Tamron Summer Instant Savings - Save up to £200!
Canon 50D + 28-300 L Soft? in need of answers please!
hi there, i am new to this forum so hello everyone. i have recently upgraded my Canon gear to a 50D with a 28-300 L series. my brother is a keen photographer and had recently upgraded himself to a Nikon D90 with 18-200 VR lens. we had a bit of a test session last night and for the love of god my Canon kit could not produce anywhwere near as sharp and colourful pictures as my brothers Nikon kit. obviously this was extremely disappointing as i would have expected my gear to have given the Nikon a run for its money(being 3 times the value). shorlty after i bought the lens i dropped it from waist height onto a carpeted floor. would i be right in saying that this could have effected its performance in the sharpness stakes and also would you expect my Canon kit to edge the Nikon kit under normal circumstances?
The Canon gear should produce just as sharp and colourful results as the Nikon. In fact the vast majority of modern DSLR's are more than capable of producing the goods.
What's of far more relevence though is the photographers ability, not only in capturing the optimum image but knowing how to process the image to it's potential (particularly if shooting in Raw mode).
L lenses are generally pretty robust so it's quite possible your dropped lens suffered no long term damage, but then again it's equally possible that it may have been damaged, perhaps not externally but enough to knock-out the focus slightly.
Have it checked out by an authorized Canon service center if you think it's focus/sharpness is under par since the fall.
What's of far more relevence though is the photographers ability, not only in capturing the optimum image but knowing how to process the image to it's potential (particularly if shooting in Raw mode).
L lenses are generally pretty robust so it's quite possible your dropped lens suffered no long term damage, but then again it's equally possible that it may have been damaged, perhaps not externally but enough to knock-out the focus slightly.
Have it checked out by an authorized Canon service center if you think it's focus/sharpness is under par since the fall.
hi steve, i used a tripod on a worktop and a window sill so scientfically we carried out the test reasonably stringently. there is definitely something amiss witht the Canon gear. i have been told Lehmann Direct are a competent repair centre if it comes to it. my shots should be sharp "off the shelf" if you like. i had a 24-105 L before the 28-300 with my 40D and it never let me down sharpness wise. maybe i should go back to it!!! yeah we tested the lenses at similar focal lengths. i have not bben impressed with my 28-300 L so far, it has IS and is built like a tank. it should perform better than it does. maybe i have a bad copy
It does sound faulty but
can you try another lens on the 50D?
did you try manually focusing the lens?
can you try another lens on the 50D?
did you try manually focusing the lens?
yeah its nothing to do with the focussing, the pictures just seem soft and nowhere near the quality of my brothers D90. i have a sigma 10-20 but its a bit unfair to compare the 2. the shots from that seem ok in relative comparison. i wish i had a different body to test the 28-300 on!
What you have to understand is
Nikon have zoomed ahead in image quality by forging links with sony they have a flag ship dslr the d3 which is absolutely light years ahead of the canon equivalent so it is only fair for the lower models to perform the same.
Nikon have zoomed ahead in image quality by forging links with sony they have a flag ship dslr the d3 which is absolutely light years ahead of the canon equivalent so it is only fair for the lower models to perform the same.
Quote:Yeah its nothing to do with the focussing, the pictures just seem soft and nowhere near the quality of my brothers D90.
Are you comparing jpgs or raw files?
i shot the canon in jpeg fine quality and i suspect my brother was shooting in raw. the pictures were compared on our cameras lcd's as they are both 920,000 pixels. the difference was apparent even on the lcd's. i have now just compared them on my laptop and i am fighting back the tears!!
You're comparing apples with pears.
To compare the two accurately you need to keep all the variables the same (or as close as possible).
The camera's LCD screen isn't the place to get an accurate indication of image quality.
As an example, if I compared the jpeg on the LCD screen of my £100 Canon A620 to the Raw image on the LCD screen of my £1K+ Canon 5D, the 5D would go in the dusbin tomorrow
To compare the two accurately you need to keep all the variables the same (or as close as possible).
The camera's LCD screen isn't the place to get an accurate indication of image quality.
As an example, if I compared the jpeg on the LCD screen of my £100 Canon A620 to the Raw image on the LCD screen of my £1K+ Canon 5D, the 5D would go in the dusbin tomorrow
Colours will be affected by the colour space you use, setup of your monitor, etc,etc.
Sharpness will be affected by the jpg sharpening settings. generally images from a Canon DSLR will apear soft as it allows you to apply sharpening as part of the post processing.
If you want a second opinion you can happily email me a file.
Quote:The camera's LCD screen isn't the place to get an accurate indication of image quality.
Never a truer word spoken
Sharpness will be affected by the jpg sharpening settings. generally images from a Canon DSLR will apear soft as it allows you to apply sharpening as part of the post processing.
If you want a second opinion you can happily email me a file.
Quote:The camera's LCD screen isn't the place to get an accurate indication of image quality.
Never a truer word spoken
ChrisATshepherdpics.com
replace AT with @
replace AT with @
