10D Sharpness issue with EF Lenses?

[mm1664877714]

I wanted to ask you if you have encountered the issue I have with my

70-200EF 2.8L IS USM lens and my 10D. I see great images before

taking them, but after they are taken the images are not at all what

I had expected them to be. The sharpness is my issue not anything

else. Please don't misunderstand when I say that what I see I don't

get form the camera, I am only talking about the sharpness or else

we would be the best photographers in the World.

 

The lens is new, the camera is new and I have taken many tests and

have checked the focusing point and it was dead on the subject, but

it was not crisp as it should have been. I have gone through and

set the setting of the camera to do some sharpening to see if that

makes some changes, but very little. What do you think? If you

have a perfect way of testing the lens or the camera please let me

know because I can still do something with them through Canon. Your

comments are appreciated.

[phil vaughan - yorkshire u]

There are many many reasons why images are not sharp, please could you post an example complete with some exif data.

 

You have what is arguably the best lens in it's class and the best camera in it's class, if you have tested it and the focus is OK, then what is not sharp?

Also, is all this equipment new to you or are you an experienced photographer?

[cdnguyen]

Here's the link to understanding on how to obtain sharpness from digital SLR

http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/using/digitalphotography/learnmore/sharpening.mspx

[mm1664877714]

Phil;

 

I am an experienced photographer thanks for asking. Let me give you a situation. I was taking a picture of a duck and the focusing was set to center weight on the camera, the lens was set to IS1 and I was at f8 and was using 200mm at 1/400. I focused on his eyes. The duck looked so crisp when I took the picture, after when I saw the picture his eyes were completly of focus and he was NOT moving.

 

Another test was a flowerwhich I took pictures of it's bud, the bud was out of focus but the rest of it was in focus. It was taken at 1/250 at f8. Through Canon's program you can see where the focus was on and that area was not focused.

 

Because I have the best lens and one of the best cameras I am asking this question. I have taken pictures with this lens and my 1VHS and they are great as they should be with FILM, but with my other lenses as I take pictures with my 10D I don't have this issue. The other lenses I have are 24-80mm 2.8L, 100mm 2.8L Macro, 27-80mm 2.8L.

[mm1664877714]

Charles;

 

Thanks for your comment. I know about this tool which works very well. My concern is regarding the 10D, if people have seen an issue with is and in particular the combination of these two components. Also see if one has a good test method that I could see if there is an issue with my camera or lense.

[darklights]

I think I'll keep an eye on this one. I've had the same problem with two other lenses that I have, but with a Rebel 2k ( Pics on my Drebel are sharp though). I found that they don't do it all the time (shots were the same basic set ups as you had). I kind of wonder if it's an AF thing or whatnot. Again, I dunno so I'm watching.

[peter_phan]

Mike, what camera parameters are you using? Are you shooting RAW? Are you shooting JPEG? If shooting JPEG, which sharpness settings are you using? Are you doing any post-processing? If so, what is your post-processing workflow? And how are you assessing sharpness? Via prints, or view your computer monitor? And if it's via your computer monitor, what image viewer are you viewing your images with? And what kind of monitor are you using? All these things can effect your perception of how sharp or unsharp the digital image is. For example, I know that on a cheap, low-resolution monitor, my 10D images can look terribly soft. But on a high-quality, high-resolution, properly calibrated monitor, with images viewed in Photoshop, the same images look beautifully sharp. And that is before I apply any post-processing sharpening optimization. Needless to say, I have no problems with the sharpness of images taken with my 10D.

 

You might want to look into a few books about digital imaging and digital workflow, so you can get all the quality that your 10D is capable of. I recommend Scott Kelby's "The Photoshop CS Book for Digital Photographers" or Martin Evening's "Adobe Photoshop CD for Photographers". Both have chapters on sharpening of digital SLR images. For me, if I want to minimize my post-processing, I shoot JPEG Large, with sharpening at its highest setting. I typically get images that require a very minimum of post-processing work, or none at all. And the only sharpening I need to apply is specifically for output optimization (output to print or output to web, for example).

[sandy.]

<P>This is taken with a 10D and a EF70-200 2.8L IS USM lens with no sharpening but a lot of cropping. It appears to be quite sharp. Maybe you just play around with it a bit more and choose center weight focusing instead of letting the camera decide for you?<div></div>

[mm1664877714]

Peter;

 

I thank you for your in-depth answer. To respond to some of your questions, I only shoot in RAW, never JPEG. I have my parameters in my 10D set at 1 for contrast and 2 for sharpness. In regards to screens, you are absolutely correct, I am using a high-end FP screen which does make a difference. The unsharp capability through PS I know how to do, but my question is why do we need to do that when we are using such a great camera with such a great lens? I understand the filter and writing process which does cause some softness in an image in all digital cameras, but my question is this particular lens with this particular camera.

 

I will look at the books you have recommended, having extra knowledge never hurts. Your input is appreciated.

[mm1664877714]

Sandy;

 

I actually love this picture of your. I looked at it a while back and liked the innocent look of your subject. I appreciate you input. You own both components I assume. Did you have to make special adjustments on the camera to get sharper images? As much as I love this image you have put up, I don't think the subject is sharp, her earring is sharp, her face is not and that is my issue. To be exact on my example to you with your picture, I focus on her nose with my center square focusing point, but then her earring is in focus, not where I had focused. This is my problem with this lens, and the 10D. I hope I have explained myself well.

[digitmstr]

Mike - how come you couldn't post a sample?? You know what they say "a picture is worth 1000 words..."

[sandy.]

<P>As I mentioned, I was using the exact equipments as you so described and I own them. However, I like very shallow DOF and I was zooming the lens to 200mm at 2.8F..Hence the very shallow "in foucus" area. If I stopped it down a couple of Fs, it should not be a problem.

[sandy.]

<P>Oh, forgot to mention : I was at least 50 feet away from the subject. Not bad ha :-)

[douglas lee]

Are you shooting in sRGB or Adobe RGB mode? If the later, then the parameter settngs are ingnored. Are you locking focus and then recomposing? I use CFn 4 to put AF on the AE lock button, that way I don't accidently refocus.

 

Regards,

Doug

[mm1664877714]

Sandy;

 

Not bad at all. Well done.

[digitmstr]

Even in Sandy's example (which is cropped) one can clearly see the part *most* in focus is the edge of the head, on top, not the eyes. The hair at that point is very crisp an in focus whereas the face is not. That could denote a certain amount of "backfocus", assuming the sensor was spot on the eyes.

[mm1664877714]

Doug;

 

I use the standard color tone that the 10D came with which I think is sRGB. In regards to your next point, I have not actiated function 4, I see your point, I will try to see how it works when I am shooting. Thanks for your comments.

[PuppyDigs]

You've gotten a lot of good suggestions, but as a 10D shooter I thought I'd throw my hat in the ring. First, it took me about 3 months to learn how coax good results out of my 10D and properly postprocess. I was an experienced EOS slider shooter and very adept at scanning and Photoshop tweaks, so I was very disappointed at first. Now that I understand its strengths and weaknesses I choose the best medium for the job and find I shoot about 50% film and 50% digital.

 

The 10D has a few AF quirks that surprised me. First, AF was disappointing compared to my EOS 3 (being a 1V owner I'm sure you noticed). The second thing was the difficulty of selecting individual AF sensors. My EOS 3 and Elan 7E with ECF and dedicated AF buttons were much faster and intuitive. The result is I use the center AF sensor most of the time and recompose. Third, 10D AF sensors cover about double the area indicated by the AF rectangles. For example, if you place the sensor on the eye, it may lock on the eyebrow as it has more contrast than the eye. You may not realize the sensor extends far beyond the borders of the AF rectangle. If a slightly nearer, brighter or more contrasty object is within reach of the sensor, it will lock on to that, not the thing you centered under the sensor.

