# Please help - just bought a new (used) lens...



## wayler (Mar 16, 2015)

I just bought a used Canon 70-200mm f/4 IS USM and took it out for the first time today to try it out with the horses at the Salt River in AZ. After seeing the photos when I got home, I am a little worried that something may be wrong with the lens, although hopefull there was just something wrong me (cheaper to fix!). The images are horribly soft, almost orton like at the far range nearing 200mm. I have never used a lens over a 135mm prior to today and in hindsight could have probably gone with a little narrower aperture (most were at 5.6) for a little greater DOF, but even with that, many of the pictures are really bad, so soft you you can't see any areas of focus. There are images around 135mm or less that do look nice - any thoughts on what is wrong?

First one is an egret at 200mm


----------



## wayler (Mar 16, 2015)

Another egret at 200mm


----------



## tirediron (Mar 16, 2015)

Interesting...  it almost looks like motion blur, but at 1/1500, that's unlikely.  Was the bird your point of focus?

Looking at the second one, it very definitely looks like motion blur; how were you holding the camera/lens?


----------



## wayler (Mar 16, 2015)

Horse at 200mm


----------



## wayler (Mar 16, 2015)

horse at 200mm


----------



## wayler (Mar 16, 2015)

Another horse at 169mm


----------



## wayler (Mar 16, 2015)

A few better ones - horses at 111mm


----------



## tirediron (Mar 16, 2015)

Do you have a tripod?


----------



## wayler (Mar 16, 2015)

@78mm


----------



## wayler (Mar 16, 2015)

Tirediron - I have one, but was not using a tripod. Most of the shots were at about 1/1500 so I didn't think I would need one at that speed. Also, they are always on the move so I wanted to be able to move along with them and at that shutter speed didn't think it would be an issue???


----------



## tirediron (Mar 16, 2015)

Okay, I'm going to try and solve the puzzle Alex...  I'm going to guess that this is a combination of three factors.  In descending order of impact:  (1) missed focus; (2) shallow DoF due to large aperture; and (3) some camera movement, perhaps due to improper support techniques.


----------



## tirediron (Mar 16, 2015)

wayler said:


> Tirediron - I have one, but was not using a tripod. Most of the shots were at about 1/1500 so I didn't think I would need one at that speed. Also, they are always on the move so I wanted to be able to move along with them and at that shutter speed didn't think it would be an issue???


You're right, at that speed camera movement should NOT be an issue; I asked not because I thought you should have used one (with practice and good technique, you can handhold a 600mm f4), but in order to verify the functionality of the lens.  Put it on the tripod, focus on something ~100' away, select a medium (~f8) aperture, and at least 1/500.  If the area of focus is sharp, you're good to go.


----------



## wayler (Mar 16, 2015)

Tirediron - thanks for you reply! As I have not used a lens of this length before, perhaps my support technique is a little sloppy, masked previously by wider focal lengths, although I felt at the time like I was fairly steady, particularly in relation to the shutter speed. If this is the case than perhaps that would cover your first 2 points as well. But if you look at the egret photos, there doesn't seem to be anything in focus if the support technique is not the issue. I will have to experiment tomorrow with a tripod and see if I can note a difference...


----------



## Gary A. (Mar 16, 2015)

Based upon your settings ... either you have a bum lens or the camera wasn't AF-ing properly. Since you're not complaining about the focus of your other lenses ... I'd get the lens checked out by an independent repair shop. Lens alignments are not that hard. The 70-200 f/4 is one of Canon's sharpest zoom. 

PS- Did you have the IS engaged?


----------



## wayler (Mar 16, 2015)

Thanks Gary - yeah, never have had any problems like this before with any other camera/lens combos I have (Canon 7D with 10-22mm, 35mm, 85mm, 24-105 and 28-135). Lens settings were the 1.2 m focus range, AF on, IS on and stabilizer mode 1. I'll retry tomorrow with test shots on a tripod. Any other thoughts greatly appreciated...


