Canon 24-70mm

[wcjacobs]

Ok, so I bought a Canon 24-70mm 2.8 USM. I had high expectation for this lens but have developed mixed emotions. Before I continue let me say I am still semi new to photography so I'm aware it may be, or should I say probably is me causing the following concerns.

I have noticed that the images have been blurry alot of the time. Sometimes they are very sharp but other times they a quite blurry. Being it's not a IS lens I have increased the shutter speed usually about 160-200 depending on the subject matter) to compensate for camera shake. I have tended to want to shoot at lower apeture settings since I got this lens and I'm thinking that may be the problem. I was getting clearer images with my kit lens (18-135 3.5-5.6 IS) which forced me to stay above f/3.5. Am I on the right track?

I have read mixed reviews on this lens from people complaining about blurred images and wonder if they too were shooting at too low a apeture. I've read that some think the 24-105mm is a clearer lens. I also wonder if that is because it bottoms out at f/4. I have also heard about people getting "bad copies" and wonder if I should send it to Canon to check if it's within specs...

I REALLY want this lens to work for me. I love the build quality and the weight has never bothered me as it seems to be an issue with others. Any input or advise is greatly appreciated...

[inkista]

Put it on a tripod. Shoot with it wide open at a newspaper taped to the wall. Use a cable release or timer. Use liveview and 10x magnification to manually focus the lens.

Then see if it's still "blurry".

My guess is it'll be perfectly fine.

You're probably just suffering from the first-L buyer's remorse wave that always hits. You bought this big expensive lens. It's larger and heavier than you'd thought it'd be. It's a beast to handle. And none of your stuff looks like those pro shots that made you buy the lens.

Yeh. Still just a lens.

Not a magic bullet. Not a perfect lens. Not four times sharper or four times more beautifuler. Just four times more expensive. That's an L for ya.

Yes. The 24-105 is likely to be sharper wide open, because at wide open, it's at f/4, not f/2.8. This is the way of all lenses. But you bought the 24-70 so you'd have f/2.8. The 24-105 doesn't have that, and isn't nearly as nice for portraits. Even with IS.

Learn good handholding technique.
Learn good focusing technique (and how to tell the AF system WHERE to autofocus. Single AF point use => good thing to master).
Learn how to stop down for sharpness when you need it.

Stop pixel peeping. Stop reading dpreview. Go out and shoot with the lens. Look at your pictures not the pixels. Pay attention to where you focused. A thinner DoF requires more accuracy of focusing. Give yourself a little time to fall in love with it, before you start looking at its teeth. Chances are good it's your technique and expectations, and not the lens. It always takes me about a month to feel like I've "mastered" a new lens.

I went through the same thing with my 24-105 (and a shooting buddy insisting his 17-85 was sharper). Y'know what? Didn't matter. I fell in love with my 24-105, and you'd have to pry it from my cold dead hands these days. But back when I bought it? Waves of doubt from the overspend.

[wcjacobs]

Thanks for the advise inkista...i had started to think that perhaps I was shooting to much with a one size fits all menality. I am still new to photography. 10+ years as a videographer helped sopme in the transitions but it is in fact a different animal. I'm not about to give up on this lens. I do love it's build and some of the images have been amazing. I almost bought the 24-105 but opted for the 24-70 for the 2.8...I may still add the 24.105 to the clan anyway though

[ErikUngerPhotography]

The 24-70 was my first L glass as well. Have had to for almost 2 years now. Every now and then I sometimes question the quality of the lens. But then I sit back and look and what is in play.

1) What aperture did I use? The DOF at 2.8 is going to be extremely shallow, made even more noticeable with closer subjects.

2) What was the shutter speed? When shooting at 24mm, you can afford to use a slower shutter speed (about 1/30 or lower depending on your holding technique). But when you are constantly shifting focal lengths, you need to be conscience about what the shutter speed is.

3) How was I holding the camera? Make sure that whichever hand you use to support the lens is cupping the lens from underneath. Also work on your stance to steady yourself. Try tucking your elbow of the lens hand against your chest to steady that hand.

The lens isn't going to be perfect. I've noticed that the edges can be a little soft when shooting wide open and at wide aperture. But while it may not be perfect, it is very rugged (can't tell you how much mine has been knocked around while hiking and climbing) and having an aperture of 2.8 can be a blessing at times.

And most importantly, stop pixel peeping. When you view an image at 100% on your screen from about 1-2 feet away, you are viewing it from an unnatural distance. Even when printing close or around poster size, you aren't going to be looking at it very close. It's natural to want your images to be absolutely perfect, but sometimes our expectations are just way too high and the image looks great as it is.

Originally Posted by wcjacobs

.I may still add the 24.105 to the clan anyway though

I personally wouldn't suggest doing that. It wouldn't be very wise to spend so much money and a very similar lens. If you need that extra reach, it would be better to invest in different lens that doesn't overlap so much or not at all. Options include 85,100, 135, 200, 70-200.

[A@EPOCH]

WP2: Bokeh Berries | Flickr - Photo Sharing!

This is an example of how sharp the 24-70 can be... I owned one for a little over two years before I decided to go to Canon primes. Honestly, there are some people who have reported problems with focusing for which they normally send it back to Canon and have it fine tuned.

[Jim Bryant]

Originally Posted by inkista

Put it on a tripod. Shoot with it wide open at a newspaper taped to the wall. Use a cable release or timer. Use liveview and 10x magnification to manually focus the lens.

Then see if it's still "blurry".

My guess is it'll be perfectly fine.

You're probably just suffering from the first-L buyer's remorse wave that always hits. You bought this big expensive lens. It's larger and heavier than you'd thought it'd be. It's a beast to handle. And none of your stuff looks like those pro shots that made you buy the lens.

Yeh. Still just a lens.

Not a magic bullet. Not a perfect lens. Not four times sharper or four times more beautifuler. Just four times more expensive. That's an L for ya.

Yes. The 24-105 is likely to be sharper wide open, because at wide open, it's at f/4, not f/2.8. This is the way of all lenses. But you bought the 24-70 so you'd have f/2.8. The 24-105 doesn't have that, and isn't nearly as nice for portraits. Even with IS.

Learn good handholding technique.
Learn good focusing technique (and how to tell the AF system WHERE to autofocus. Single AF point use => good thing to master).
Learn how to stop down for sharpness when you need it.

Stop pixel peeping. Stop reading dpreview. Go out and shoot with the lens. Look at your pictures not the pixels. Pay attention to where you focused. A thinner DoF requires more accuracy of focusing. Give yourself a little time to fall in love with it, before you start looking at its teeth. Chances are good it's your technique and expectations, and not the lens. It always takes me about a month to feel like I've "mastered" a new lens.

I went through the same thing with my 24-105 (and a shooting buddy insisting his 17-85 was sharper). Y'know what? Didn't matter. I fell in love with my 24-105, and you'd have to pry it from my cold dead hands these days. But back when I bought it? Waves of doubt from the overspend.

You took the words right out of my mouth!

[Doug Pardee]

According to Canon's Tech guru Chuck Westfall, the 24-70 "is very difficult to calibrate for autofocus over the entire zoom range." He provides a home test to see if yours needs to be sent to Canon for calibrating:
Tech Tips by Chuck Westfall- The Digital Journalist

Note: the custom function numbers may be different on your camera model. That article is over 5 years old.