Slightly blurred photos with Canon 24-70mm f/2.8L lens

[achua00]

I was wondering, if I take photos with the Canon 24-70mm f/2.8L at 70mm and use the same settings (same aperture, ISO, shutter speed) on a 70-200mm f/2.8L should I be expecting similar quality photos? I keep getting slight out of focused images at 24mm and at 70mm with the 24-70mm lens. I am on aperture f/2.8 but on the 70-200mm lens I don't get that out of focus look...it is much sharper. I'm wondering if it is because the 24-70mm does not have IS?
Thank you.

 

[The_Traveler]

Post pictures for examples. (with exif)

 

[Big Mike]

Hard to judge, without knowing more. Posting examples would certainly help.

This lens is a bit of an enigma. It's pretty much been the workhorse lens of Pro Canon shooters for a good long while. It's capable of great image quality, but there are also many photographers who are not satisfied with it's ability to achieve sharp focus in some situations (probably at some focal lengths).

I know one photograph, who is very picky about sharp focus. He's tried 6 or 7 different 27-70mm F2.8 L lenses...and all but one of them was satisfactory, and only just. I think he still owns it, but he certainly doesn't use it very often or at all. If you mention it, he won't hesitate to say how much he hates the Canon 24-70mm F2.8 L.

 

[achua00]

I just tried to upload the 2 pictures I wanted to reference but after uploading nothing happened....now it's telling me to upload url....not the choice I intended. help please.

 

[o hey tyler]

I just tried to upload the 2 pictures I wanted to reference but after uploading nothing happened....now it's telling me to upload url....not the choice I intended. help please.

http://www.thephotoforum.com/forum/...forum-functions-pictoral-guide-using-tpf.html

 

[achua00]

http://www.flickr.com/photos/45136505@N06/6709269329/

http://www.flickr.com/photos/45136505@N06/6709267869/
Please tell me you can view these photos, thanks.
I realize she's in different positions but I couldn't get her to sit in the same exact position while I was changing my lenses.

 

[GnipGnop]

ISO 6400? You can't expect super sharp images at that sensitivity, even with a full frame. I think the sharpness you achieved here is pretty good given the high ISO.

 

[achua00]

I didn't want to use flash so I cranked up the ISO but I noticed with this lens even at much lower ISOs...100-200 it's the same thing...slight fuzziness

 

[GnipGnop]

Post some examples of the fuzziness you experience at lower ISOs.

 

[Big Mike]

ISO 6400? You can't expect super sharp images at that sensitivity, even with a full frame. I think the sharpness you achieved here is pretty good given the high ISO.

I haven't done intensive testing, but the 5DmkII is pretty decent at 6400....and it shouldn't be to hard to differentiate sharpens (lack thereof) from noise.

 

[EIngerson]

They're not blurry, they're noisy (slightly noisy)

 

[GnipGnop]

Bingo.

Big Three Shootout, Page 3 of 5

 

[Rephargotohp]

I assume you have a Series 1 70-200 L2.8

The 70-200L is sharper than the 24-70L 2.8 shot wide open, stopped doen to f/8 the differenece dissappears and actally favors the 24-70

The MarkII 70-200 is sharper than either lens

That said, as Mike pointed out there are a lot of bad copies of the 24-70 floating around. I was lucky to have a great copy my friends went back to Canon multiple times before it was fixed.

Your copy from that image doesn't look bad, But 24-70 do havea tendancy to back focus. Your camera does do Micro focus adjusments so you may want to try doing that first. Like I said though the 70-200 is sharper wide open though

 

[gsgary]

You could have moved slightly and missed focus with a narrow dof wiith the 24-70

 

[achua00]

micro focus adjustments? ok I will have to look into that, thank you.