70-200 f2.8 not focusing well......?

[rice1]

<p>i just bought the 70-200 f2.8. and i want to love it, but it doesnt seem to focus well and the stabilizer hums when engaged. fully zoomed is very soft and it just isnt living up to my expectations. has anyone else had this problem? i use a 40d and a 50d body. thank you much...</p>

[PuppyDigs]

<p>They all hum. Some jerk 'n clank on startup. Pianissimo of course. Realize it's right next to your head and if you're in a quiet room you'll hear IS.</p>

<p>Post an image with EXIF data and we'll help ya out with the focus. Guessing as to cause won't be helpful.</p>

[rice1]

<p>thx.<br>

i think the real issue is that i am used to a 120-300 sigma which is tack sharp, always.<br>

here is a sample....</p>

[ben_goren]

<p>chris,</p>

 

<p>Your lens is fine. What you’re seeing is noise from shooting at ISO 1000 and a shallow depth of field.</p>

 

<p>The whole point of IS is that you can shoot at slower shutter speeds. 1/1250 is waaaaaaaaay

overkill for this shot. You could have gotten the exact same exposure at ISO 100 and 1/125 with no

noise visible at all.</p>

 

<p>Also detracting from the sharpness of the image is the shallow depth of field from shooting a

telephoto lens wide open. In your shoes, I would have started at ISO 400, 1/125, and f/5.6.</p>

 

<p>Oh — and stop pixel peeping unless you plan on printing bigger than 12″ ×

18″. You could crop the picture as in the attachment below and still get a great 8″

× 10″ print out of it (at 225 ppi).</p>

 

<p>Cheers,</p>

 

<p>b&</p><div></div>

[sheldonnalos]

<p>Doesn't look super sharp, but to me the main problem with that shot is missed focus. Plane of sharp focus is closest to the rear foot of the player in black/yellow. Shoot more, and judge lens sharpness on a shot where you nailed the focus. If there's a consistent front/back focus throughout all shots, you may need to have lens/body calibrated.</p>

[rice1]

<p>thank you. both responses make sense. "missed focus" is new to me, i usually nail it. i am using a new body and lens so i may just need to get used to them. thx for the advice. any other settings to consider for sports photography?</p>

 

[ben_goren]

<p>chris,</p>

 

<p>My main suggestion would be to remember that your “film” is essentially free, so

feel equally free to experiment.</p>

 

<p>For sports, there’s rarely any need for autoexposure. On a partly cloudy day with the sun

playing peek-a-boo, maybe, but most of the time you’re better off shooting manually. Set

your aperture for the desired depth of field (experience, chimping and the DOF preview button can

all help you determine what to use). Set your shutter to get the desired amount of motion blur

— just a hint can help make a scene much more dynamic; usually, that means panning with

the subject or dragging the shutter while using flash. Of course, setting it high enough to freeze all motion is safest and will result in a much higher percentage of “keepers.” Last, set the ISO to get the proper

exposure.</p>

 

<p>Know the characteristics of your equipment and be prepared, for example, to open the aperture or slow the shutter if necessary to keep the ISO low enough to meet your quality requirements (which are, in turn, largely based on how large the final print will be). That also means, of course, knowing the effects of different shutter speeds and apertures…what you’re aiming for is the right balance to let you make the final prints you want.</p>

 

<p>Cheers,</p>

 

<p>b&</p>