Austin Greene
Been spending a lot of time on here!
- Joined
- Jan 6, 2012
- Messages
- 1,472
- Reaction score
- 855
- Location
- Mountain View, California
- Website
- www.austingreenephotography.com
- Can others edit my Photos
- Photos NOT OK to edit
EDIT: I should have included that my body, the 550D, does not have an AF micro-adjust feature. If it did, I wouldn't be making this post.
Well, I have to say that I was incredibly excited over the weekend to have acquired my first L lens, a beautiful 70-200 f/4 IS. Bought used over CraigsList, I did a thorough investigation of the lens, running through an entire checklist including everything from checking for dust in the inner elements, to inspecting if the mounting plate screws were worn or stripped. I also attempted to check for back-focusing, but apparently didn't do a good enough job. Damn if I didn't take 30 minutes giving the thing a once over, and taking shots with it (albeit in low light, it was early evening) before deciding to buy it.
Fast forward to today, and as I'm shooting my usual wildlife subjects, I begin to notice something. The photos aren't sharp, at least not where they should be. Everything is back-focused by roughly a centimeter. I have a hard time understanding it, the lens had only been used for about 100 photos, and had never been dropped. There wasn't a single nick on it. I drive home, and run some tests, still appears to be back-focusing. Lastly, I ask a friend to stand in front of a flash for me, so I could test the lens in a real-life situation. Focusing on her brow, centered between here eye-brows I take the shot. Sure enough, while her brow is just barely coming into focus, her eyes and the skin around them (in the sockets) are acceptably sharp. Back-focusing again.
I sit on a lens which is functionally useless for all its beauty and hype. That pretty USM AF motor doesn't do me any favors if it consistently focuses 8-10mm behind my intended point. The lens is three years old, and well out of warranty.
I have two options:
1) We have a local place, which has been recommended to me by a local shop as a possible repair site as they have a reputation for re-calibrating lenses. I will be calling them tomorrow for a quote.
2) I called Canon, and sending it to them is an option. That said, they would be a far slower than using the sacramento shop, and I have serious questions about the whole "send it to us, and then we'll tell you how much it will cost" process. I simply can't afford another couple hundred dollars.
So here I am, totally confused on what to do. Have any of you had any experiences with Canon's services? Are they decent, did they actually fix the issue? Is the 1 week turnaround time they told me a reliable estimate? How much did it cost for you?
Also, has anyone in the Sacramento valley had an experience with the mentioned shop? One of my concerns is how they go about calibrating lenses (they used to be a licensed Nikon service center awhile back), and if it could mess with the weather sealing on the lens. If it won't, do I have anything to lose by going through them, assuming they could get it done right?
Thanks for all the help, I'm pretty well depressed at the moment.
Here is an image for your verification. As mentioned, it was focused dead between her eyebrows, and area which is clearly unsharp, while an area slightly farther back (skin by her eyes) is acceptably sharp.
Link for full image
Well, I have to say that I was incredibly excited over the weekend to have acquired my first L lens, a beautiful 70-200 f/4 IS. Bought used over CraigsList, I did a thorough investigation of the lens, running through an entire checklist including everything from checking for dust in the inner elements, to inspecting if the mounting plate screws were worn or stripped. I also attempted to check for back-focusing, but apparently didn't do a good enough job. Damn if I didn't take 30 minutes giving the thing a once over, and taking shots with it (albeit in low light, it was early evening) before deciding to buy it.
Fast forward to today, and as I'm shooting my usual wildlife subjects, I begin to notice something. The photos aren't sharp, at least not where they should be. Everything is back-focused by roughly a centimeter. I have a hard time understanding it, the lens had only been used for about 100 photos, and had never been dropped. There wasn't a single nick on it. I drive home, and run some tests, still appears to be back-focusing. Lastly, I ask a friend to stand in front of a flash for me, so I could test the lens in a real-life situation. Focusing on her brow, centered between here eye-brows I take the shot. Sure enough, while her brow is just barely coming into focus, her eyes and the skin around them (in the sockets) are acceptably sharp. Back-focusing again.
I sit on a lens which is functionally useless for all its beauty and hype. That pretty USM AF motor doesn't do me any favors if it consistently focuses 8-10mm behind my intended point. The lens is three years old, and well out of warranty.
I have two options:
1) We have a local place, which has been recommended to me by a local shop as a possible repair site as they have a reputation for re-calibrating lenses. I will be calling them tomorrow for a quote.
2) I called Canon, and sending it to them is an option. That said, they would be a far slower than using the sacramento shop, and I have serious questions about the whole "send it to us, and then we'll tell you how much it will cost" process. I simply can't afford another couple hundred dollars.
So here I am, totally confused on what to do. Have any of you had any experiences with Canon's services? Are they decent, did they actually fix the issue? Is the 1 week turnaround time they told me a reliable estimate? How much did it cost for you?
Also, has anyone in the Sacramento valley had an experience with the mentioned shop? One of my concerns is how they go about calibrating lenses (they used to be a licensed Nikon service center awhile back), and if it could mess with the weather sealing on the lens. If it won't, do I have anything to lose by going through them, assuming they could get it done right?
Thanks for all the help, I'm pretty well depressed at the moment.
Here is an image for your verification. As mentioned, it was focused dead between her eyebrows, and area which is clearly unsharp, while an area slightly farther back (skin by her eyes) is acceptably sharp.
Link for full image
Last edited: