EF 70-200mm f/2.8 IS II USM - Focus problem?

Similar Questions

• Reviews for poles, please?

  Extender EF 2 x III - or the EF 1.4 x III.  Same price.  Other than the obvious, why one over the other?  The optics are equal?

  Thank you!

  And of course, it's the right answer...

  "I would recommend the 1.4 X if you can only afford a..

  I'm sure you probably know, but Canon Extenders only work woth with some Canon lenses... »

  In general the Extenders are a bad idea.  You give a lot for little.  There are a few glasses of 'L' that tolerates an Extender well enough.  Most of the lenses don't. The Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8 L II USM lens and the Canon Extender EF 1. 4 X II work well together.  I have this combo so I can recommend it.  It also works well with the Canon EF 300mm f / 4L IS USM lens.  Once a combo yet personal, I can recommend it.  As a general rule they are not and you should avoid lenses that are slower than f4 with Extender. And f2.8 it's even better.  And yet once again, IMHO, avoid the x 2 in total.

  Then you enter the really great TV like the Canon EF 500mm f / 4L IS II USM lens.  Although the 1. 4 x works well with it, it brings some more difficult terms more come.  700 mm FL, it can be quite a challenge to use.  I only have the combo but I rented it.

• Suggestion for just the right target?

  I use a 70-200 mm f/2.8 for shooting dancers in annoying the light of situations, usually from the back of the seat in the room. Works great.

  Is there a fast lens just as impressive for shooting the most close to?  Sitting at a table next to a dance floor at a wedding do you never attended.

  I need quickly.

  TIA

  You have the 70-200mm f2.8L ef?  The choice of obivious and by far the best choice is the Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8 L II USM lens.  I have a lot of and tested many glasses, personally, over the last years.  I can say categorically that it could become my most favorite goal of all time.  It is very good.  He has no equal.  My courses most favorite all time lens is the Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8 L II USM lens but the Canon EF 24-70 mm f/2.8 L II USM can just clear it as King!

  IMHO, I wouldn't pick any goal. In your environment, unless you are free to move, you absolutely want a zoom.

• 70-200 F2.8 IS USM III?

  Y at - it a scheduled update, or rumor to the legendary canon 70-200 F2.8 IS USM II? It has been five years since the update and I want to get one, but not if it will be updated in the next season.

  Thank you

  Kevin

  Lenses in general don't you a refresh unless there is a reason to make an update.

  The EF 70-200mm f/2.8 L IS USM (original) was (and still is) a VERY good lens.   The brand 'II' version of this improved lens - lens is very very slightly more sharp in the Center and slightly more slightly sharper on the edges. Image stabilization is also improved.

  The Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8 L IS USM II is currently not just the best of 70-200 lenses that can fit on your gun... but the best lens in this category in the whole of the industry (nobody does a better 70-200).

  Sigma, Tamron, and Nikon have all the lenses either the same or very similar focal length ranges available with opening of f/2.8... but they all have very important questions "breathe."  All lenses have questions of "breathing" to a certain extent.  "Breathing" means that if you look very carefully at the edges of your frame, and then change the focus, you will notice that as the focus changes, the goal seems also to be zoom in or out (just of the changing object - is not in contact with the zoom ring).

  On the Canon, this "acquire" is insiginficant... at the end of 200 mm, respiration can change by maybe 10 mm tops.  But the Sigma, Tramron and Nikon versions have significant breathing... depending on your purpose, your focal length can be only 130 or 140 mm (even though the zoom ring says you're at 200).

  I think that you are pretty safe in this Canon custom likely update this lens anytime soon.  There is simply not any reason, update again.

• Compatibility with the EOS rebel T3i

  I have an EOS Rebel T3i.  Is this compatible with an EF 70-200mm F/2.8 L IS USM he's lens?