 

Finally, a few 10D bodies are known to require AF calibration because they consistently focus in front of or behind the target.

[larry_mayo]

Mike,

I have the 10D and find that the 70-200 at 2.8 does NOT work near as well as it does on my cheap Canon Rebel film camera.The $100 film camera is much sharper at the same Exact settings as th $1600 so called Digital Wizzard.

Talking to my local photo store I am not the only one that has that problem.I have done many many test in the last year Shooting Air Force test charts,Brick walls Baseballs etc.I get the Best Results If the center focus point is slightly off to the Right, at f2.8.

Bottom Line. I believe that it is a major Problem.

[mm1664877714]

Puppy Face;

 

You have hit it on the nose. My comparisons have been with my 1VHS and how precise that camera is in it's metering, focusing and ... At the same time I am NOT comparing the 10D with the 1VHS or else I would have gotten the 1D or 1D Mark II.

 

I thank you for your comments, your last comment about some needed to get recalibrated. How do you if a 10D needs to get recalibrated or not? Is there a test that one does? Does Canon know about this or is there a site I can go to get more info on this recalibration issue? Thanks

[mm1664877714]

Larry;

 

I am sad you have the same isue as I am experiencing, but I have done those test as well but not getting the results that I would like. I would like to see if anyone in our Photo.Net community knows a Canon person in the US branch who we could talk to.

[phil vaughan - yorkshire u]

I think you should read this

 

http://www.photo.net/learn/focustest/

 

as it sounds like you need reassurance OR the evidence to have your body recalibrated.

 

BTW my current guess is around the size of the sensor (as Puppy Face suggested).

[john_jovic]

The problem you describe, soft images immediately from the camera, are a standard feature of the 10D. As a Provia/Velvia/EOS1V user, and with some fine lenses, I see a fairly soft image from the 10D. I get around this problem with minimal USM in Photoshop, something like 150/1-1.5/3. I mainly shoot in RAW and adobe gamut so I don't use the in camera sharpening. The post Photoshop result is usually extremely good/sharp as long as you also take all the regular precautions you would take with film, eg, accurate focusing, mirror lockup, tripod etc.

 

In summary, I agree that the 10D is soft straight out of the camera and absolutely reuires USM for a sharp final image.

 

JJ

[peter_phan]

Giampiero Scuderi wrote:

<p>

<i>Even in Sandy's example (which is cropped) one can clearly see the part *most* in focus is the edge of the head, on top, not the eyes. The hair at that point is very crisp an in focus whereas the face is not. That could denote a certain amount of "backfocus", assuming the sensor was spot on the eyes.</i>

<p>

Giampiero, I think you're being fooled by perceptual cues. The "edge of the head, on top" is not any sharper than her eyes. It's just that the stronger contrast along those edges gives the false perception of them being sharper than her eyes, where there is less contrast. But in reality, if you look very closely at her eyelashes, they are very sharp. And localized sharpening only at her eyes will only bring this out even more. You can also see the freckles on her nose near the eyes, as well as crease lines on her eyelids, crease lines on her lips, and you can even make out strands of hair detail on her eyebrows. Also, her earrings are sharp and in focus. Not bad for an unsharpened image!! I don't think any of this detail would be available if the lens was backfocused on the hair at the top of her head. The reality is, there is no backfocusing in this image, and your eye was just tricked by the clear contrast delineation of the hairs on the top of her head against the black background which causes them to stand out and be percieved as sharper and more in focus.

[mm1664877714]

Phil;

 

I appreciate the focus test URL, I actually did the test and it came out fine. The manual test came out better than the USM. So John you are corret, manual is the best way to go. It is good to think the systems you pay for sometimes can do it better than you though! I have posted the results of the test for Bob to see what he thinks. I hope I hear form him.

 

Thanks both of you for your great comments.