RF100-500 soft at 500. did I get a bad one?

[doug86]

I Purchased a new RF100-500mm last month, and took it out in the field for a month. But out of the box, it wasn't producing sharp images with my R6 body. When shooting some birds in flight, I was next to a friend who had the same lens on his R3, so we swapped lenses and did a test. He shot both his lens, then mine, shooting in manual so the settings remained the same. Same light, same bird about one minute apart. 

Here are the two, side by side. The one on the left is my lens (which I think is soft) and the picture on the right is his lens. What do you think? (Zoomed in with Lightroom) 

[ebiggs1]

Got to say this so just hold on, but almost all OOF or soft images are user caused and not camera or lens issues. Now that is not to say there can't be a camera/les problem but keep in  mind the chances are small.

However you can't use the samples you displayed as proof. You need to set up a real static test where everything is essentially exactly the same. A good tripod and a good test subject are best. Exact settings and camera. You know all the same. Same, same completely. So, don't discount your lens yet.

[doug86]

---

@ebiggs1 wrote:

Got to say this so just hold on, but almost all OOF or soft images are user caused and not camera or lens issues. Now that is not to say there can't be a camera/les problem but keep in  mind the chances are small.

However you can't use the samples you displayed as proof. You need to set up a real static test where everything is essentially exactly the same. A good tripod and a good test subject are best. Exact settings and camera. You know all the same. Same, same completely. So, don't discount your lens yet.

---

sure, that I understand. the problem is, I don't have 2 identical lenses, so this was simply an opportunity to do some testing. I understand that is is usually settings and user caused, but I have 30 years shooting canon lenses and bodies, and I feel that I have a realistic expectation of their capabilities. This particular lens was new, but I'm pretty sure its a grey market lens (from Abe's of Maine), as they are not an authorized Canon dealer. 

The question remains: do you think those two photos show equal sharpness? The settings are clearly shown in my post.

[jrhoffman75]

Assuming all the post processing settings were the same I would agree that the image of the bird on the left is not acceptably sharp.

But, it looks like the water on the left is sharper than the water on the right, so perhaps there is a focus issue? Was one camera AI Servo and the other One Shot AF? Can you post a link to the RAW files?

[March411]

You can still achieve your goal with your lens by controlling the environment.

• Set up the camera on a tripod with good lighting, outside will be fine if you have good skies.
• Place an item with some detail on a surface, a statue, animal figurine, toy or something with text. I use a shovel handle with a textured grip that has screws and a logo on it. B&H or Amazon has Back focus Chart and White Cards that work well if you want to drop a couple bucks.
• Setup at a max distance where the item fills a good portion of your viewfinder and take some test images.
• Use a remote or two second timer to take the picture, it will give you more clues to the real issue. You may be moving when you shutter the lens. Eliminate potential challenges and variables with hard controls.

This will give you a good indication on how to evaluate if it's you or possibly an issue with the equipment.

[doug86]

both photos are with the same camera, swapping lenses. The shutter speed is 1/5000 on both, so camera shake would be eliminated in that case, even with NO IS in play. I'll try to post the raw somewhere.

[March411]

I would agree with John, the one on the left the water is sharper and the one on the right it appears that the eye/head is sharper.

That was my rational for trying some controlled exposures with the tripod.

[doug86]

https://photos.app.goo.gl/73b6nB3LqL2SjCJE6

first photo was with the suspect lens (my lens), other photo is with my friends lens. Both shot on HIS R3, with same settings. I think the background difference is due to the bird's distance from the waves. The photos were taken about one minute apart.

[jrhoffman75]

It looks like the files are converted to small JPEGs when downloaded. Can you use Dropbox?

[wq9nsc]

I also agree with John that there isn't a clear sharpness difference but instead where the critical focus occurred.  This was a BIF so you have the focus system predicting movement and predictions aren't perfect.  It would be no difference than shooting a fast series where some of the images from the sequence are near perfect while others are less so.

Both appear to be cropped so severely that they are into the "pixel peeping" mode such that neither has acceptable image quality at that level of cropping.

Rodger