  I was shooting with a T3i when I bought my 70-200 mm f/2.8 mkII IS a few years back. Yes, it worked great! I love the lens. It is not only my sharpest lens, it is also my fastest focusing lens and more importantly, it gives rich and profound colors impressive contrast and beautiful background blur/bokeh.

  Good luck and enjoy!

• Canon 5 d Mkiii problem with multiple registration.

  Hello.

  I have a CF (32 MB sandisk extreme 60 MB/s) card and an SD card (sandisk 32 GB extreme pro 95 MB/s) inserted and in the menu under the Record func + map section I the func record. Rec. multiple value. My problem is that sometimes my video files are only copied to the SD card and not the CF card although the photo files are saved at the same time.

  Any help would be greatly appreciated.

  Canon 5 d Mkiii 50 mm f/1.4. EF 16-35mm f2.8L II USM.  EF 24-105mm f / 4L IS USM.

  EF 24-70mm f/2.8 L USM. EF 100 mm f/2.8 L Macro USM.  EF 70-200MM f/2.8 L IS USM

  Speedllite 430EX II

  I asked a videographer, a friend and he said...

  You can choose which films of map will be saved to, but there is no excess capacity or ability to mirror

  for movies with the 5 d Mk III.

• Focus on the t3i problem

  My t3i is having focusing problems. What may be the cause?  Can I have very well to the development as on fullframe cameras?

  Kolourl3lind wrote:

  OK I'll do it, but I just realized maybe it's because I'm zoom after focus and recompose?

  Yep - most of the lenses are "varifocale" - which means that if you focus carefully on a subject at a few focal length in the range of zoom... then zoom to a new lens, then your topic will be specifically developed in the.  You must refocus the goal.

  There are a few lenses that are "parfocal" - means that if you zoom the lens after update, your subject will always be precisely focused.  However... VERY FEW lenses is technically "parfocal" (even if some are close).

  The lenses I know who are "parfocal" are:

  • EF 16-135mm f/2.8 L USM
  • EF 17-40mm f / 4L USM
  • EF 70-200mm f/2.8 L USM (only the non)

  That's all.  If you use any other goal, he must refocus the goal after a zoom.

  But I also noticed that you were aiming at 1/15 sec.  It's a little slow, but you were at 18mm (which helps).  Here is the guideline on this.

  In the days of 35mm, there was to be a general rule that if the shutter speed is equal to, or faster than 1/focal length (e.g.. If the shot at 50 mm from you would be at least 1/50th sec at 70 mm you would be at least 1/70th or more fast, etc) would be appropriate.  This number does not apply to your T3i, but I'll be back in a moment.

  But there are some caveats with this...

  First, it assumes that you use actually very good camera-technical operation and you really WANT to be stable.  Good camera-technical operation means that you support the camera down - usually your left is the palm-up supporting the bottom of the camera and lens and your elbow is in verse your chest/belly.    Your weight is centered between your legs and you have a wide position.  This means that you are not leaning so your muscles must work hard to stand and your weapons as a brace to support the camera to your body and, of course, your body is well balanced and stable.

  Secondly, it is just a 'guide' - not a rule.  Some people are apparently able to be more stable than others (and if caffiene makes nervous and you just drank a coffee... and all that sort of thing.)  And it takes some practice to learn the proper technique.

  Thirdly, it is also not the same for the cameras (like your T3i) APS - C sized sensor.  To make the camera, you would have to the multiple minimum speed by the crop factor of the camera.  For a Canon APS - C camera is 1.6 (but if you wanted to use 1.5 which would be close enough.)  That means 50 mm instead of using 1/50th you would actually use 1/75th (technically 1/80th if we use the factor 1.6).  for example 50 x 1.6 = 80 so for 50mm, we would use 1/80th.

  If you have a goal that includes image stabilization, so you can be able to pull a little slower.