----------



## wayler (Mar 16, 2015)

Missed seeing this post earlier - Bird was the point of focus, I was using the center point plus the 1 point on each side of center, so it's possible that could have caused a missed focus, but I am having a hard time seeing any point of focus on those. I was using the view finder, not the live view screen so it was pressed up against my face with left hand steadying lens and right hand on camera body.


tirediron said:


> Interesting...  it almost looks like motion blur, but at 1/1500, that's unlikely.  Was the bird your point of focus?
> 
> Looking at the second one, it very definitely looks like motion blur; how were you holding the camera/lens?


----------



## tirediron (Mar 16, 2015)

I couldn't find a point of focus in that one either.  Looking at them again, full-res and over the whole image, I think perhaps Gary may be right.  Were you getting an 'in focus' indication?


----------



## wayler (Mar 16, 2015)

tirediron said:


> I couldn't find a point of focus in that one either.  Looking at them again, full-res and over the whole image, I think perhaps Gary may be right.  Were you getting an 'in focus' indication?


Yeah - I got a beep and red flash on the focus points. I don't have any experience at this point with having lens work done - do you guys think if this is a lens issue it is potentially fixable? Thought I got a pretty good deal on the lens at $770, but hoping my savings over a new purchase are not eaten up with a repair or worse, not repairable at all...


----------



## tirediron (Mar 16, 2015)

Do some experimenting at various apertures and focal lengths using a tripod to verify that the lens is, or is not operating correctly.  It could be as simple as using your AF fine-adjust to 'dial the lens in', but I wouldn't hold my breath.  I'm a Nikonian, so I have no knowledge of Canon repair services, but if the lens is faulty and was a Nikon, I'd guess it was a $300 - 350 repair.


----------



## wayler (Mar 16, 2015)

tirediron said:


> Do some experimenting at various apertures and focal lengths using a tripod to verify that the lens is, or is not operating correctly.  It could be as simple as using your AF fine-adjust to 'dial the lens in', but I wouldn't hold my breath.  I'm a Nikonian, so I have no knowledge of Canon repair services, but if the lens is faulty and was a Nikon, I'd guess it was a $300 - 350 repair.


Sounds good - I'll work with it on the tripod tomorrow and see what I come up with. While I have not had to do any equipment repairs in the past, the local place I know to go to in AZ is Tempe Camera. Without endorsing a particular business, do you think this is a good way to go or do you think I need to send it in to Canon?


----------



## Derrel (Mar 16, 2015)

The lens is seriously out of calibration. I expect that at least one element is extremely loose, not just de-centered, but practically rattling around inside with its retaining ring not even screwed into place. 

Likely scenarios:A)It's been dropped, and something is seriously out of alignment, or B)it was disassembled by the previous owner and put back together on a kitchen table after a few vodka and tonics. B) is a likely scenarios after the original owner saw four or five dust specks inside his lens, and he decided to "fix the problem".

Look at the central area at 111mm,and it's ONLY sharp in one tiny area...

http://www.thephotoforum.com/attachments/_mg_9487-jpg.97196/

At longer focal lengths, the images are utter garbage. The seller no doubt knew the lens was duff. You bought a bum steer.


----------



## tirediron (Mar 16, 2015)

Derrel said:


> The lens is seriously out of calibration. I expect that at least one element is extremely loose, not just de-centered, but practically rattling around inside with its retaining ring not even screwed into place..


Hmmm... I hadn't considered that possibility; does the lens make any noise when you move/shake it?  A "free floating" element would certainly explain the lack of consistency between the images.


----------



## DarkShadow (Mar 16, 2015)

I have this lens and it's tack sharp through out its focal range and even wide open. Are you sure the IS working on the lens? you should hear a constant sound as long as the shutter is press halfway but even so at those shutter speeds shouldn't even need it. I posted a few shots you should  expect from this lens.

This one is @ 200mm 1/640 f/4.0



IMG_0298 by DarkShadow191145, on Flickr

Not sure the EXIF on this one,it seems to have lost after editing.This was a heavy crop.



