File :-(, x, )
Anonymous
Does anybody in /p/ has the Sigma 24-70 2.8 EX Macro?
Has it met your expectations? How is it wide-open?
Thanks in advance.
>> Anonymous
<insert heavyweather sigma go for gold, nikon rocks speech>
>> Anonymous
OP here, I'm from Canon.
>> Anonymous
>>195727

your money is better spent on the Tamron 17-50
>> Martin !!ve2Q1ETWmJH
>>195722
Soft wide open, although stopping down is no problem.

>Typical sigma speckled horrible outa-shell. Reason for me selling it; as im a fashionfag and cant be seen with a tacky grey lens.

If your a nikon fag like myself, I suggest the Nikon 17-55mm f/2.8G.
>> Anonymous
>>195731
Yeah, i've consider that and also the fact that i'm loosing the WA. 17 against 24, but on the other hand i'm getting an extra 20mm at the end, in 2.8.
>> Anonymous
OP, Sigmas tend to have focusing issues with Canons. Not all models do, and not all lenses from the models that do do, but it's something to look into. I don't know anything about this particular lens, with regards to this or generally.

>>195733

see

>>195727.
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
>>195742

you can almost always walk forward, but you can't back up against a wall

that extra 20mm is insignificant

< that's 24/70/105

the extra 35 can be easily cropped. trying adding that extra info from the wider 7mm

>> in 2.8.

both are 2.8
>> Anonymous
I'm the somewhat regretful owner of a Tamron 28-75 2.8. Equivalent of the lens in question. These guys are right, you'll hardly ever use the 20mm on the long end as much as you could use them on the wide end.
>> Martin !!ve2Q1ETWmJH
>>195744
saw after I posted;

>>195744
>OP, Sigmas tend to have focusing issues with Canons
There was a huge issue with Sigma's backfocusing a while back, with apparently up to a third of all lenses bought having to be re-calibrated. Not sure if it still exists, you've got google for that.
>> Anonymous
OP here
>you can almost always walk forward, but you can't back up against a wall

Great point
>> Anonymous
>>195769
Enormous point. Honestly wish I had read this before I bought my 28-75.
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
I just got one of these and a D80 this weekend. I haven't had any problems with it. Although it does use huge filters (82mm) which is a pain in the ass, especially if you're picking up a polarizer for it. It's great for the price. I'm happy with it.

I took a picture of my breakfast with this.

Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeNIKON CORPORATIONCamera ModelNIKON D80Camera SoftwareVer.1.10Maximum Lens Aperturef/2.8Sensing MethodOne-Chip Color AreaColor Filter Array Pattern836Focal Length (35mm Equiv)72 mmImage-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution300 dpiVertical Resolution300 dpiImage Created2008:06:01 13:11:57Exposure Time1/50 secF-Numberf/2.8Exposure ProgramManualISO Speed Rating800Exposure Bias0 EVMetering ModePatternLight SourceTungstenFlashNo FlashFocal Length48.00 mmColor Space InformationsRGBImage Width3872Image Height2592RenderingNormalExposure ModeManualScene Capture TypeStandardGain ControlLow Gain UpContrastNormalSharpnessNormalSubject Distance RangeUnknownISO Speed Used800Color ModeCOLORImage QualityNORMALWhite BalanceINCANDESCENTImage SharpeningAUTOFocus ModeAF-AFlash SettingNORMALFlash Compensation0.0 EVISO Speed Requested800Flash Bracket Compensation0.0 EVAE Bracket Compensation0.0 EVTone CompensationAUTOLens TypeUnknownLens Range24.0 - 70.0 mm; f/2.8Auto FocusSingle Area, Center Selected, Top FocusedShooting/Bracketing ModeSingle Frame/OffColor ModePortrait sRGBLighting TypeNATURALNoise ReductionOFFCamera Actuations156Image OptimizationNORMALSaturation 2AUTO
>> sage !ccqXAQxUxI
>>195805

Please resize next time.
>> Anonymous
no, get a browser that'll resize the picture for you. Also this post is about the lens. Wouldn't the OP want to see the full size to see what the lens does? I think you are just parroting everyone else who complains about resizing and wanted to be the first one to tell me so you can get some 4chan cred.
>> sage !i/euDJmWr2
>>195826
real sage here

