Sponsor Message:
Aviation Photography Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
EF 100-400mm Lens Soft Due To Age?  
User currently offlineDraigonair From Netherlands, joined Oct 2000, 708 posts, RR: 5
Posted (5 years 5 months 4 days 11 hours ago) and read 4602 times:

Hey guys

I havent used my EF100-400mm lens for a while but today i decided to go and shoot some photos. However, i noticed that the lens is rather soft. Can this be due to the age of the lens? (got it 2004)

Is there a possibility to have it repaired/improved?

link to the test photo: 300mm and 400mm

http://www.ommering.nl/300mm.jpg
http://www.ommering.nl/400mm.jpg

let me know what you guys think!

cheers

Nick


cheers
18 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineKlemmi85 From Germany, joined Mar 2009, 210 posts, RR: 0
Reply 1, posted (5 years 5 months 4 days 11 hours ago) and read 4602 times:

AFAIK you can send your DSLR body and the lens to Canon to make them adjust the lens and body as good as they can.

At least in Germany that's possible and a commonly used service.

But normally it should not become softer over time.... strange thing...


User currently offlineCpd From Australia, joined Jun 2008, 4879 posts, RR: 38
Reply 2, posted (5 years 5 months 4 days 10 hours ago) and read 4589 times:

I'd recommend getting it serviced as described above if you feel it is soft.

But from these photos - it looks more like motion blur in about a 45 degree angle.

You might need the sensor cleaned as well - pretty big dust spot is visible (even I can see it - with my hopeless eyes).


User currently offlineINNflight From Switzerland, joined Apr 2004, 3766 posts, RR: 59
Reply 3, posted (5 years 5 months 4 days 8 hours ago) and read 4568 times:



Quoting Cpd (Reply 2):
it looks more like motion blur in about a 45 degree angle.

I agree, looks like you got some motion blur in those.

Plus, the 100-400 never was the sharpest lens at full zoom, but I don't think it could get worse over time.



Jet Visuals
User currently offlineTopGun3 From Canada, joined Aug 2005, 263 posts, RR: 0
Reply 4, posted (5 years 5 months 4 days 8 hours ago) and read 4562 times:

Definitely looks like a motion blur...therefore the lens could be OK.

Try using a tripod and see if the shots improve (for comparative purposes).



I'd rather be flying.
User currently offlineWalter2222 From Belgium, joined exactly 9 years ago today! , 1299 posts, RR: 27
Reply 5, posted (5 years 5 months 4 days 7 hours ago) and read 4549 times:



Quoting Draigonair (Thread starter):
However, i noticed that the lens is rather soft. Can this be due to the age of the lens? (got it 2004)

I am sure that the optics itself don't degrade over age (unless you dropped your lens), but electronics (e.g. IS) could go bust after some time... As others have already said, the shots show a kind of motion blur (did you shoot it with IS on (mode1) or was IS off?). A defective IS can of course be repaired, but it is costly...

Quoting TopGun3 (Reply 4):
Try using a tripod and see if the shots improve (for comparative purposes).

 checkmark  ... and take some shots at different apertures also!

Best regards,

Walter



canon 340d ;-) - EFS10-22mm f/3.5-4.5 USM - EFS18-55mm - EF28-105mm f3.5/4.5 - EF100-400mm f4.5-5.6l is usm - ...
User currently offlineSamuel32 From Switzerland, joined Jun 2005, 141 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (5 years 5 months 4 days 6 hours ago) and read 4533 times:

What a co-incidence!

Mine got soft over the years too, heading to the service center tomorrow.

Mines had a harsh life, so I guess some lens elements might of shifted ever so slightly. Mines been shaken throughout its life.

Though most of the time I blame myself for the bad results, even though i've had it since 05.

Sam


User currently offlineDraigonair From Netherlands, joined Oct 2000, 708 posts, RR: 5
Reply 7, posted (5 years 5 months 4 days 4 hours ago) and read 4513 times:

Hey,

These photos are taken with a simple UV filter with a tri-pod. ISO 100 and autofocus (oneshot mode) F8.0

What do you guys think?

http://www.ommering.nl/test1.jpg
http://www.ommering.nl/test2.jpg

Indeed there are some dust spots and i need to clean the camera  Smile

Cheers

Nick



cheers
User currently offlineDraigonair From Netherlands, joined Oct 2000, 708 posts, RR: 5
Reply 8, posted (5 years 5 months 4 days 4 hours ago) and read 4505 times:

Here another test from a contrail:

http://www.ommering.nl/conttest.jpg

It seems that its 'double' or something not sure.

Nick



cheers
User currently offlineTimdeGroot From Netherlands, joined Apr 2002, 3674 posts, RR: 64
Reply 9, posted (5 years 5 months 4 days 4 hours ago) and read 4503 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!



Quoting Draigonair (Reply 8):
Here another test from a contrail:

http://www.ommering.nl/conttest.jpg

It seems that its 'double' or something not sure.

Looks blurry, not soft.

Try shooting some tripod shots with some different settings in optimal conditions and see if they are still coming out blurry

Tim



Alderman Exit
User currently offlineDazbo5 From United Kingdom, joined Mar 2005, 2913 posts, RR: 2
Reply 10, posted (5 years 5 months 4 days 2 hours ago) and read 4468 times:

Where were you focusing on the shots of the roof? Are you using all points so the camera selects or just one? The side of the house looks pretty sharp so I was wondering if the camera used that as the focal point and the tiles are slightly soft / out of focus because of the shallow depth of field at the longer length? Just a suggestion. I'm having similar problems to yourself on the Sigma 50-500 since I upgraded from the 350D to the 50D; everything is very soft. Are you using the same camera body as before? It seems newer generation highter resolution cameras are producing slightly softer shots than less dense sensor cameras and showing up every minor flaw in the lens. Sigma have suggested I send the lens and camera back to them so they can calibrate the lens for my camera. I don't fancy sending nearly £2,000 in the post though!

