus and simply recompose. Just some ideas to try, all the best, Pete
|
|
|
|
||
|
Deborah Liperote |
Thanks Pete will do. I always do use just the center focus point and recompose. I knew I was having problems with this lens so I really took my time and made sure I establish a good focus lock but my images came out blurry. They are mostly fixable but I expect amazing shots from an L lens!!!!!!!!!!!!! ya kNOW?
|
|
|
|
||
|
Deborah Liperote |
WHAT PROBLEMS WERE YOU HAVING WITH THE 70-200..Robyn?. I DO GET AMAZING SHOTS WITH MINE. But i'm curious as to what your problems were. And how did you get them to issue you a new lens? I called canon and they sent me a label to ship it to them for free along with both of my cameras to see what the issue might be. this will be the second time I have sent the lens in. I asked the guy if they would please just issue me a new lens and at this point the answer is no. so what do I need to say to them to get them to issue the new one?
|
|
|
|
||
|
Jerry Frazier |
Canon says to send the camera in with the lens. I told them to suck eggs. I asked them which camera would you like me to send in along with the lens I bought that is totally independant from any of my bodies? Shall I send the Rebel, the 20Ds, if a 20D please specify the serial number as I have 5, all purcahsed at diffferent times. Should I send in my 5D? Should I send a 1D, if so, please speocify the serial # as I have 3. See how ludicrious this is? But, I've heard that it will fix the problem if you have 1 camera and you send that in with your 24-70 lens. But, what happens if you replace your camera body? Maybe you worry about that later. Like I said, this is a known problem with this lens and most people will just send it back and get another. It's hit or miss with them.
|
|
|
|
||
|
- Gregory LaGrange Contact Gregory LaGrange Gregory LaGrange's Gallery |
" Sorry to be doff (stupid), but what is a 'back focussing' problem?" That's a lens always having the point in focus slightly behind the subject. The store you bought it from is where you'd have to get a new lens from. You can email Jerry to see if he knows of anybody who's had to take one back, or see if google brings up some forums where people have talked about the problems with the lens.
|
|
|
|
||
|
Robyn Gwilt |
My 70-200 just gave me about 9/10 out of focus shots. They re-calibrated it, and I still wasn't happy. After throwing a monumental tantrum, and behaving like a first class kugel they eventually gave up, and got me a new one. These lenses do come with a 1year guarrantee after all, and for this kind of money.... no way Jose was I going to take what was supposed to be the joy of my life, which turned into a dud! But I'm happy now! Greg, I sometimes have that problem when shooting groups, or when I'm more than about 3 or so meters away from my subject - (24-105mm) I use my centre focus point, focus and recompose, but I'm wondering if when I recompose I'm moving too much. I'm also wondering whether its my monitor, as when I print, they don't look bad at all. (possible User Error?!) Deborah, I forgot to mention I'm in South Africa, so not sure what the rules are in the US regarding changing things - I would have thought you'd have more luck than here. I guess you just gotta yell and threaten, and perform and shriek..... Good luck!
|
|
|
|
||
|
Deborah Liperote |
Thanks Robyn... that's pretty much what I was worried about. I'll have to throw a royal fit! how do you like the 24-105? because I'm actually considering selling the 24-70 and getting the lens you got. I knew I shouldve done that in the first place but I didn't! recommendation? her's my question... why in the heck is there so many problems with these L lenses. I have better photos with my 28-135mm 3.5-5.6 than I do with this lens! I could scream!!!!!!!!!!!!Or maybe I should stick with prime lenses. I love the pics from my 50mm 1.4. super sharp
|
|
|
|
||
|
Robyn Gwilt |
The 24-105 is a very very nice lens - not quite as heavy as it's predecssor, which I think is your 24-70. A nice all round lens, and also great in the studio. I don't have a prime, so can't compare, but I believe that 50mm 1.4 is something to lust after :)
|
|
|
|
||
|
Scott McCord |
Hey Guys/Gals I just asked the same question about focusing problems on the 70-200/2,8L in a different thread. I was referred to a article titled "Focus and Recompose Sucks." http://visual-vacations.com/Photography/focus-recompose_sucks.htm. I've always locked focus on my subject with centerpoint and then recomposed - for more than ten years and I never had a problem with out of focus shots until the 70-200. I read the article and it made sense. I then took my 70-200 out to test by shooting my dogs in my back yard. Holy Cow, what a difference that made. I had been kicking myself previously for not buying the IS version of this lens because I thought the standard version of the lens was not allowing me to use a fast enough shutter speed which was blurring my shots. However, it seems to be completely a depth of field issue (mainly at wide apertures). I've tended to get away with the recompose and shoot with my 24-70 because I tend to shoot portraits a little wider and then crop later (for different sized print orders) which increases depth of field. And in fact, I noticed some soft faces even with my 24-70 when shooting tight shots with recompose and shoot method. I never noticed this problem with my older, cheaper telephoto because it was not capable of 2.8. So I obviously had more depth of field to play with. But since I shoot a lot of weddings, I am constantly on wide apertures for darker situations, leaving me a very shallow depth of field. I would suggest setting your camera to activate all the focus points and letting the camera choose the appropriate points, or switching to a different focus point that would fall on your subject's face. It won't be a high precision focus point, but it tends to result in sharper photos. Since I've been in the recompose shoot mode for so long, I'm actually a little annoyed by the automatic focus points, but it's worth it if it gives you sharper results. So now, I'm trying to break this habit, at least with the 70-200. This new focus method has really made all the difference between good shots and complete junk.
