Jump to content

Tamron 28-75 if sp di focusing isues with canon 5d...


anna_nielsen

Recommended Posts

<p>Hi there - for once in my life i decided to buy a Tamron 28-75 2.8. The thing is i sold my canon 24-70 2.8 :( to be able to affort a 70-200 2.8 USm thinking i would never miss the middelrange zoom again . A month later i did just that. Reading many many reviews i bought the 28.75 lastweek. Once i had it i did some test shots on my 5D and i couldnt get the Autofocus to focus on eyes when using multible focuspoints on either Aifocus, servo or one shot. Insteat it focused on nose, eyebrows - the things that sticks out (hope you understand:)) . when focused manually i could get supersharp images. I suspected that it had a frontfocus problems when using 5D multible focuspoints. However when i set only the centerfocus point focusing on the eyes it really made good sharp images also on 2.8. So i found this focusing chart a made some tests using only the centerfocus point , blew it up to 100% and everything , i think looks nice. Ive posetd some test images wanting you to see what you think. all shot on 75 mm : 1) 8.0. 2) 5.6. 3)4.0 4) 2.8. all with flash and 5D set to oneshot.. Should i keep it or should i get a replacement. (Really the thing is i dont understand why i dosent work on multible focuspoints as ive allways used on my other lenses. Or maybe im not using my AF correctly. Thanks for havig a look .</p>
Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>It seem to me what is happening is it's doing an averaging of the over all focus/ depth of field, when you use the multiple focusing zones. Nothing wrong with the lens as I could see. Please don't take this the wrong way it's probably the user. I have found that with new equipment it take time to learn the quirks that comes with it.<br>

Hope this helped.</p>

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>The lens looks good. Keep in mind the 5D auto focus sensor has no way of knowing what you want in focus. If you use multiple focus points, the camera will sample all of them and then sellect a average of the focus. So there is a good chance it will not be exactly on the eye. </p>

<p>If you want the eyes in focus use only one focus point (many people prefer the center focus point), set the focus mode to single shot, place it on the eye, focus, and if necessary recompose before you trip the shutter. However even when doing this the camera may still focus on the nose or something else. So always double check before you trip the shutter. Also keep in mind the focus points on the 5D are slightly larger than the focus marks in the viewfinder. So depending on lighting and contrast conditions it might focus on something at the edge of the focus sensor instead of the target in the middle of the focus sensor. </p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>To add to what Mike and Steven wrote: using a backfocus chart is a perfect example of when you should NOT use multiple focus points because upper, central, and bottom focus points will be trying to focus at different distances. The only time it makes sense to use multiple points is when you are indifferent as to which one locks on. The way to use this particular chart is to focus on the dark line in the center using the central focus point only.</p>

<p>I did this last year with my Tamron 28-75 using the same chart, and it was right on the money. I have used the lens happily ever since. It is a great lens, particularly for the price. Enjoy it.</p>

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>Ok - Thanks all - well i agree that it certainly can be the person behind the camera and it its maybe so :) - Now ive tryied Steven F method and its actually improved it so far - i think ´(please see attacments 2.8/4.0/5.6 which is totaly raw images without any sharpening-or other pp , shot with Bowens strobe- i guess my sister i kind of tired ofthis:)) . But i must admit that this is demanding a hole other kind of concentration than shooting with the Canon 24-70 2.8 - MAYBE!. - im thinking that maybe ive become a pixelpeeper now that ive got my tamron knowing that it could have ceratin problems! Maybe my old 24-70 wasent that sharp either i cant really remember because i seldom blew it to 100%. All ths could very well be some kind of problem in my head i must admit:). Dan Koretz - thats exactly what i did - focusing with centerfocus point ONLY on the black line. - what i need is for you to tell me what you think of all my test images - do you think it compares to your speciment.Is it right on the money or do you think im crazy:)? My oppinion - i think the eyes on all images could/should be sharper. BUT applying smartsharpen really lift them . Maybe im demanding to much for the price. Only when it really locks on target manal (happend once or twice)as i said above - they are supersharp. Thanks again for all your nice replies . anna</p>
Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>You have three separate questions: back/front focus, sharpness, and pixel peeping.</p>

