AVForums

Our philosophy in our forums, reviews, podcasts and feature videos is to promote audio and visual excellence by gathering and sharing the best information and resources available.

Help

To begin please visit our help section »

Not a Member Yet?

It only takes a minute to start enjoying the benefits of AVForums membership, and it's free!

Member Log in

Sigma 17-70: soft?? needs calibration?? faulty??

Post Reply
Old 13-06-2008, 2:40 PM   #1
Veteran Member
 
1LeeDenton's Avatar
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Stafford
Experience Points:
25,710, Level: 39
Points: 25,710, Level: 39 Points: 25,710, Level: 39 Points: 25,710, Level: 39
Activity: 0.4%
Activity: 0.4% Activity: 0.4% Activity: 0.4%
Thanks: Gave 2,943, Got 1,715
Posts: 7,358
Question Sigma 17-70: soft?? needs calibration?? faulty??

Hi all,

I was bought a Sigma 17-70 for Christmas as a replacement to the 400D Kit Lens (non IS version), and initially I was very impressed with the whole package.

However, it's started to strike me recently that I seem to be getting a lot of soft/mushy/out of focus shots from the combination. I've just been testing it now, and even on high ISO like 800/1600, with a decent aperture of 6.3/7.1 etc, fast shutter speed, AF lights red and beeps, yet the resultant picture looks out of focus....there's nothing in the shot that strikes me as even sharp, never mind tack sharp.

So, I'm wondering whether lenses can often be 'pups' from the minute they leave the factory, or they can be supplied 'out of calibration' or something?? Mine hasn't had that much use since December last year, and has recieved zero knocks/drops etc, and been stored in my Lowepro bag very securely.

I remember when I was researching my first new lens I saw some illustration shots with the Sigma 17-70 and I was really impressed by the increase in PQ, but at the moment I just don't feel that's what I'm getting. Does it need to go back to the retailer?? Does it need a visit to Sigma??

Any suggestions are most welcome.
  Quote
Old 13-06-2008, 2:43 PM   #2
Prominent Member
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Swindon
Experience Points:
13,312, Level: 27
Points: 13,312, Level: 27 Points: 13,312, Level: 27 Points: 13,312, Level: 27
Activity: 54.2%
Activity: 54.2% Activity: 54.2% Activity: 54.2%
Thanks: Gave 1, Got 523
Posts: 4,528
Re: Sigma 17-70: soft?? needs calibration?? faulty??

The focussing is a closed loop system and sharp focus is determined by the camera. In other words, all the camera does is adjust the focus motor on the lens until the camera thinks the image is in focus.

I'd say it was more likely to be an issue with the camera than the lens. Do you still have your kit lens to do a comparison?
  Quote
Old 13-06-2008, 2:50 PM   #3
Veteran Member
 
1LeeDenton's Avatar
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Stafford
Experience Points:
25,710, Level: 39
Points: 25,710, Level: 39 Points: 25,710, Level: 39 Points: 25,710, Level: 39
Activity: 0.4%
Activity: 0.4% Activity: 0.4% Activity: 0.4%
Thanks: Gave 2,943, Got 1,715
Posts: 7,358
Re: Sigma 17-70: soft?? needs calibration?? faulty??

Quote:
Originally Posted by stevelup View Post
The focussing is a closed loop system and sharp focus is determined by the camera. In other words, all the camera does is adjust the focus motor on the lens until the camera thinks the image is in focus.

I'd say it was more likely to be an issue with the camera than the lens. Do you still have your kit lens to do a comparison?
Unfortunately not - sold it pretty much straight away. It's such a strange one, some lengths/settings come back really good, but other times it looks really mushy I'm no pro, but I'm pretty confident I've a sufficient understanding of exposure settings to ensure that my shots are sharp, so I'm just a bit confused really...
  Quote
Old 13-06-2008, 2:56 PM   #4
Prominent Member
Join Date: Oct 2005
Experience Points:
12,582, Level: 26
Points: 12,582, Level: 26 Points: 12,582, Level: 26 Points: 12,582, Level: 26
Activity: 8.7%
Activity: 8.7% Activity: 8.7% Activity: 8.7%
Thanks: Gave 270, Got 393
Posts: 3,166
Re: Sigma 17-70: soft?? needs calibration?? faulty??

1) Put the camera on a tripod

2a) focus manually and do a series of shots at different apertures.
2b) Repeat the test using Auto Focus.

And compare the results.

You probably want to repeat the tests at different distances.

To add to this...
If you get sharp results with manual focus but not with AF - it's probably a calibration issue with the lens, which means going back to Sigma - it's not a big task, more of a pain than anything else.
It obviously could also be the camera, but less likely.
When testing, use your Base ISO setting (ISO100 or 200) for the best quality.

Last edited by springtide; 13-06-2008 at 3:17 PM.
  Quote
Thanks from:
1LeeDenton (13-06-2008)
Old 13-06-2008, 2:59 PM   #5
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Near Lampeter
Experience Points:
5,013, Level: 16
Points: 5,013, Level: 16 Points: 5,013, Level: 16 Points: 5,013, Level: 16
Activity: 9.1%
Activity: 9.1% Activity: 9.1% Activity: 9.1%
Thanks: Gave 62, Got 72
Posts: 1,015
Re: Sigma 17-70: soft?? needs calibration?? faulty??

Two points.

