70-200 2.8 III

[antsy88]

Well, I got my 70-200 2.8 III with great expectations... Did my first shoot with it...its headed back to Canon tomorrow.

Nothing is sharp at F9 at 200th of a second on a tripod with a cable release. My old first version is a heck of a lot sharper and Im really bummed out. $2000 and what did I get??? possibly my first reshoot.

[ebiggs1]

"The lens is on its way to Canon and should be there tomorrow."

Your best answer.  If you didn't, even if it were to perform OK, you would always wonder. Keep in mind a lens is as sharp as it will ever be when it is manufactured. Unless a physical alteration is made it is what it is.

[Waddizzle]

---

@RobertTheFat wrote:

---

@ebiggs1 wrote:

"... that camera/lens combination required 12 points of autofocus microadjustment."

Keep in mind focus adjustment in the camera does not make a lens one bit sharper.  Nada, not any.

---

Well, I'm not sure I claimed that it does. What I do claim is that AFMA (if needed) makes the picture sharper – at least the part that matters. If that's a distinction without a difference, so be it.

---

It is very obvious that you didn’t claim that AFMA makes a lens sharper.  The lens focuses, but the camera body is what controls the show.

Some people do not understand that the camera and lens work together as a focusing system.  They are still stuck in the past, when lenses were manually focused, and the camera body made no difference how sharp a lens would be.