  Image stabilization in most claims to improve the stability of the lens of 2 to 4 "stop".  Does that mean that you can reduce the shutter speed... two to four times slower that you would normally need the lens because stabilizes for you.   But more caveats apply because it is not as simple as 'get you 4 stops.  The stabilization is not a guarantee... that's just a liklihood.  If it were to be less ambitious to stabilize your shot he will be much more likely to succeed.  If she must be more ambitious to stabilize your shot, then he'll do it is better... but there is no guarantee that it will work.

  You were aiming at 18mm.  So, if you use technical excellent posture and camera-operation but don't have image stabilization and that you are the one "average" trying to hold the camera steady, then we multiply 18 x 1.6 and go down to 28.8.  There is no shuter speed 1 / 28.8th so we turn to 1/30th (because there is a 1/30th.

  1 stop slower than 1/30 is 1/15th, and image stabilization is probably enough to make you slower 1 stop successfully.

  2 times slower is 1/8th.  Image stabilization that claims "4 stops" will be generally well 2 stops.  So it is less than a sure thing, but he tilt the odds in your favor.

  3 times slower is 1/4 sec.  At this point, you are pushing the image stabilization system... you will notice that if you shoot a lot of frames, the rate of "keeper" (tips, you like) will be lower, but you will see that you have found some.

  4 times slower is 1/2 sec (based on the basis of 1/30th for a focal length of 18mm on an APS - C size sensor device).  If you press any stabilized lens image 4 stops, don't expect to get a very high rate of keeper.  It will help you sometimes, but you have to accept you are really be ambitious in your expectations.

  This is image stabilization by the numbers... take the focal distance, multiply it by your crop factor (which is always in 1.6, but if you want to use 1.5 because it is somewhat easy to do this calculation in our head that's close enough), round up to the nearest available shutter speed.  If you have image stabilization that you can speed up the shutter speed of 1, 2, 3 or 4 times faster... but every time you get more ambitious your chances of obtaining 'gatekeepers' go down (but it is better than without image stabilization at all.)

  The summary is that your minimum shutter speed (assuming good holding technique and you're stable, etc etc) with stabilizing image out of the 1/30th would be your minimum speed.  At 1/15 sec am that you relied on 1-stop image stabilization help.  The lens image stabilization technology is good enough so that 'most of the time' it will probably be able to do (not guaranteed... only likely.)  If you were NOT using a good posture and technical outfit... you can be difficult to your image stabilization system to try to keep up.

• Canon 70-200mm F4 L USM replacement

  I have a 70-200mm F4 L USM Canon's, he started to act erratic plastic clicking noise, random automatic manual focus. I took the plate on the side of the lens of the camera, the AF/MF focus switch and switches have come off, I can't get back them on even though they work. I'll attach a picture to show what I mean. Help, please

  «.. . Please help. "

  OK, call the Canon Service.

• Canon 18-200mm zoom lens

  I'm new here.  I have a Canon T3i.  Two kit lenses came with it in a bundle... 18-55mm, 55-250mm.  I am considering getting the Canon 18-200mm.  Would be the Canon 18-200mm is a good choice to replace the two lenses, or are there better choices to replace them with and keep the 18-200mm too?

  I wouldn't buy one for several reasons.  The one above all, it is more difficult to zoom, when the zoom range becomes very extreme.  18-200 is a 11 x scope and very ambitious to say the least. Not only in mind but in build quality, too. It will be in the same level of quality that the two glasses, the only advantage is to have just a lens so you.  Is that what you need? The superior advantage of a digital SLR is the possibility of having the right lens for the good work.  This implies usually several different lenses.  So you will be defeated this concept a little!

  I'd rather see you get a different level of lens for example IS the Canon EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 USM Lens.  Directly by replacing your 18-55mm kit lens. Of course, it is in the case where you have does not work for you. But this approach is better built, better optics and a little more quickly the objective that can be very useful.  Don't get me wrong the Canon EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM lens is a very good lens and offers a constant aperture.  A great plus in my book.

