Help with focus: Canon EOS R with EF 70-200mm f/2.8 IS II and adapter ring

[cdisimone]

I had been using the EOS 5D Mark II for quite sometime until I recently bought the Canon EOS R. Today I tried my EF 70-200mm f/2.8 IS II for the first time with the EOS R. Admittedly, this is my most underutilized lens so I don't have a lot of shots to compare to, but I got some seriously disappointing results today when just shooting objects in my yard. I had a lot of trouble focusing using the center focus point on the smallest setting. Maybe I am doing something wrong... looking for some guidance.

I have had tack sharp images with the other EF lenses I have tried with the EOS R so I'm hoping it is something I am doing... and that there is nothing wrong with the lens. My test shots were all handheld but on a pretty fast shutter speed, wide open and zoomed in at 200mm, and I was sitting and leaning my back against a wall so I should have been pretty still as well. I used single shot focus in the center and just snapped the photo.. no recomposing, no al servo, no choosing alternate focus points. Just center the subject and shoot. 

Can anyone tell me what is going wrong here? I didn't get one clear shot of the squirrel, or the bird.

Photo 1 (squirrel): https://flic.kr/p/2iNDbwc

Photo 1 Focus Point: https://flic.kr/p/2iNEVdP

Photo 2 (bird): https://flic.kr/p/2iNEUEV

Photo 2 Focus Point: https://flic.kr/p/2iNEVdo

If there's a better way to share photos here or if it's better to load right into this window, please let me know. I'm new here!

Thanks!

[Waddizzle]

From the EOS R Advanced User Manual

Every camera sold today has this type of focusing ability, including your 5D2.  Use the default normal setting.  As I explained in a previous reply, the "spot" may not be where you think it is.  Besides, your subjects seem smaller than the spot.  Use the normal AF point mode, evaluative metering, keep it simple.  Try Ernie's tests.  Use a tripod, or your table.  The timer delayed shutter is a good thing.  If the lens works on the 5D2, then there is nothing wrong with it.

[ebiggs1]

"... the switches were on the 2.8m-infinity setting, IS On, Mode 1."

This is not and was not the problem.

[ebiggs1]

" Let's set up a test."

What happened with the test?  I would not try to over think this, it isn't that complicated.  You need only simple settings to do what you want if the "test" came out good, there was/is nothing wrong with your gear.  You just missed that first shot.

How about resetting your cameras back to factory default.  Clear all settings.  The set it to P mode, ISO 200, average WB and large jpg.  Go out on a nice day and try some normal average shots of several differing subjects. A tree a house a car a dog some good contrast stuff.  If the pictures look good, than there isn't for sure anything wrong with your gear and you did just miss that first squirrel.

Don't over think it and don't let others cause you to over think it.  Do the test for piece of mind if nothing else.

[Waddizzle]

---

@ebiggs1 wrote:

"... the switches were on the 2.8m-infinity setting, IS On, Mode 1."

This is not and was not the problem.

---

If the switches do not make a difference, then why are they there?  

One switch sets MFD at 1.5m, while the other sets MFD at 2.5M.  The lens focuses a little faster and sharper on distant objects in the 2.5M position.  When it is set to 1.5M, the result is shots that look like these.  Sharp, but not quite tack sharp. 

[cdisimone]

---

@ebiggs1 wrote:

" Let's set up a test."

What happened with the test?  

---

My test shots were mostly fine. In focus but maybe a tad soft.

Test shot on Manual at 1/1250 sec, f2.8, ISO 400 resting on a table with 2 second timer.

https://flic.kr/p/2iPdHx1

It looks plenty sharp in the Flickr preview size but when viewing at 100% in Lightroom it doesn't look quite as sharp. I did the same shot at f4 and f5.6 and they're all about the same sharpness at 100% but all were in focus.

I am glad nothing seems to be wrong with the lens, and yes, the problem with the real squirrel is definitely that I missed focus due to the subject being so small in the frame.. but I still don't really understand how it focused where it did. I guess that is why I initially sought opinions from others. To me, if I had missed the mark, it would have focused on the pot or further back on the grass, and it didn't make sense tao me what had happened.

I will continue to test it out in some more real life examples instead of shooting a stuffed animal in a pot with the camera resting on a table with a 2 second timer 🙂 

Thanks to all of you who took the time to comment. Appreciate it.

[rs-eos]

Regarding the statement "ISO 1000 is an odd number"...  I believe that was probably made in reference to the situation where the "in-between" ISO values may be more noisy.

It's important to say may since it's not true that all cameras exhibit this.  When I first read such statements made years ago, I ran my own tests (several others have well over the years).  And the answer ultimately depends on your camera.

For my older EOS 6D and now EOS 5D IV, the "in-between" values don't have higher noise than the next higher "integral" setting.  i.e. noise strictly increases from ISO 100, 125, 160, 200, etc.

[cdisimone]

---

@ebiggs1 wrote:

" Let's set up a test."

What happened with the test? 

---

My replies to this keep disappearing after I post. I was able to go back and copy and paste before but I lost the text now and don't feel like rewriting everything. Not sure what's happening. Did anyone see my reply with test results?

[Waddizzle]

---

@cdisimone wrote:

---

@ebiggs1 wrote:

" Let's set up a test."

What happened with the test? 

---

My replies to this keep disappearing after I post. I was able to go back and copy and paste before but I lost the text now and don't feel like rewriting everything. Not sure what's happening. Did anyone see my reply with test results?

---

There is an automated filter that detects bad links.  Your links to Flicker might be the reason.  It is easy to upload photos to the forum.

[ebiggs1]

"The lens focuses a little faster and sharper on distant objects in the 2.5M position.  When it is set to 1.5M, the result is shots that look like these.  Sharp, but not quite tack sharp."

Now you and I both know that is ridiculous and nonsense.  The lens may and does focus slower when on 1.5m~inf. compared to 2.5m but not any less sharp. A lens does not can not change it's "sharpness".  They are what they are from day one and on.

[RobertTheFat]

---

@ebiggs1 wrote:

"The lens focuses a little faster and sharper on distant objects in the 2.5M position.  When it is set to 1.5M, the result is shots that look like these.  Sharp, but not quite tack sharp."

Now you and I both know that is ridiculous and nonsense.  The lens may and does focus slower when on 1.5m~inf. compared to 2.5m but not any less sharp. A lens does not can not change it's "sharpness".  They are what they are from day one and on.

---

No, the lens doesn't change its sharpness. But that doesn't necessarily guarantee, in any given situation, that it will exhibit the same focusing accuracy in both switch positions. It may in fact be so, but to dismiss as "nonsense" the possibility that it isn't, seems a bit of a stretch.