Resize because no one cares about your pixels. You don't view pictures at full resolution, you view them resized. Quit being lazy and take care of your stupid pictures.
>> Anonymous
>>195832Resize because no one cares about your pixels. You don't view pictures at full resolution, you view them resized.

if i'm going to judge a lens before buying, i'm sure as fuck going to want the pixels

everything looks good resized
>> Anonymous
>>195832
firefox resizes for me and gives me the option of viewing shit at full resolution. This is about lens performance which is more pronounced at higher resolution. In this situation not resizing is practical not lazy. If i just wanted the picture to be viewed aesthetically I would resize it.
>> Anonymous
>>195842
OP Here. You are right, kind sir.
>> Anonymous
Better than either would be, say, a 600-pixel-wide resized version and a 100% crop of the point in focus.
>> sage !i/euDJmWr2
>>195842
yeah, if you're fucking blind or don't "get" good optics.

>>195844
browsers =/= proper resizing, kills quality.
>> Anonymous
>>195851yeah, if you're fucking blind or don't "get" good optics.

i'm surprised you would show your face after saying that bullshit

you're going to judge lenses with resized versions?

that's awesome, man
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
Here's one I took at my desk. Also not resized.

Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeNIKON CORPORATIONCamera ModelNIKON D80Camera SoftwareVer.1.10Maximum Lens Aperturef/2.8Sensing MethodOne-Chip Color AreaColor Filter Array Pattern824Focal Length (35mm Equiv)105 mmImage-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution300 dpiVertical Resolution300 dpiImage Created2008:05:30 15:03:26Exposure Time1/60 secF-Numberf/2.8Exposure ProgramManualExposure Bias0 EVMetering ModeSpotLight SourceTungstenFlashNo FlashFocal Length70.00 mmColor Space InformationsRGBImage Width3872Image Height2592RenderingNormalExposure ModeManualScene Capture TypeStandardGain ControlHigh Gain UpContrastHardSharpnessNormalSubject Distance RangeUnknownISO Speed Used3200Color ModeCOLORImage QualityNORMALWhite BalanceINCANDESCENTImage SharpeningAUTOFocus ModeMANUALFlash SettingNORMALFlash Compensation0.0 EVISO Speed Requested3200Flash Bracket Compensation0.0 EVAE Bracket Compensation0.0 EVTone CompensationAUTOLens TypeUnknownLens Range24.0 - 70.0 mm; f/2.8Auto FocusCenterShooting/Bracketing ModeSingle Frame/OffColor ModePortrait sRGBLighting TypeNATURALNoise ReductionOFFCamera Actuations37Image OptimizationNORMALSaturation 2AUTO
>> sage !i/euDJmWr2
>>195867
yeah, I am. Going down to 1000 pixels on the long end doesn't prevent you from looking at the picture. Good bokeh is good bokeh at 1000 just like it is at 3872, bad bokeh is still bad at 1000.

Quit trying to excuse yourself from being too lazy to resize, it's not fucking hard.
>> Anonymous
>>195888Quit trying to excuse yourself from being too lazy to resize, it's not fucking hard.

i'm not even the one posting the pictures

bokeh is always subjective

but there are sharp lenses and there are soft lenses

you don't judge resolving power with a 1000 pixel wide version
>> sage !i/euDJmWr2
>>195895
you can see "sharp" and "not-so-sharp" at 1000 pixels. EVERYTHING looks softer than it really is at full resolution.
>> Anonymous
>>195903you can see "sharp" and "not-so-sharp" at 1000 pixels.

everything looks sharp enough at 1000 pixels

>> EVERYTHING looks softer than it really is at full resolution.

not if you have good lenses..

that's the whole point, you can only tell if one is really sharper than another at full resolution, with no processing applied

now you will run out of arguments and say LOL PIXEL PEEPER LOL
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
So I fucked up on trying to post this earlier. But there's a problem with the lens if you use a built-in flash on the wide end. The lens will create a shadow at the bottom of your pic.

Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeNIKON CORPORATIONCamera ModelNIKON D80Camera SoftwareVer.1.10Maximum Lens Aperturef/2.8Sensing MethodOne-Chip Color AreaColor Filter Array Pattern836Focal Length (35mm Equiv)39 mmImage-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution300 dpiVertical Resolution300 dpiImage Created2008:05:30 19:11:24Exposure Time1/60 secF-Numberf/2.8Exposure ProgramNot DefinedISO Speed Rating200Exposure Bias0 EVMetering ModePatternLight SourceUnknownFlashFlash, Auto, Return DetectedFocal Length26.00 mmColor Space InformationsRGBImage Width3872Image Height2592RenderingNormalExposure ModeAutoScene Capture TypeStandardGain ControlNoneContrastNormalSharpnessNormalSubject Distance RangeUnknownISO Speed Used200Color ModeCOLORImage QualityNORMALWhite BalanceAUTOImage SharpeningAUTOFocus ModeAF-AFlash SettingNORMALAuto Flash ModeBuilt-in,TTLFlash Compensation0.0 EVISO Speed Requested200Flash Bracket Compensation0.0 EVAE Bracket Compensation0.0 EVTone CompensationAUTOLens TypeUnknownLens Range24.0 - 70.0 mm; f/2.8Auto FocusClosest Subject, Left Selected, Unknown FocusedShooting/Bracketing ModeSingle Frame/OffColor ModePortrait sRGBLighting TypeSPEEDLIGHTNoise ReductionOFFCamera Actuations63Saturation 2AUTODigital Vari-ProgramAUTO
>> Anonymous
>>195916
Damn, that's ugly.
>> Anonymous
>>195916

Turn the camera upside down and do the same shot.
>> Anonymous
>>195916

LOL @ shitty movie selection & shitty basement apartment.
>> Anonymous
you don't know shit about shitty movies. the only shitty movies i see there are Van Wilder and Napoleon Dynamite. Fight Club is badass
Goodfellas is badass
Straw Dogs is badass
Salo is crazy badass fucked up shit
City of God is badass
Requim for a Dream is alright
Three Kings is badass
The Wizard of Oz is badass

Oh it's not in a basement. My dumbass roommates tried to build a "bar" in the living room. I wasn't against it and told them that their "bar" would probably end up being a box, which is what it became. Also it's not an apartment, but a nice house. It's pretty. You can come over for some dinner and you'll realize.
>> Anonymous
I have/had it for my Canon. It actually broke all of the sudden after a trip outside in the snow and then coming back in. The heat must have cracked the bitch open or something. I hate EX plastic. It 's got glitter also, WTF seriously?!

The focusing is also changed by to levers and if you actually dont like the fucking screaky sound it makes when it focuses, then just wait a couple of weeks and the micro motor will fuck itself up and wont focus nearer than 90 centimeters (mine did this).

It's an ok performer wide open on a aps-c body, but tends to always produce underexposed images and it has a fair amount of vignetting. Seems like hasnt really got as big of an aperture than sigma wants to think it is.
>> Anonymous
>>195708
and that lens on OP's picture is also the older version of the lens and pretty much crappier than the one i just gave a review on
>> Anonymous
i just got the sigma 20mm f/2.8 prime and it is a sweet lens. it is still pretty wide with the 1.6 crop factor. nice aperture too.
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
>>195708

I bought one a while back, so I'll post some 100% of @ 2.8 for you.

Because of the large sample variation between the lenses, take my shots w/ a grain of salt.

You can get the tamron 17-50 if you want this build quality. Or you can buy the canon one if you have the extra cash. But I can vouch that my copy is as sharp as the Canon 24-70.

Personally, I'd rather have a normal zoom, and then a separate WA lens, because it's going to overlap with your 17-XX on the wide end anyways.

Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeCanonCamera ModelCanon EOS DIGITAL REBEL XTiPhotographerunknownLens Size24.00 - 70.00 mmFirmware VersionFirmware 1.0.5Owner NameunknownSerial Number1220733201Image-Specific Properties:Image Width1288Image Height1936Pixel CompositionRGBImage OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution240 dpiVertical Resolution240 dpiImage Data ArrangementChunky FormatImage Created2008:04:30 20:25:31Exposure Time1/60 secF-Numberf/2.8Exposure ProgramAperture PriorityISO Speed Rating400Lens Aperturef/2.8Exposure Bias0 EVFlashNo FlashFocal Length24.00 mmRenderingNormalExposure ModeAutoScene Capture TypeStandardContrastNormalSaturationNormalSharpnessNormalExposure ModeAv-PriorityFocus TypeAutoMetering ModeEvaluativeSharpnessUnknownSaturationHighContrastUnknownShooting ModeManualImage SizeUnknownFocus ModeOne-ShotDrive ModeSingleFlash ModeOffCompression SettingUnknownMacro ModeNormalFlash Bias-2.00 EVWhite BalanceCustomExposure Compensation3Sensor ISO Speed224Camera Actuations238485568Color Matrix33
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
>>196080
>You can get the tamron 17-50 if you want this build quality.
That was a joke, if you missed that.

Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeCanonCamera ModelCanon EOS DIGITAL REBEL XTiPhotographerunknownLens Size24.00 - 70.00 mmFirmware VersionFirmware 1.0.5Owner NameunknownSerial Number1220733201Image-Specific Properties:Image Width1936Image Height1288Pixel CompositionRGBImage OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution240 dpiVertical Resolution240 dpiImage Data ArrangementChunky FormatImage Created2008:04:30 20:47:21Exposure Time1/200 secF-Numberf/2.8Exposure ProgramManualISO Speed Rating200Lens Aperturef/2.8Exposure Bias0 EVLight SourceUnknownFlashNo FlashFocal Length70.00 mmRenderingNormalExposure ModeManualScene Capture TypeStandardContrastNormalSaturationNormalSharpnessNormalExposure ModeManualFocus TypeAutoMetering ModeEvaluativeSharpnessUnknownSaturationHighContrastUnknownShooting ModeManualImage SizeUnknownFocus ModeManualDrive ModeSingleFlash ModeOffCompression SettingUnknownMacro ModeNormalWhite BalanceAutoExposure Compensation3Sensor ISO Speed192Camera Actuations238682144Color Matrix33
>> Spades !!byXwIH+F+lH
>>196084

MMM.....korm
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
Actually, I just realized that the 2.8 ones I just uploaded were probably not the best choice.

I'll look for some more. Have a 5.6 while waiting.

Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeCanonCamera ModelCanon EOS DIGITAL REBEL XTiPhotographerunknownLens Size24.00 - 70.00 mmFirmware VersionFirmware 1.0.5Owner NameunknownSerial Number1220733201Image-Specific Properties:Image Width1288Image Height1936Pixel CompositionRGBImage OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution240 dpiVertical Resolution240 dpiImage Data ArrangementChunky FormatImage Created2008:04:30 08:58:47Exposure Time1/60 secF-Numberf/5.6Exposure ProgramManualISO Speed Rating400Lens Aperturef/5.6Exposure Bias0 EVLight SourceUnknownFlashNo FlashFocal Length70.00 mmRenderingNormalExposure ModeManualScene Capture TypeStandardContrastNormalSaturationNormalSharpnessNormalExposure ModeManualFocus TypeAutoMetering ModeEvaluativeSharpnessUnknownSaturationHighContrastUnknownShooting ModeManualImage SizeUnknownFocus ModeOne-ShotDrive ModeSingleFlash ModeOffCompression SettingUnknownMacro ModeNormalFlash Bias-2.00 EVWhite BalanceAutoExposure Compensation3Sensor ISO Speed224Camera Actuations238289056Color Matrix33
>> Anonymous
OP you guys want more or do you not care any more?
>> Anonymous
>>196104
Op here.
MOAR
>> Anonymous
>>196080
>>196084
>>196090

That's pretty shitty if you think those are sharp
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
>>196130
You're right. I think so too.
Here's also a sample of the hex. bokeh.

Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeCanonCamera ModelCanon EOS DIGITAL REBEL XTiPhotographerunknownLens Size24.00 - 70.00 mmFirmware VersionFirmware 1.0.5Owner NameunknownSerial Number1220733201Image-Specific Properties:Image Width1936Image Height1288Pixel CompositionRGBImage OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution240 dpiVertical Resolution240 dpiImage Data ArrangementChunky FormatImage Created2008:05:10 20:31:24Exposure Time1/40 secF-Numberf/2.8Exposure ProgramManualISO Speed Rating1600Lens Aperturef/2.8Exposure Bias0 EVLight SourceUnknownFlashNo FlashFocal Length42.00 mmRenderingNormalExposure ModeManualScene Capture TypeStandardContrastNormalSaturationNormalSharpnessNormalExposure ModeManualFocus TypeAutoMetering ModePartialSharpnessUnknownSaturationHighContrastUnknownShooting ModeManualImage SizeUnknownFocus ModeOne-ShotDrive ModeSingleFlash ModeOffCompression SettingUnknownMacro ModeNormalFlash Bias-1.38 EVWhite BalanceAutoExposure Compensation3Sensor ISO Speed288Camera Actuations239796400Color Matrix33
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
I just realized that this film frame is sharper than my digital stuff. Do you guys think that it is making a difference when I am posting the extracted jpgs not the raw converted ones? I'm not very interested in processing useless pics.

Camera-Specific Properties:Camera SoftwarePicasa 2.7Image-Specific Properties:Unique Image IDb1ff576070a13c8606eb1e9b202b0121
>> Depressed Cheesecake !wFh1Fw9wBU
>>196144
Either you fail at focusing, or that lens is trash. These are not sharp at all :(
>> Anonymous
>>196152
You know, it could be that this one is in daylight and at a small aperture, whereas the digital ones are all at a larger aperture, most of them wide open.

The f/5.6 one looked like it was bad handholding that caused the blur.
>> Anonymous
>>196155
What does a sharp lens at 2.8 look like?
>> Depressed Cheesecake !wFh1Fw9wBU
     File :-(, x)
>>196163
Like this

Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeCanonCamera ModelCanon EOS DIGITAL REBEL XTCamera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop CS3 MacintoshPhotographerunknownImage-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution240 dpiVertical Resolution240 dpiImage Created2008:05:17 22:14:20Exposure Time1/400 secF-Numberf/2.8Exposure ProgramAperture PriorityISO Speed Rating100Lens Aperturef/2.8Exposure Bias0 EVMetering ModePatternFlashNo Flash, CompulsoryFocal Length100.00 mmColor Space InformationsRGBImage Width677Image Height451RenderingNormalExposure ModeAutoWhite BalanceAutoScene Capture TypeStandard
>> Anonymous
>>196169

daylight vs. indoors lowlight

come back with a sharp shot at 2.8 indoors in lowlight
>> $19.99 !OSYhGye6hY
>>196169
lol! Canon macro prime vs sigma zoom.
Not very fair comparison.
>> $19.99 !OSYhGye6hY
>>196169
....but now i really want one.
>> Anonymous
>>196169
sorry but can you repost an unresized image?
>> Depressed Cheesecake !wFh1Fw9wBU
     File :-(, x)
>>196169
Here it is with only RAW adjustments.

Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeCanonCamera ModelCanon EOS DIGITAL REBEL XTCamera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop CS3 MacintoshPhotographerunknownImage-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution240 dpiVertical Resolution240 dpiImage Created2008:06:02 23:54:54Exposure Time1/400 secF-Numberf/2.8Exposure ProgramAperture PriorityISO Speed Rating100Lens Aperturef/2.8Exposure Bias0 EVMetering ModePatternFlashNo Flash, CompulsoryFocal Length100.00 mmColor Space InformationsRGBImage Width3456Image Height2304RenderingNormalExposure ModeAutoWhite BalanceAutoScene Capture TypeStandard
>> $19.99 !OSYhGye6hY
>>196177
aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaand now i reallllly want one.
>> Anonymous
>>196084
So, DC this is not sharp?
>> Anonymous
>>196181

your lens is front focusing
>> Anonymous
>>196181
no it isn't
>> $19.99 !OSYhGye6hY
>>196181
it doesn't look like anything is in focus.
>> Anonymous
>>196177

you guys, i think somethings missing...
>> Anonymous
>>196186
?
>> Anonymous
wat
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
>>196186

