70-200 f/2.8L IS problems?

[loraksus]

Got a new 70-200 f/2.8L IS about a month ago.
I'm looking through some pics from my latest trips and have noticed something strange - I'm wondering if you folks can tell me if I'm just imagining it.
For some reason - in this picture -
4.6MB JPEG http://vehiclehitech.com/pictures/woot/IMG_3801.JPG
the trees look "weird". Not sure how to describe it, but I don't like it.
Also looks "weird" in raw.

It seems isolated mainly to that set of pictures though - not sure what is going on - some other sample shots can be found here. I'm happy with most, but I'm trying to figure out if it's me, or focus is slightly off (i.e. 4086 seems rather soft) or if it's the lens...

Index of /pictures/woot

No post or anything done to them, that's the jpeg straight off the card. EXIF data should be preserved.
Believe all were shot at iso 100.

TIA

[loraksus]

Also... no filters used here. Most shots done w/ autofocus on a Canon XTI.

[ohenry]

Personally, I don't see anything drastically wrong with them. 4086 is sharp where it should be expected to be sharp...you did shoot at f/2.8 so the dof isn't going to cover everything. Not sure what your expectations are, but judging from your EXIF data, you're shooting auto mode and getting decent results. I'm not sure what your issue is with the trees, other than that they're not within the dof range of focus.

[Rodeoshooter]

Originally Posted by loraksus

Got a new 70-200 f/2.8L IS about a month ago.
I'm looking through some pics from my latest trips and have noticed something strange - I'm wondering if you folks can tell me if I'm just imagining it.
For some reason - in this picture -
4.6MB JPEG http://vehiclehitech.com/pictures/woot/IMG_3801.JPG
the trees look "weird". Not sure how to describe it, but I don't like it.
Also looks "weird" in raw.

It seems isolated mainly to that set of pictures though - not sure what is going on - some other sample shots can be found here. I'm happy with most, but I'm trying to figure out if it's me, or focus is slightly off (i.e. 4086 seems rather soft) or if it's the lens...

Index of /pictures/woot

No post or anything done to them, that's the jpeg straight off the card. EXIF data should be preserved.
Believe all were shot at iso 100.

TIA

Sorry, not seeing what you are talking about.

[Max@Home]

Originally Posted by loraksus

Got a new 70-200 f/2.8L IS about a month ago.
I'm looking through some pics from my latest trips and have noticed something strange - I'm wondering if you folks can tell me if I'm just imagining it.
For some reason - in this picture -
4.6MB JPEG http://vehiclehitech.com/pictures/woot/IMG_3801.JPG
the trees look "weird". Not sure how to describe it, but I don't like it.
Also looks "weird" in raw.

It seems isolated mainly to that set of pictures though - not sure what is going on - some other sample shots can be found here. I'm happy with most, but I'm trying to figure out if it's me, or focus is slightly off (i.e. 4086 seems rather soft) or if it's the lens...

Index of /pictures/woot

No post or anything done to them, that's the jpeg straight off the card. EXIF data should be preserved.
Believe all were shot at iso 100.

As Mr. ohenry kinly explained: nothing weird going on: your DoF is shallow for the scene on both shots, 4086 is plenty sharp, has enough in it to get the RAW and in DPP set RAW sharpen at 4, JPG sharpen at 85-95%, see how 4086 looks then...

The trees in the first image are for a large part outside DoF, and with loaf- or pine trees in the distance in landscapes you are going to see the limits of the resolving power of an 8 MP 1.6x crop XTI sensor ... a little 'blooming' and 'blurring', a 'muddy look' is the result ...

landscapers prefer FF or even MF or LF digital backs for a reason, and loads & loads of MP's to catch all that detail

...*my* €0.02 worth...

Kindest regards!

Max@Home

[jfrancho]

Its definitely from a shallow DOF. Is it also possible that you shot through a window?

[loraksus]

Originally Posted by Max@Home

The trees in the first image are for a large part outside DoF, and with loaf- or pine trees in the distance in landscapes you are going to see the limits of the resolving power of an 8 MP 1.6x crop XTI sensor ... a little 'blooming' and 'blurring', a 'muddy look' is the result ...
landscapers prefer FF or even MF or LF digital backs for a reason, and loads & loads of MP's to catch all that detail

OK... I think it's odd that DOF is an issue at such a distance, unless the camera autofocused incorrectly. Not sure what it could of have focused on, since there is nothing else in the frame (except for the thing in the upper corner, but that shouldn't matter - correct?) A DOF calculator shows that DOF is basically 150 feet to infinity and there wasn't anything anywhere near 150 feet. I checked the image in camera, but didn't notice this until I put it on a computer screen.

What I normally have done to create nice looking landscapes is to take a number of pictures and stitch them together. Then, once I have something that is 15,000 pixels wide or what not, I can do post, then resize down a bit, which makes the image look really nice and sharp. This is one of a series of 20 or so odd pics.
Sadly a 5D or MF back isn't in my budget - at least not for the next little while anyways

[loraksus]

Originally Posted by jfrancho

Its definitely from a shallow DOF. Is it also possible that you shot through a window?

Nope - all were outside w/o any glass or anything in the way. The distance to sandtrap in the lower left (lower right if oriented properly) that sort of looks like an arrowhead is 9300 feet according to google earth - that distance is based on the terrain, but I'm sure it's still a good 5000 feet as the crow flies.

And just so there isn't any misunderstanding - before I got this lens, I was using a $100 75-300 as a telephoto - which has nowhere near the resolving ability of this lens - it would of have just muddied everything in this image to a green blur.

They also have a bunch of pine beetle there now, which explains the screwy (purplish) color of the trees in certain areas

[E-Man]

Looking at 4086 in canon's zoom browser shows a focus point that is not on the goat, but to the left by a little bit. Seems like perhaps you focused and recomposed before exposing? Also, applying a little bit of unsharp mask in zoom browser improves things a little. Softness may also be an artifact of shutter speed. The EXIF data indicates 1/125th of a second, while your focal length is effectively 224mm (140mm * 1.6 crop factor of your body). Was IS engaged? Given these observations, I'd say your exposure of the goat is rather nice.