  Unfortunately these lens upgrades are expensive and replacing the 55-250mm is going to be even more.

• No data lens for the 200mm f2.8 in DPP?

  Just bought the 200mm f2.8 L lens and I am unable to see any 200mm Prime lenses in DPP, am I missing something?

  Jack

  AlaskaAce wrote:

  Just bought the 200mm f2.8 L lens and I am unable to see any 200mm Prime lenses in DPP, am I missing something?

  Jack

  You're right, it's the focus is not on the list. I think Canon made a kind of determination about what advantage needs a lens of the optimizer and how many lenses are there in use.

  For example, while the new kit lenses STM is supported in this way, the EF-S 60mm f/2.8 macro is not. Either because it would not really benefit from or there is not a lot of them it to use.

  Good lens aberration correction tool many of the same things and works with all identifiable Canon lenses.

• Mirror / reflex lenses... well how do they get? 55mm? 100mm? 200mm?

  so I'm a nut "fuzzy donuts"...

  Mirror / reflex lenses... In short how do they get? 55mm? 100mm? 200mm?

  I wonder why you would be interested in "short" mirror of focal length.

  These lenses perform a very special purpose and you normally not wish to use one for general photography.

  A lens 'mirror' (technically, these are "catadioptric" lenses which means that it uses a combination of lenses and mirrors.  The clear glass façade is a "corrective" and is technically a goal, even if the map are minor.

  These lenses have no ability to communicate with the camera - they have a focal report sets which cannot be changed.  They are setting manual focus only.

  They usually come in focal length of 400mm, 500mm or 800mm.

  When a lens uses glass elements, the element works by bending light.  Whenever you bend light through something objective (rather than using a mirror), refracts the light based on its wavelength.  The red light does not turn blue light for example.  This means that an element simple single lens can focus all wavelengths of light for the same focal plane.   To fix this, additional lenses items are included - often SEVERAL elements of goal.

  When the lenses lie, the amount of light making it to through drops - and to compensate, the lens must have a far greater physical diameter.  When using lenses, these should also be physically larger.  As the elements of lenses get fat, the Prism effect that causes the dispersion (different wavelengths of colors different amounts of curvature) becomes even more extreme.  This is why VERY long focal lengths become VERY expensive.

  'Mirror' lenses avoid the problem by bouncing the light on mirrors... There is no dispersion by bouncing a light on a mirror (you are not technically passing light 'through' an objective element.  This is substantially the cost of the construction of the lens!

  Mirror lenses are usually "t-mounts" and you should buy a T adapter for your camera.  As mentioned above... you can not adjust the report f / d and the lens is manual focus only.   There is no communication between the camera and lens (the camera behaves as if it had no target).

  Out-of-focus image areas will be blur based on the shape of the opening... which is actually shaped donut for a mirror lens.  This means out of areas of interest have black spots in the Middle - resulting in a very unpleasant quality of out-of-focus areas.

  A 800mm mirror lens could cost $200 (more or less) and you need the adaptor in T (maybe another $15-30 depending on who makes them.)  An 800mm lens actually designed for an EOS mount (with auto focus, Aperture, control etc.) would be significantly more expensive (probably in thousands).

  The inability to change the focal reports, the update manual constratint and the lack of autofocus... There is a considerable handicap in terms of speed and flexibility of shooting.   No, you probably want to use as a daily goal.

• DOES THIS EXIST: EF-S 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6 IS - STM VERSION?

  Hello!

  I currently have the lens EF-S 18-55mm IS STM and EF-S 55-250mm STM IS objective. I'm about to go on a journey very full to bursting and will not have the time to constantly move my lenses back and forth.

  Ideally, I would like the EF-S 18-200mm lens, but in a version of the STM... which still exist?

  The Canon Website does not always list their latest models.

