Well first, just checking Canon's Website, the Sure Shot 76 Zoom is
autofocus. I'm not sure if that's the same thing as the Megazoom 76 or not,
but I'll bet the Megazoom uses autofocus of some kind. The blanket
statement that "acceptable quality..." shows your frustration, and I don't
blame you. When I bought an Elan IIe two years ago with the kit lens, I was
very disappointed with the results. That's when I started doing reading
about technique and doing online research like you're doing. Autofocus can
and does yield excellent results. My early frustrations were cause by my
not understanding what else it took took to get crisp photos with good
contrast and saturations. After all, many pro wildlife, sports,
photojounalist, and even some portrait photographers use autofocus. Here's
what you might consider as causing your frustration.
1. It could be your print film processor. Shoot some rolls of slides to be
sure (Provia 100F ought to do, Velvia even better). They won't lie about
the sharpness.
2. Use a tripod and a good one at that (not a Ritz Camera Store "Slik"
anything). The longer the focal length, the more important it is to use a
tripod. Otherwise, the shutterspeed need to be a reciprical of the focal
length to be sharp, and that's no guarantee. You still need to use good
technique to be steady.
3. Three of the lenses you mentioned are so-so from what I've read (22-55,
75-300, and not though not specifically rated, I wouldn't expect the 28-200
to be sharp--to broad a zoom range). The 28-105 is the sharpest of your
lenses, but even it does not get the best reviews. You don't have to spend
a lot of money to get a sharp lens, get a $80 Canon 50mm f1.8 if you want to
see incredibly sharp. Look on photodo.com for objective lens test, and
camerareview.com and photographyreview.com for subjective user opinions.
They're not gospel, but they give you a starting point. Don't trust Pop
Photo reviews.
4. While I'm sure there are lots more things to consider (f-stop for depth
of field, use of lens hood, etc.), the important thing is not to give up. I
know it is very frustrating to spend $$$$ on "high-tech" systems and see
them not perform as good as the Point and Shoots, but hang in there. The
camera's you've purchased give you creative control you'll never have with a
point and shoot, but like a high performance car, you have to use it with
proper knowledge and technique to get the maximum value out of it. Trust
me, when you see your first macro shot of the petals of a flower shot on
velvia, you'll be blown away.
Cheers, JD
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Dr. John
> Sent: Saturday, September 08, 2001 6:43 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: EOS Lens Quality
>
>
> I recently upgraded my 35mm equipment to EOS cameras and lenses,
> including an Elan IIe and Elan 7e bodies. I also have a 28-105 II USM,
> a 28-200 USM, 75-300 III USM, and a 22-55 USM. The quality in my photos
> even in 4 X 6 size is just not there. Since changing to the EOS system,
> my photos are not sharp and appear to be of low contrast with all of the
> above mentioned lenses. This is happening at all focal lengths,
> especially at the wide angle settings. I've taken all these photos at
> relatively fast shutter speeds (faster than 1/125 sec) and small
> apertures (5.8 or 8 or smaller). I've tried different film (usually ISO
> 200 or 100) and processing to no avail.
>
> I am beginning to think that acceptable quality is just not possible
> with AF lenses. The photos from my canon Megazoom 76 are actually much
> sharper! Any comments or ideas as to what is happening? Thanks!
>
*
****
*******
***********************************************************
* For list instructions, including unsubscribe, see:
* http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/eos_list.htm
***********************************************************