Darren



Equipment: 2x Canon EOS 50D; Sigma 10-20 EX DC HSM, 50-500 EX APO DG, Canon 24-105 f/4 L, Speedlite 430EX
User currently offlineDraigonair From Netherlands, joined Oct 2000, 708 posts, RR: 5
Reply 11, posted (5 years 5 months 4 days ago) and read 4449 times:

I use a 20D and have always done so..and yes im sure that i focused on the center part
of the photo  Smile..Im going to test the lens tomorrow at the airport and see what it gives. I have also sent a message to canon, see what they say i should do.

How much does it usually take to have them clean/ take a look at the lens?

Nick



cheers
User currently offlineCvervais From United States of America, joined Sep 2003, 610 posts, RR: 2
Reply 12, posted (5 years 5 months 3 days 18 hours ago) and read 4414 times:

I think the base rate in the US is around $130. Usually it ends up just a little higher than that if it just needs a adjustment and cleaning. Some might balk at the price but, after sending them my 24-70 it's a bargain. They really do a thorough job.

User currently offlineDehowie From Australia, joined Feb 2004, 1060 posts, RR: 33
Reply 13, posted (5 years 5 months 2 days 19 hours ago) and read 4323 times:

I'd definitely be testing without the filter. Its the only ay you will see what the lens is really producing. Any filter reduces quality..
Imagine at worst a focus calibration but id be testing it more thoroughly in a more controlled way(tripod etc) b4 i pack up a lens to send off.
Darren

[Edited 2009-04-23 20:15:41]


2EOS1DX,EF14.2.8LII,17TS,85/1.2,16-35L,24-70LII,24L,70-200F2.8LII,100-400,300/400/500/800L
User currently onlineSilver1SWA From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 4816 posts, RR: 25
Reply 14, posted (5 years 5 months 2 days 19 hours ago) and read 4315 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!



Quoting Draigonair (Reply 7):
Hey,

These photos are taken with a simple UV filter with a tri-pod. ISO 100 and autofocus (oneshot mode) F8.0

What do you guys think?

You still haven't mentioned whether or not IS was turned on. Especially when using a tripod, ensure IS is off.



ALL views, opinions expressed are mine ONLY and are NOT representative of those shared by Southwest Airlines Co.
User currently offlineDraigonair From Netherlands, joined Oct 2000, 708 posts, RR: 5
Reply 15, posted (5 years 5 months 2 days 7 hours ago) and read 4272 times:

Hey guys,

I just had the camera cleaned and i removed my UV filter and sure enough its a lot better!

Thanks for your inputs!

cheers

Nick



cheers
User currently offlineArdynas From United States of America, joined Mar 2009, 11 posts, RR: 0
Reply 16, posted (5 years 5 months 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 4209 times:

Yes, IS should be off when on tripod. That alone will mess up image.

User currently offlineGabik001 From Poland, joined Jun 2005, 206 posts, RR: 1
Reply 17, posted (5 years 5 months ago) and read 4115 times:

I checked all that images and all looks blurry not soft. Anyway you can always set sharpening in camera settings to sharpen more images... I am using it at first step in case of...
Regards , Gabriel



Canon 50D gripped + Canon 70D +17-85IS USM + 18-55 STM + 100-400L IS USM + Minolta X300 w/ 35-70 f/3.5
User currently offlineWhisperjet From Germany, joined Nov 2007, 569 posts, RR: 8
Reply 18, posted (5 years 4 months 4 weeks 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 4067 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
PHOTO SCREENER

I bought my 100-400 about 3 years ago and I also have the feeling that the pictures came out sharper and contrastier when it was newer. I have to admit that I haven't used the calibration service yet.

Talking about the 100-400, has anybody ever sent the 100-400 back to Canon service for problems with locking function? I can't lock it anymore which is a bit annoying. Does anybody know how much it costs to repair it (just a guess in the right direction)?

Stefan



Nobody is perfect - not even a perfect fool.
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Lense Thoughts: Canon EF 100-400mm F/2.8L Is USM posted Thu Jun 29 2006 21:56:02 by Aero145
Learning This 100-400mm L Lens/badquality posted Thu Apr 7 2005 11:55:24 by A340Spotter
EF 100-400mm L Is Dimensions posted Tue Jun 15 2004 23:36:12 by SHAMROCK_107
Anyone Using The Canon EF 100-400mm F/4.5-5.6L Is? posted Sun Jul 13 2003 22:13:52 by Brick
Canon 100-400mm Is Lens Filter Help posted Wed Jul 4 2007 13:18:22 by Davejwatts
Canon 100-400mm Is Lens Problems posted Fri Jun 8 2007 01:41:56 by Opso1
Where To Buy The 100-400mm L Is At MIA? posted Wed Nov 19 2003 17:00:18 by Condor
Canon L Lens 100-400mm Or Sigma 50-500mm? posted Thu Dec 12 2002 07:05:15 by Tsentsan
$2100 Camera- Broken Due To Cleaning Fluid! posted Wed Nov 12 2008 18:28:01 by SXDFC
Canon 100-400 Lens Questions. posted Sun Oct 19 2008 12:37:22 by Apollo13