70-200 f2.8L photos too soft

[uptheirons]

I am facing IQ issues with all photos I am capturing with my 70-200 on a 5dm4. Even when mounted on a tripod under good lighting conditions, I can't seem to get crisp photos. They come out pretty soft. I am not sure if its my technique or if there is some issue with the lens. I've never had any luck with this lens since I bought it but I always attribted that to my T2i. I sent it to canon for repair few months back and they told me there is dust on the glass and the mount has scratches, which I think is total BS as I hardly used the lens.

Even after coming back from the "repair", I still get very soft pics. I will test the lens for front and back focussing to see if that's the reason, but sometimes I seem to be getting ok shots. I am not sure if I am expecting too much out of this lens. Reading online many people attest to the quality of the lens. May be I got a bad one.

Any suggestions on how I can make sure its not the lens that defective?

Link to some raw files - https://photos.app.goo.gl/mXL3rNktA21e1f2P8.

Thanks!   

[uptheirons]

Just saw your previous post. I did upload the raw files but I think google photos converted them to jpg. How do I upload raw files on this forum? I tried that but the site complained that they are too big.

[ebiggs1]

Yes they would be so that is out.  You need something like Dropbox.

However form the sample, I did get to see in PS, your lens looks just fine. Don't go beyond 100% in viewing.  That is a critical viewing level for sure. If you shoot Raw format none of your camera settings are applied to the Raw file.  Always do a lens correction and a small amount of sharpening.  Less is more. I always do a levels adjustment in PS, too.  But that is mostly it.

There are similar adjustments in DPP4.

[uptheirons]

I do shoot only raw. It’s possible google photos stripped out all the meta data.

Thanks for assuring me that the lens is ok 😃. This thing has been stressing me out.

[Waddizzle]

---

@Ray-uk wrote:

Trying to assess sharpness by viewing at 200% is a complete waste of time because the software is just spreading the pixel information over a larger area than the natural resolution, there is no point in going above 100%.

---

That is both true and not true at the same time.  I lot depends upon the size of your screen, so let's assume a 15" laptop. 

"Trying to assess sharpness by viewing at 200%, on a 15-inch 2K display, is a complete waste of time". Now, this is TRUE!  A 2K display is your typical 1920 x 1080 Full HD display resolution.

I use a laptop with a 15" 4K display.  The display has a resolution of 3840 x 2160.  When I open a photo in most appplications, the image is typically displayed "fit" to the size of the window displaying it.  

Zooming to "100%" means use one display pixel per image pixel. In other words, display the image at a 1:1 ratio between display pixels and image pixels.  When I change the image from "fit" to "100%", the display does not change very much.  I am sill looking at most of an 20MP image.

If I want to actually "zoom in" on an image for a magnified view, then I need to select 200% or more to see a "magnified" view.

[ebiggs1]

"That is both true and not true at the same time." 

Of course a better monitor is better. But at 100% you are still at pixel level at least in PS. I don't know what editor or viewer you use.

I have a 32" monitor and PS opens up a full Raw file at 25% from the 1DX.

If you increase to more than one 100% you are asking the computer guess. A Raw file can only reproduce an image at the resolution it was taken at. If you blow it up the image further than 100%, it will try to do it. However, what you see will be a best guess. Your computer will try to show the current pixels replicated outwards. Each pixel will be surrounded by replicas of itself. This will make your picture look blurry.  100% is 100%.

To the OP don't do that!

[Waddizzle]

---

@ebiggs1 wrote:

"That is both true and not true at the same time." 

Of course a better monitor is better. But at 100% you are still at pixel level at least in PS. I don't know what editor or viewer you use.

I have a 32" monitor and PS opens up a full Raw file at 25% from the 1DX.

If you increase to more than one 100% you are asking the computer guess. A Raw file can only reproduce an image at the resolution it was taken at. If you blow it up the image further than 100%, it will try to do it. However, what you see will be a best guess. Your computer will try to show the current pixels replicated outwards. Each pixel will be surrounded by replicas of itself. This will make your picture look blurry.  100% is 100%.

To the OP don't do that!

---

You're talking about pixel binning.  When I zoom to 200%, the number of pixels needed to display the image is doubled in along horizontal and vertical axis.  This means four display pixels, 2 x 2, are used to display one image pixel.  No image processing required.

I have a couple of 27" 1920 x 1080 monitors, too.  Images do look bad when I zoom past 100%. 

[ebiggs1]

OK then you are not actually viewing at 100% pixel level.  That was my point.