# Picture Styles: 5D Mark III



## bleephotography (Nov 27, 2012)

So I've been searching for preferred 5D III picture styles for stills, but all I can find are ones common for videography. Does anyone have any recommendations?

I only ask because I think that I may have subpar copies of the 24-70 II and 70-200 IS II; unless I add sharpening to my user-defined styles, or use one of the default presets with added sharpening, they look noticeably soft. I have been shooting in faithful/neutral without added sharpening, and the results are quite discouraging.

On the other hand, right off the bat without AFMA, my 100 macro IS is tack sharp even without added sharpening. Therefore, I don't think that my body's the issue. Either they are bad copies or they require significant calibration, perahps?


----------



## neuroanatomist (Nov 27, 2012)

Set up on a tripod, take the same picture 2-3 times with regular AF, then go to Live View and take 2-3 shots with Live AF (contrast detect). If the Live View images are sharper, you need AFMA. Some lenses require significant adjustment, and it varies with the combo (for example, your body could be off quite a bit, and your 100L is off by the same amount in the same direction, and your new lens could be 'perfect'). 

If the lens is soft even with live view, compared to the 100L for example, then I'd strongly consider exchanging it or sending it to Canon. You shouldn't need to boost sharpening with a picture style or during RAW conversion - the lens should be sharp, so look for the root cause...


----------



## bleephotography (Nov 28, 2012)

neuroanatomist said:


> Set up on a tripod, take the same picture 2-3 times with regular AF, then go to Live View and take 2-3 shots with Live AF (contrast detect). If the Live View images are sharper, you need AFMA. Some lenses require significant adjustment, and it varies with the combo (for example, your body could be off quite a bit, and your 100L is off by the same amount in the same direction, and your new lens could be 'perfect').
> 
> If the lens is soft even with live view, compared to the 100L for example, then I'd strongly consider exchanging it or sending it to Canon. You shouldn't need to boost sharpening with a picture style or during RAW conversion - the lens should be sharp, so look for the root cause...



Thanks, Neuro. After performing this test, I could not differentiate any noticeable sharpness variability between regular AF and Live View AF (contrast detect). Perhaps I am expecting too much from a 22MP sensor?

Here is a 100% crop of the Reikan Focal target at 24mm, about 4.5 feet away using a tripod and shutter release in silent mode, faithful picture style (no added sharpening):



ISO 100 f/11 1/25 sec.

And again at 70mm, same settings:




Even at 70mm (*still only 4.5 ft away* from the target) the text looks fairly soft to me. I know I may be pixel-peeping, but for a $2300 lens I expected it to at least match my 70-200. Currently, my 100 macro is my only prime and it simply destroys both of my zooms in terms of sharpness and contrast.

Any thoughts?


----------



## neuroanatomist (Nov 29, 2012)

bleephotography said:


> Any thoughts?



Send it back. Now.

I just took a similar shot with my 24-105mm f/4L IS - the IQ of the new 24-70 II should be better. Handheld, 24mm, 1/5 s (with IS on, but still...), f/4, ISO 800. Faithful picture style, sharpness = 0.


----------



## ishdakuteb (Nov 29, 2012)

probably wrong white balance makes it soft. try to correct your white balance prior to shoot the chart to see as if it makes a different. as if you would like to make further experiment, then shoot your chart with major wrong white balance with shifting toward to warm tone, you probably see what i am talking about.... i tried this before 

i tried everything though... ahahhaa... that is the reason why i am using my 30d most of the time. in case i broke it in in some stupid experiment, i will then not sit there and cry ;D


----------



## TrumpetPower! (Nov 29, 2012)

bleephotography said:


> Here is a 100% crop of the Reikan Focal target at 24mm, about 4.5 feet away using a tripod and shutter release in *silent mode*, faithful picture style (no added sharpening):
> ISO 100 *f/11 1/25 sec.*



Before you send it back, try these things:

* *Use live view autofocus.*
* Put a lot more light onto the scene. Your shutter is slow enough that a less-than-ideal tripod could easily be causing the softness, and you might even be seeing some mirror slap. Shoot outdoors in bright sunlight.
* Use mirror lockup (or shoot in live view, same thing).
* Make several exposures with the exact same setup (just keep clicking the shutter) and see if sharpness is differing between them.