it's more in focus now

Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeCanonCamera ModelCanon EOS DIGITAL REBEL XTCamera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop CS3 MacintoshPhotographerunknownImage-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution240 dpiVertical Resolution240 dpiImage Created2008:05:17 22:14:20Exposure Time1/400 secF-Numberf/2.8Exposure ProgramAperture PriorityISO Speed Rating100Lens Aperturef/2.8Exposure Bias0 EVMetering ModePatternFlashNo Flash, CompulsoryFocal Length100.00 mmColor Space InformationsRGBImage Width677Image Height451RenderingNormalExposure ModeAutoWhite BalanceAutoScene Capture TypeStandard
>> Depressed Cheesecake !wFh1Fw9wBU
>>196181
I'm not an expert, but 19.99 is right, the prime will obviously be sharper. It looks a little bit more dull than I would find acceptable. Luckily, there's USM.
>> Anonymous
>>196189
...
>> TheGeneral !m7n7x2Yyfo
>>196189

COMEDY GOLD RIGHT HERE! YESSIR!!!!
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
>>196080Or you can buy the canon one if you have the extra cash. But I can vouch that my copy is as sharp as the Canon 24-70.

come on now.. you can't be serious

Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeCanonCamera ModelCanon EOS DIGITAL REBEL XTiCamera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop CS2 MacintoshPhotographerunknownMaximum Lens Aperturef/2.8Image-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution350 dpiVertical Resolution350 dpiImage Created2008:06:03 00:10:53Exposure Time1/20 secF-Numberf/2.8Exposure ProgramManualISO Speed Rating400Lens Aperturef/2.8Exposure Bias0 EVMetering ModePatternFlashNo Flash, CompulsoryFocal Length62.00 mmColor Space InformationsRGBImage Width1944Image Height1296RenderingNormalExposure ModeManualWhite BalanceAutoScene Capture TypeStandard
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
>>196199

one more

Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeCanonCamera ModelCanon EOS DIGITAL REBEL XTiCamera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop CS2 MacintoshPhotographerunknownMaximum Lens Aperturef/2.8Image-Specific Properties:Image Width3888Image Height2592Number of Bits Per Component8, 8, 8Compression SchemeUncompressedPixel CompositionRGBImage OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution350 dpiVertical Resolution350 dpiImage Data ArrangementChunky FormatImage Created2008:06:03 00:11:33Exposure Time1/125 secF-Numberf/2.8Exposure ProgramManualISO Speed Rating200Lens Aperturef/2.8Exposure Bias0 EVMetering ModePatternFlashNo Flash, CompulsoryFocal Length48.00 mmColor Space InformationsRGBImage Width1944Image Height1296RenderingNormalExposure ModeManualWhite BalanceManualScene Capture TypeStandard
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
For comparison, here's a $300-when-new point and shoot at f/2.8. Straight from the raw file except resizing, all settings default except setting the noise reduction and sharpening to 0 in ACR. Resized bicubic sharper. I manually focused on the second brush from camera, but I moved a little I guess and it wound up landing between the second and third one from the camera.

Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakePanasonicCamera ModelDMC-FZ8Camera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop Elements 5.0 WindowsMaximum Lens Aperturef/2.8Image-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution240 dpiVertical Resolution240 dpiImage Created2008:06:03 00:12:05Exposure Time1/100 secF-Numberf/2.8Exposure ProgramManualISO Speed Rating100Lens Aperturef/2.8Exposure Bias0 EVMetering ModeCenter Weighted AverageFlashNo Flash, CompulsoryFocal Length7.00 mmColor Space InformationsRGBImage Width750Image Height563
>> Anonymous
I think we just burst that guy's bubble. ;___;
>> Depressed Cheesecake !wFh1Fw9wBU
I don't have any zoom lenses that go down to 2.8, but I think you might just have a defective lens, or AF. Or were you using manual focus?
>> Anonymous
>>196155
probably mostly due to that picture being taken at ISO 1600, actually nearly all the examples posted are taken at higher ISOs. They do look good for what they are IMO.
>> Anonymous
>>196204
I was using AF. How do I check for back focusing?
>> Anonymous
high iso doesn't make your shit soft, it makes it noisy

that's just plain wrong focus
>> Depressed Cheesecake !wFh1Fw9wBU
     File :-(, x)
>>196206
I don't know, but I take back the comment about it being defective. I didn't notice it went down to 24. You can't really expect it to be sharp wide open on a zoom lens thats ultra-wide. Even Canon's L lenses won't be sharp with the same range and aperture.