|
|
|
|
||
|
Deborah Liperote |
Scott, I want to thank you so much for responding to this thread and will immediately try this out! your awesome!
|
|
|
|
||
|
Scott McCord |
Deborah, No problem! Hope it works for you like it did for me.
|
|
|
|
||
|
Erin Johnson |
Hi Deb, I can't believe you are having so much trouble with your lens. I use mine for 50% of the wedding. 70-200 about 20%, the 85 about 10%, The 16-35 about 10% the 50 about 7% and the fisheye for 3% (dont quote me on those).I have 2 24-70's and they are a little different, but just on the autofocus/manual switch. One is smooth and raised and the other flat with ridges. I have never had a a problem with either. Not saying that you are an amatuer, but my assistant had trouble at the first couple of weddings with soft focus or back focus like you mentioned. I let him use my camera for a couple of shot and later checked his photos. The ones where the focus was soft I wrote the file numbers down and then popped the CF card into my MarkII. I selected info until it showed me right where his focus point was (little red square). Some people thnik that when they press half way down on the focus button there is no way the camera can pick a spot behind the people, but a contrasty backround will grab the sensors attention better than a face sometimes. So I suggested to him to use the center focus point, turn off the auto focus and then recompose. He rarely gets one out of focus now. I don't think Canon would send back a faulty camera, I'd hate to say it , but sometimes its the driver, not the car. Get a photo friend to test it on there camera and see what happens.
|
|
|
|
||
|
- Gregory LaGrange Contact Gregory LaGrange Gregory LaGrange's Gallery |
Justin the surfing canadian is still having assistant problems. Where do you get them from, a temp agency?
|
|
|
|
||
|
Erin Johnson |
Living in South Carolina now. Folly Island hasn't had nothing but ankle slappers yet.
|
|
|
|
||
|
- Gregory LaGrange Contact Gregory LaGrange Gregory LaGrange's Gallery |
You move around more than somebody with a fake identity.
|
|
|
|
||
|
Scott McCord |
Deborah, I might add that using the automatic focus, like I suggested earlier, on the camera will also give you the same problem as Erin just mentioned with focus points picking up a background with high contrast. So if you run into the problem of the camera constantly selecting the wrong part of the frame for focusing with automatic selection, Erin has a good solution.
|
|
|
|
||
|
Erin Johnson |
Hey Gregy, whats your address? I think I'm pretty close to your studio.
|
|
|
|
||
|
Oliver Anderson |
I think you should both meet and post a photo of you two hugging!!!! It will win the editors choice award.Haha
|
|
|
|
||
|
Erin Johnson |
Cat got your tongue?
|
|
|
|
||
|
Deborah Liperote |
Just wanted to let everyone know that I got my camera and lens back from Canon and they work fabulously. They said that they needed to change an incorrect focusing ring that was causing the lens to back focus.
|
|
|
|
||
|
- Gregory LaGrange Contact Gregory LaGrange Gregory LaGrange's Gallery |
Cool. Slick justin craig digital, you having more visions of imaginary studios?
|
|
|
|
||
|
Erin Johnson |
I forgot your in Texass, for some reason I thought you were in Atlanta. What a bummer, I stayed in Hotel in SanAntonio on my drive to Columbiana,SC. I could have stopped by.
|
|
|
|
||
|
- Gregory LaGrange Contact Gregory LaGrange Gregory LaGrange's Gallery |
There's a shorter route.
|
|
|
|
||
|
Erin Johnson |
visited a friend in mesa,AZ then went from there.
|
|
|
|
||
|
This old forum is now archived. Use improved Forum here
Report this Thread |
||