13563059614_1e8099fb08_b-1 by DarkShadow191145, on Flickr


----------



## wayler (Mar 16, 2015)

tirediron said:


> Derrel said:
> 
> 
> > The lens is seriously out of calibration. I expect that at least one element is extremely loose, not just de-centered, but practically rattling around inside with its retaining ring not even screwed into place..
> ...


Oh no...I hadn't noticed it before, but I just checked and do feel a slight rattle. Does this change my ability or price to have it repaired??? Will try and contact the seller about his history with it, but I doubt he's going to happily turn the money back over to me...


----------



## wayler (Mar 16, 2015)

Yes - this is what I was expecting!!! Getting a little nervous I may have wasted a bunch of money...



DarkShadow said:


> I have this lens and it's tack sharp through out its focal range and even wide open. Are you sure the IS working on the lens? you should hear a constant sound as long as the shutter is press halfway but even so at those shutter speeds shouldn't even need it. I posted a few shots you should  expect from this lens.
> 
> This one is @ 200mm 1/640 f/4.0
> 
> ...


----------



## tirediron (Mar 16, 2015)

It's hard to say, but if it is a loose/mis-aligned element, I wouldn't even want to guess at the price.  It could be an easy fix, or it could be beyond saving.  I have to ask though, did you not test the lens thoroughly before handing over the money?


----------



## DarkShadow (Mar 16, 2015)

I think Derrel is on the money.This is why I am afraid of buying used glass unless its refurb by the manufacturer.


----------



## wayler (Mar 16, 2015)

tirediron said:


> It's hard to say, but if it is a loose/mis-aligned element, I wouldn't even want to guess at the price.  It could be an easy fix, or it could be beyond saving.  I have to ask though, did you not test the lens thoroughly before handing over the money?


Well, I guess the word "thoroughly" would seem to be up for some debate...
Admittedly, my working knowledge from an internal parts perspective is pretty limited. When I purchased it, I took my camera along and took some test shots and in terms of looking at the live view thought things looked fine, although I didn't zoom in on the photos which in hindsight seems to have been a mistake. In reality I realize I probably don't have the knowledge to really accurately asses the various potential problems to look for when buying a used lens. Thank you all for you help - guess I'll take it in tomorrow to have it looked at. Just sent a politely worded email to the seller inquiring about his history with the lens...


----------



## tirediron (Mar 17, 2015)

wayler said:


> tirediron said:
> 
> 
> > It's hard to say, but if it is a loose/mis-aligned element, I wouldn't even want to guess at the price.  It could be an easy fix, or it could be beyond saving.  I have to ask though, did you not test the lens thoroughly before handing over the money?
> ...


 Good luck!


----------



## fjrabon (Mar 17, 2015)

yep, no way that this is user error.  The images don't even look like missed focus, they have that sort of "off calibration look" I used to see when one of the photographers at the studio I used to work for would drop a lens.  It's like it's out of focus, but more "nervous" looking is the only way I can think to describe it.


----------



## ronlane (Mar 17, 2015)

If an element is loose and you send it back to Canon for repair, you are looking at the $200 range for repair. (Speaking from experience, because, I sent my 70-200mm f/4 back to them for this very thing in December 2014.)


----------



## DarkShadow (Mar 17, 2015)

Being the Value of this lens even at used prices is worth fixing If its around the couple hundred dollar range.If anything, the little shipping cost back to canon is worth the trip to have canon look at it.


----------



## ronlane (Mar 17, 2015)

@DarkShadow that was exactly how I was with it. They look at it and determine what needs work and how much before you have to decide. If you don't want to, they ship it back to you.

I had already spent the $500 for the lens and I would have to add twice that to it to get the 2.8, so I fixed mine and it was well worth the expense. (I still want the 2.8 but I can wait now)


----------



## pgriz (Mar 17, 2015)

That model of lens is very, very good - I have a copy and it's super sharp.  I think Derrel has diagnosed the problem right.  If the seller won't refund you the money, then getting the lens fixed by Canon is probably worth it - one it's fixed, it'll be a favourite.