<p>My own view is that for sharpness, faces are not a very good test. I use images with clear lines and points of contrast, like the corners of dormer windows. With those images, a lack of sharpness is readily apparent. When I got my Tamron 28-75, I shot a series of photos of a dormer and surrounding areas, using both different f stops and different focal lengths. What I found was that if I closed the lens down at all, it was tack sharp. At 2.8 it lost some sharpness (all lenses do), but it still looked pretty good for a lens wide open.However, I use a 50D, and the crop sensor removes the far corners. The Tamron is reputed to lose some noticeable sharpness in the corners on a full frame camera.</p>

<p>Re pixel peeping: it will almost always show "problems" of one sort or another. You can't compare pixel peeping on one lens to less magnified images from another.</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>f/2.8 in the tele range will have quite a reduced depth of field. In your sample above, it is apparent that the focus is centered around the left eye on the right, but not the other eye , and not at all the nose. If the ear were visible, it would no doubt also not be in focus. The f/4 shot is much more crisp over all, due to the increased depth of field.</p>

<p>A facial shot with greatly reduced depth of field will have the above characteristics. Sometimes, that is the desired effect, otherwise the f/4 in this case, is a better choice.</p>

<p>It is a balancing act when choosing your aperture, to determine how much of your subject you want sharp, and weigh your choice against your focal length, your distance from your main subject, and how far distant the background objects are that you want to render out of focus.</p>

<p>And yes, most lenses will provide improved performance when not used wide open. From what you show here, this lens looks pretty good wide open.</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>Ok thanks Michael - i dont know what to do - first Dan says that that it lacks sharpnees - then you say it looks ok - then i find this <a href="http://www.photo.net/canon-eos-digital-camera-forum/00DFsY">http://www.photo.net/canon-eos-digital-camera-forum/00DFsY</a> - i have a hard time making the decision´if i should keep it or get my money back .<br>

I dont really wanna get into getting a replacement which can be even worse - seems like its bigger a gamble than i thought buying a third party lens. And im in doubt that this has anything to do with depth of field - i have the 85 1.8, 50 1.4 and as i remember i could get nice focused shots on eyes down to at least 1.8! or even 1.4 maybe - . As i write im looking at a printet A3 image ive done very very closeup of my littel daughter done with my former canon 24-70 and its tack sharp at 2.8 - no uneven out of focus areas and i never really thought about it when photographing it and when i printet it - i just did. Now using this Tamron i have to use center focus point making dam sure that its focused on the eyes only to get one eye relativ unblured . hmmm......</p>

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>I have HAD those lenses - the funny thing is ive sold all just to be able to affort the new bowens heads which is soon on the market and a large boomarm/stand. ive bought a car battery and put it together with the travelpack batteri so my goal is to shoot alot of outdoorinviromental portraits images with strobes in daylight also meaning that i will seldom get close up portraits BUT its nice to know that it is ok and that i can get if i want. That was just some side explanation:)</p>
Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>And also... I always use centre focus point only. I focus on what I want to be in focus then recompose. Works for me. You cannot expect the camera to zone in on the eyes with multiple focus points, as it has no clue that the eyes should be in focus - some times you may get lucky but it is like throwing a dart at a dart board with a blindfold on.</p>
Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>Nice images there David - "And also... I always use centre focus point only. I focus on what I want to be in focus" - that is ok but a human has two eyes:) and sometimes the head in a portrait is angled very very slightly like the above face images how do i do that - hmm ..maybe it is the debth of field after all so one would use 4.0 or more.... i would think that 2.8 could handle that distance there is when the head is angled like that - ive been searching the net for larger portrait images made on a kind of flat face pose with this lens at 2.8 but its impossible. For me this is where a lens shows its strength and weekness - not with a smalll image res. on a ex .car 100 meters away:) With you owning this lens what is your oppininon of the raw images above?Ps . again its unlikely that i never do these kind of shots but i need to push this to make a decision if should sent it back.</p>
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...