If you're not printing, use Smart Sharpen before you resize for web, then resize using Bicubic Sharper, it'll make even your photos look razor-sharp. At least that's my workflow.

Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeCanonCamera ModelCanon EOS DIGITAL REBEL XTCamera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop CS3 MacintoshPhotographerunknownImage-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution240 dpiVertical Resolution240 dpiImage Created2008:06:03 00:42:13Exposure Time1/200 secF-Numberf/1.8Exposure ProgramAperture PriorityISO Speed Rating100Lens Aperturef/1.8Exposure Bias1/3 EVMetering ModePatternFlashNo Flash, CompulsoryFocal Length50.00 mmColor Space InformationsRGBImage Width576Image Height864RenderingNormalExposure ModeAutoWhite BalanceManualScene Capture TypeStandard
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
Those this count as an unsharp image?

Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeCanonCamera ModelCanon EOS DIGITAL REBEL XTiLens Size24.00 - 70.00 mmFirmware VersionFirmware 1.0.5Owner NameunknownSerial Number1220733201Image-Specific Properties:Image OrientationRight-Hand, TopHorizontal Resolution72 dpiVertical Resolution72 dpiImage Created2008:05:29 06:15:57White Point Chromaticity0.3Exposure Time1/500 secF-Numberf/2.8Exposure ProgramManualISO Speed Rating1600Lens Aperturef/2.8Exposure Bias0 EVFlashNo Flash, CompulsoryFocal Length56.00 mmColor Space InformationUncalibratedImage Width1936Image Height1288RenderingNormalExposure ModeManualScene Capture TypeStandardExposure ModeManualFocus TypeAutoMetering ModePartialSharpnessUnknownSaturationUnknownContrastUnknownShooting ModeManualImage SizeSmallFocus ModeManualDrive ModeContinuousFlash ModeOffCompression SettingFineMacro ModeNormalFlash Bias-1.38 EVWhite BalanceAutoExposure Compensation3Sensor ISO Speed288Camera Actuations241500192Color Matrix33
>> Anonymous
>>196213
Why is this sideways?
>>196212
I though this thread was about comparing native sharpness for 24-70 zooms at f/2.8?
>> Depressed Cheesecake !wFh1Fw9wBU
>>196214
It was. Still is. Doesn't mean I can't plug my photo when OP wants to know what a sharp photo should look like.
>> TheGeneral !m7n7x2Yyfo
>>196212
holy crap DC, that's a lot better! and I just resized my latest batch of pics....FFFFFFFFFFF
>> Anonymous
>>196206I was using AF. How do I check for back focusing?

since you're doing a great job of ignoring everyone else but DC

feel free to ignore this link as well

http://focustestchart.com/chart.html
>> Depressed Cheesecake !wFh1Fw9wBU
>>196216
Yep. I used to sharpen after resize, but this just creates halos and noise. If you sharpen before, you won't lose any detail on the resize.

One more thing, always resize last. Especially if you've adjusted contrast.
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
so this is the secret to making things more in focus

thanks guys!
>> Anonymous
>>196218
brb focus test
>> TheGeneral !m7n7x2Yyfo
>>196219
Interesting, my workflow used to be sharpen > curves > other PP > resize

feels like another thread needs to be opened up...
>> Liquefied !!CF1+3tSFCce
>>196222
Always sharpen after you've established your final presentation size no matter what method you use to sharpen.
>> Anonymous
>>196207
It's not the primary effect, but noise on a large enough scale can cause apparent softness. Sometimes a camera also will do auto noise reduction on higher ISO images that causes a soft look.

I'm not making this up, research it if you want. But considering it's showing up on more of the shots, it may not be the only issue.
>> TheGeneral !m7n7x2Yyfo
why liquified? mmmm

i'm gonna go kick up an image comparison now...

will open another thread later...