  The alternative (for not having to change my goal, but have the 18mm start and a best 55mm zoom) lens EF-S 18-135mm IS STM would. Are there other objectives that I'm missing a wider scope than this (VTS version)?

  I like to keep the beginning of the range about 18 mm.

  Also, I'm not for anything over $ 500... I know that these expensive lenses exist.

  Thank you!!

  No version of the STM. Tamron 18-270 Google.

• Canon lens EF 70-200mm L F4 USM + 2 X L series extender

  Hi, I have a Canon lens EF 70-200mm L F4 USM. Now, I want to buy an extension of series X L 2. Can someone help me by informing that AF can work with EF 70-200mm L USM F4 + 2 X Extender mounted on 650 d device and how much image quality I have to make compromises for the same thing.

  mithun_pal129 wrote:

  Thank you all for your valuable comments. I forgot to mention that my intension of extender to my EF 70-200mm L F4 USM in a telephoto lens for wildlife / birds. But now that I'm your stay in Abu Dhabi, he is not paid a lot of bird / wild life. This is why I don't want to spend a lot on super telephoto, and personally, I don't want to go to cheap Sigma lens. So I wanted to do objective 70-200mm + 2 Expander x 140-400 mm. As I myself feel 1.4 X extender is pretty good, but it will give me up to 280mm. I know that's not very good lens for bird / wild raise photography. But you want to know still is feasible or if I use 2 x Extender to make the 400mm autofocus lens is required for the wild life or manual focus can still operate at F8. I don't have a lot of experience in the photography of wild life that's why I wanted to know things.

  In a Word... N °

  Of a 2 X teleconverter on a 70-200/4 made for a lens of 140-400/8 "effective." Due to the reduction of light reaching the AF sensors, your camera will turn off autofocus. A stronger 2 X also "costs" more loss of quality of the image due to the deterioration.

  It is possible to tape on some of the electronic contacts on the focal length multiplier, so that the camera does not know it is there and always try to auto focus. However, the autofocus will be much slower and will tend to hunt much more.

  In some situations, you may be able to manually update. However, effective f8 makes for a pretty weak sight, most cameras update automatic modern as you do not have some fo the features allowing the development manual, vintage cameras designed for the manual focus had in the past. Some people change to one-third of frosted glass to add functionality to support manual focus (split finder image, micro diaprisms, for example). However this requires careful work to install the screen and the display of different can affect precision measurement of the camera, especially in the incorrect Spot metering.

  Addition of a lower 1.4 X teleconverter makes your lens in effect 112-280mm f5.6, who will still be updated with auto focus and will be much less loss of image quality, but not as much 'reach. If yours is a goal IS, it can reasonably be handholdable. If it is not a goal IS, you will need to watch your shutter speeds than blur carefully, probably should keep to 1/500 or more quickly to avoid the camera. Or use a tripod, as suggested by ebibgs, or at least a monopod. You also need to limit the autofocus on your camera to the central AF point only, I think.

  ebiggs1 wrote:

  On your camera, the 70-200mm f4 is like a 112-320mm f4.  With a converter 1. 4 x, looking at 448mm f5.6 and th elong end.  + 400 mm should be long enough for you to get photos of some birds.  BTW, use a tripod.

  While it is technically correct, citing the "crop camera lens factor" in this way may not help much, can be confusing.

  The original poster has simply a 70-200mm lens which they are accustomed to using on a crop sensor camera. They would now like to double the range of this lens on their camera. Crop sensor lens incorporating conversation factor is very useful when the user goes from frame of film/full to reframe the camera or vice versa. For someone who has never used a film camera or has not used one for many years and is now completely accustomed to how behaves a lens of focal length on their device to harvest, it is a completely moot point.

  But what he's basically saying that while you can add a 2 X, it is probably not a good idea for several reasons. Auto focus will work or not, with a few tips, won't work only weakly. Manual focus will be difficult. And the picture quality might take too big a hit, combining a 2 X with your goal. .

