70-300 L wide open definition. Big File.

People have stated that this zoom is not sharp wide open at 300.

Certainly, with regard to my one, they are dead wrong.

My usual whiskey bottle test, 1Dsiii, Tripod, 300mm f5.6

The fronts of the bottles are aligned so the curved ones have their very front in line.

Looks really good!

cheers
Sebastian

PS: I suspect that when the bottles are empty it will not look as sharp...

YOU are not drinking enough


--

I started in the 50's - my first picture was taken with a Leica and hooked me for life. I no longer use my Leicas, but I am still taking pictures. Some things never change.

One can even see the embossed print and the texture of the laphroaig label.

This lens is already on my wishlist, nice to see I'll be able to shoot my whisky bottles in unprecedented sharpness with it !

It is sharp probably but this image is oversharpeed too much to show the actual performance of the lens.

The heck with the lens. Break out the shot glasses.

Peter 13 said:

It is sharp probably but this image is oversharpeed too much to show the actual performance of the lens.

Click to expand...

How do you mean sharp, probably? You cannot make something this sharp unless it's fundalmentally sharp...

Here it is with default jpeg sharpening.

Gearóid Ó Laoi said:

Peter 13 said:

It is sharp probably but this image is oversharpeed too much to show the actual performance of the lens.

Click to expand...

How do you mean sharp, probably? You cannot make something this sharp unless it's fundalmentally sharp...

Click to expand...

Printed text (font not to small) can be sharpened very well. You are basically sharpening edges.

Gearóid Ó Laoi Garry Lee said:

Here it is with default jpeg sharpening.

Click to expand...

Looks very good, indeed. I am convinced now.

Gearóid Ó Laoi said:

People have stated that this zoom is not sharp wide open at 300.

Certainly, with regard to my one, they are dead wrong.

My usual whiskey bottle test, 1Dsiii, Tripod, 300mm f5.6

The fronts of the bottles are aligned so the curved ones have their very front in line.

Click to expand...

Not gonna lie, I was kinda looking forward to the end of the post having an Irish Galic saying that sounded like a wise proverb...

I really like when you do that

Oh, and the lens...very nice

Your sample looks good but that doesn't mean that all samples are the same. There really can be someone with a much worse sample.

James

true, but he did say "...in regards to mine"

I would love it if lens-rentals had the capacity to do there imatest comparison on some of these zooms to see if we could see some of the ranges of the best to worst

to be honest, I think we all get a little hypersensitive when we get ready to make a purchase that we want to be the best use of our money and begin to worry that luck is going to make that risky, it would be impossible to do this, but interesting if there was no internet or mass database of reviews and comparisons if any of the lenses that are highly praised and those that are commonly thrashed would have different perspectives cast

For example if say a given medium telephoto lens has marvelous colors/center resolution and is an amazing lens for portraits, but wide open is soft in the corners but stopped down is not, if the general understanding would be

"oh that lens is a most have and the best in its range" because the majority of photographers bought it for a purpose that when shot wide open has no reason to pixel peep the corners instead of the "well that lens is ok, but too soft in the corners wide open, you should really look at this lens" which then may have better resolution wide open, but not improve stopping down as much and then end up not performing as well as someone wanted for landscapes.....

I'm bored at work... sorry for the run on sentences, just my thoughts

also, wasn't trying to disagree with you, just that he didn't state it was a universal truth I just went on a huge tangent

i also realize the contrast in my wishes to experiment with a ton more data in one case and a lot less in the other, but that's me

Watch those bottles don't slide off the table!

to bobby1781

I guess I just get tired of threads telling you that if your lens is soft you must be blind, stupid or user error. No insult meant it was mostly previous threads that were getting to me.

I recently rented a 100-400l from Lens Rentals (you mentioned them) and I thought it was slightly soft at 400mm but I had heard that before on these forums so I assumed that it was that way normally. I decided to buy a new one and that one was quite a bit sharper than the one I rented so there was a lesson about variability even in L lenses. Who really knows if yours is the best, the worst or even the normal. I have had lenses that clearly beat the reviews I studied before buying them and some that were worse than the reviews.

I also had rented a 70-300l and it was not sharper than my 70-300is at 300mm. Actually my 70-300is was always quite sharp so both looked good to me. I have now sold the 70-300is and replaced it with a 100-400l
You take your chances with ervey lens you buy.
Another long ramble.

James