----------



## TCampbell (Mar 18, 2015)

When the optics are in question, you really MUST perform carefully controlled testing -- no live shots because too many things can cause weird problems.  

Put the camera on a tripod, if a lens has IS... switch it off.  Carefully focus at a flat target (tape a piece of newsprint to a wall -- something with LOTS of contrasty detail from corner to corner.)   Take some test shots.  Run focus out to infinity... force the camera to re-focus and take more test shots.  Run the focus in to minimum distance... force the camera to re-focus and take even more test shots.    Now you have data.  You KNOW the camera wasn't moving.   You KNOW the subject wasn't moving.   You KNOW the IS was switched off so it wasn't moving.   And since you took lots of shots that forced re-focusing from max distance and min distance, you can determine if it focuses correctly when coming from one direction vs. the other.  

Some of those shots look like the lens has coma (astigmatism -- that would be caused by a lens element not being collimated -- so it's out of alignment or askew).    But I can't be sure unless you take all the variables out (eliminate the possibility of human error from hand-held photography or moving subjects, etc.)


----------



## Tinderbox (UK) (Mar 18, 2015)

I read that IS does not work over 1/500? of a second and can cause problems if it is used, have you tried turning it off, 1/1500 does not really need IS.

John.


----------



## DarkShadow (Mar 18, 2015)

I think IS can cause problems on with higher shutter speeds with any lens,but I haven't experienced this with this lens.Here is a shot  @ 1/4000  f/4.o  @ 187.0 mm IS on.



IMG_1993 by DarkShadow191145, on Flickr


----------



## Mr. Innuendo (Mar 19, 2015)

Derrel said:


> The lens is seriously out of calibration. I expect that at least one element is extremely loose, not just de-centered, but practically rattling around inside with its retaining ring not even screwed into place.



I agree with Derrel. There's really not a single thing positive to say about the samples you've provided. One of the images is out of whack to the point where I'd have guessed it was shot with a Lens Baby as opposed to that lens.


----------



## W.Y.Photo (Mar 19, 2015)

I have this exact issue with an old 18-200 nikkor lens I bought at an auction. I was unaware that it was repairable. Now that I know I'm going to pay a visit to a camera store.


----------



## wayler (Apr 12, 2015)

Just wanted to thank everyone for their input - ronlane was correct in terms of price, total cost for repair including shipping was $255. While disappointing and a lesson learned, I am still happy that the used price paid plus repair costs still came in under what the new price is. Thanks again for all the help!


----------



## owlxxx (May 1, 2015)

I just got my 80-200mm 2.8 ed back from nikon.  They replaced the AF motor, focusing ring, a/m switch, rubber rings, general cleaning,   $200.  it took them a week.  They also check infinity focus, lens mount, communications, auto focus operation.  Not a bad price in my opinion.


----------



## Patriot (May 12, 2015)

owlxxx said:


> I just got my 80-200mm 2.8 ed back from nikon.  They replaced the AF motor, focusing ring, a/m switch, rubber rings, general cleaning,   $200.  it took them a week.  They also check infinity focus, lens mount, communications, auto focus operation.  Not a bad price in my opinion.



Did you ask for all of that specifically? I have the Af-s version of this lens and the motor is going out. It is also not very sharp so it may need to be tuned.


----------



## raventepes (May 14, 2015)

I hate to say it, but that's one heck of a lesson learned. At least it's repairable though, and at a good rate. My condolences. 

For what it's worth for buying lenses in the future, especially if you're going to buy used, I find it's usually best to stick with reputable retailers...the bigger names like Adorama, BH Photo, and Keh, to name a few. Amazon can be great, but you really have to pay attention to the seller, and I'd say it's worth just staying away from Ebay. 

I hope you can get the lens fixed soon. It's a great piece of glass when its working right!


----------