  I have a 70-200/4 IS, 70-200/2.8 IS ("Mark I"), 1. 4 X II and 2 X Teleconverters II. I also have long telephoto lenses, so rarely need to add these zooms teleconverter. However if necessary I would use 1.4 X on one of them. But even if AF still work on the 70-200/2.8 + 2 X combo, I won't use it because of the amount of loss of image quality (the most recent IS of 70 - 200/2.8 Mark II and 2 X Mark III are supposed to work together better, than my older versions of each).

  I use mostly 2 X on 300/2.8 and 500/4 lenses privileged where the image quality is still good. (Note: Yes, on some of my cameras 2 X 500/4 causes AF to stop working, as it would on your f4 lens, so I only use the combo on a limited basis.)

  mithun_pal129... I would say the more you get a 1. 4 X and use it with your goal. See if the image quality is to your expectations. Then work to get closer to your subjects. Or bring them closer to you. Practice the techniques of stalking and to study the behaviors of your subjects to discover ways to get closer. Work in a blind and use bait (food, calls). And start saving for a lens of longer focal length.

  The Canon 1.4 X II and III teleconverters are excellent. All Canon teleconverters have mated before elements that limit the lenses that they physically can be attached, but the 70-200 are among those where this is possible. Teleconverter Kenko is another that I see quite often recommended. They have two different levels of quality: a more expensive "Pro 300" version and a cheaper "MC - 4". These are currently offered in versions "DGX" whose operation is very similar to Canon teleconverters. Old Kenko teleconverters "DG" not "reported" to the camera, the camera didn't know they were there, so try to focus.  In the view of users and tests I've seen, the current Kenko Pro 300 DGX is pretty good overall of the entire image area. The MC - 4 cheaper is actually a little sharper in the Center, but not as strong in the corners and the edges of the image. Tamron and Sigma teleconverters also do, but I have little experience or knowledge of the current versions of the people.

  The wildlife/bird photography is not easy. Since no matter how long a goal that you have, there are times when the subjects are just out of reach and all you can go is to sit back and enjoy the show.

  These photos of small subjects with different, but close to or less than the effective focal length even lenses like your 70-200 mm + a 1. 4 X teleconverter would be on your camera...

  

  

  

  

  ***********
  Alan Myers

  San Jose, California, USA.
  «Market softly and carry a great lens.»
  MATERIAL: 5DII, 7D(x2), 50D(x3), some other cameras, various lenses & accessories
  FLICKR & REPROGRAPHY

• Impossible to find profiles of lens for Canon 35-80mm and 80-200mm (3.6 Lightroom)

  Hello

  
  

  This may seem like a piece of cake to most of you, but I am fairly new to photography, especially things like the optical correction, etc.

  I use Lightroom 3.6 and there is no profile target for these 2 objectives:

  Canon 35-80mm

  Canon 80-200mm

  Anyone know what to do in this case? Do I need to create them somehow (if so - how?) or can I download them (if so - where)?

  Thank you in advance for your help!

  Kind regards

  A.
  

  Profiles for these lenses have been added in later versions. But I don't know because I don't keep track of all the profiles that are added. If you Google Adobe Lens profile Downloader, you will find link to a program provided by Adobe. It will connect you to a Web site where other people have created profiles and are sharing them with others. The Downloader will download and install all of the profiles that you choose.

• Sony 70-200mm 2.8 G SSM II on A77?

  Is the Sony 70-200mm f2.8 g SSM II taken in charge on the A77?  The description referred only full frame, not APS - C.

  Thanks, that's what I suspected.  I'll be sure to post my comments after I set up enough rolls of quarters to buy it!

  : - )

  I have an old Tamron 28-300 my Konica/Minolta Maxxum 7 days D and the image quality isn't so great.  It will be a quantum time for me!  Just that it was a bit more affordable... or that Sony had a 70-200 f4.0 alternative for my A77 wish.