You may have a bad lens, but right now I'm personally suspecting less-than-optimal technique.

Cheers,

b&


----------



## ishdakuteb (Nov 29, 2012)

or you can do this way (using photoshop):

1. add curve adjustment layer
2. set black to 3%
3. set white to 96%
4. take black i-dropper, drop on black
5. take white i-dropper, drop on white

i think it would come out perfect


----------



## PackLight (Nov 29, 2012)

I go with Neuro on this, send the 24-70 back now.
Most of what I have heard and what I have seen is the new 24-70 is extremely sharp at 24mm. It should be near prime sharp on the short end.
Some are experiencing problems on the long end. lensrental had an article a few days back where they said now that they have tested the lens more, the new 24-70 has about a 40% chance of being sharper than any random 70-200mm at 70mm. The initial article they did was based on a few lenses, they have since backed up from the original claims they made at 70mm.


----------



## bleephotography (Nov 30, 2012)

ishdakuteb said:


> probably wrong white balance makes it soft. try to correct your white balance prior to shoot the chart to see as if it makes a different. as if you would like to make further experiment, then shoot your chart with major wrong white balance with shifting toward to warm tone, you probably see what i am talking about.... i tried this before
> 
> i tried everything though... ahahhaa... that is the reason why i am using my 30d most of the time. in case i broke it in in some stupid experiment, i will then not sit there and cry ;D



Unfortunately, I tried all of that and still no difference.



TrumpetPower! said:


> bleephotography said:
> 
> 
> > Here is a 100% crop of the Reikan Focal target at 24mm, about 4.5 feet away using a tripod and shutter release in *silent mode*, faithful picture style (no added sharpening):
> ...



Thanks for the advice, but I tried all of that in ample light with live view (as Neuro suggested) with varying settings and it still didn't improve. I even tried it by stopping down further and opening wider, but still no improvement (although it did worsen at smaller apertures due to diffraction, obviously).



neuroanatomist said:


> bleephotography said:
> 
> 
> > Any thoughts?
> ...





PackLight said:


> I go with Neuro on this, send the 24-70 back now.
> Most of what I have heard and what I have seen is the new 24-70 is extremely sharp at 24mm. It should be near prime sharp on the short end.
> Some are experiencing problems on the long end. lensrental had an article a few days back where they said now that they have tested the lens more, the new 24-70 has about a 40% chance of being sharper than any random 70-200mm at 70mm. The initial article they did was based on a few lenses, they have since backed up from the original claims they made at 70mm.



Thanks all for the suggestions. I did end up sending it back yesterday and I put in a new order through B&H this time, instead of Kenmore Camera. Hopefully third time's a charm :-\


----------



## TrumpetPower! (Dec 1, 2012)

bleephotography said:


> Thanks for the advice, but I tried all of that in ample light with live view (as Neuro suggested) with varying settings and it still didn't improve.



Then sending it back was the right decision. Here's hoping the next one delivers!

b&


----------



## bleephotography (Dec 15, 2012)

TrumpetPower! said:


> bleephotography said:
> 
> 
> > Thanks for the advice, but I tried all of that in ample light with live view (as Neuro suggested) with varying settings and it still didn't improve.
> ...



Well, I just got my third copy of the 24-70 II in and preliminary report is that it is slightly sharper than the prior two out of box, and quite sharp after default sharpening in Lightroom (on a Retina display). This is before AFMA. I am about 80% satisfied, so here's hoping AFMA improves it by +20% for +100% satisfaction ;D

On a side note, it seems to be sharpest at f/2.8 and doesn't improve much, if at all, stopping down all the way to f/8, whence it slowly seems to decline.


----------