1. You don't mention using a tripod which is essential if you want to check sharpness of a lens.
2. High ISO should also be avoided as this will also lead to less than perfect shots due to noise.
  Quote
Old 13-06-2008, 3:00 PM   #6
Member
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Bristol
Experience Points:
8,488, Level: 22
Points: 8,488, Level: 22 Points: 8,488, Level: 22 Points: 8,488, Level: 22
Activity: 0%
Activity: 0% Activity: 0% Activity: 0%
Thanks: Gave 13, Got 64
Posts: 507
Re: Sigma 17-70: soft?? needs calibration?? faulty??

Sigma are somewhat notorious for having rather varied quality control - some lenses are perfect and others can be dogs - sounds like you have a bad copy....
  Quote
Old 13-06-2008, 3:06 PM   #7
Prominent Member
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Swindon
Experience Points:
13,312, Level: 27
Points: 13,312, Level: 27 Points: 13,312, Level: 27 Points: 13,312, Level: 27
Activity: 54.2%
Activity: 54.2% Activity: 54.2% Activity: 54.2%
Thanks: Gave 1, Got 523
Posts: 4,528
Re: Sigma 17-70: soft?? needs calibration?? faulty??

Some good advice there. It may be that the lens is inherently soft and the camera is focussing it as sharply as it can.

If you can get sharp results with manual focus, but blurry AF shots, then I'd err towards suspecting the camera. If you can't get sharp results at all, then it's going to be the lens.

As suggested earlier, make sure it's on a tripod and I'd advise using the self timer or a remote release for the test shots just so you can be absolutely 100% sure that external factors are not influencing the tests.
  Quote
Old 13-06-2008, 3:52 PM   #8
Member
 
themoron's Avatar
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Christchurch, Dorset
Experience Points:
5,137, Level: 16
Points: 5,137, Level: 16 Points: 5,137, Level: 16 Points: 5,137, Level: 16
Activity: 0.8%
Activity: 0.8% Activity: 0.8% Activity: 0.8%
Thanks: Gave 20, Got 2
Posts: 234
Re: Sigma 17-70: soft?? needs calibration?? faulty??

I've got a similar problem on a sigma 70-300 APO on a canon 400d. I'm still learning the ins and outs of SLR photography but I only rarely get a nice crisp image. Could be me, the camera or the lens.

I'll have to do as you suggested but the below shots were taken on a tripod, one is sharp to my eyes, one isn't.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/27285539@N08/2574991159/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/27285539@N08/2575814412/

P.S. I hope it doesn't seem like I'm hijacking this thread, just in a similar situation.
  Quote
Old 13-06-2008, 4:18 PM   #9
Prominent Member
 
tryingtimes's Avatar
Join Date: Feb 2001
Experience Points:
15,548, Level: 30
Points: 15,548, Level: 30 Points: 15,548, Level: 30 Points: 15,548, Level: 30
Activity: 6.3%
Activity: 6.3% Activity: 6.3% Activity: 6.3%
Thanks: Gave 394, Got 561
Posts: 4,079
Re: Sigma 17-70: soft?? needs calibration?? faulty??

Quote:
Originally Posted by themoron View Post
I've got a similar problem on a sigma 70-300 APO on a canon 400d. I'm still learning the ins and outs of SLR photography but I only rarely get a nice crisp image. Could be me, the camera or the lens.

I'll have to do as you suggested but the below shots were taken on a tripod, one is sharp to my eyes, one isn't.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/27285539@N08/2574991159/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/27285539@N08/2575814412/

P.S. I hope it doesn't seem like I'm hijacking this thread, just in a similar situation.
I think this is probably a different issue to the OP.
They both look sharp to me - apart from I don't think that the intended subject is sharp in either of them. They both have a shallow depth of field which makes this trickier, and in the first, the log bark looks sharper than the dial, and on the second it's focussed on the near petals, not the stamen.
This is easily remedied by using only one of the focussing points (the centre one would have worked for the above images). Or by focussing manually (easier with live view magnified).
HTH
tt
  Quote
Old 13-06-2008, 4:32 PM   #10
Member
Join Date: Dec 2007
Experience Points:
3,507, Level: 13
Points: 3,507, Level: 13 Points: 3,507, Level: 13 Points: 3,507, Level: 13
Activity: 0%
Activity: 0% Activity: 0% Activity: 0%
Thanks: Gave 9, Got 24
Posts: 295
Re: Sigma 17-70: soft?? needs calibration?? faulty??

Quote:
Originally Posted by tryingtimes View Post
I think this is probably a different issue to the OP.
They both look sharp to me - apart from I don't think that the intended subject is sharp in either of them. They both have a shallow depth of field which makes this trickier, and in the first, the log bark looks sharper than the dial, and on the second it's focussed on the near petals, not the stamen.
This is easily remedied by using only one of the focussing points (the centre one would have worked for the above images). Or by focussing manually (easier with live view magnified).
HTH
tt
First of all i can see that both pics are not evenly tested. Different ISOs and focal distance, of course it will be slightly different. You need to do a same test with AF and manual at same distance ISO settings shutter etc etc. The only thing that should change is the focusing.

I agree also that both pic are quite sharp but one is on 300 with ISO 200 and the other at 70 with ISO 400. Although this might not be too obivious it does change the picture sharpness and speed of the shutter. Higher ISO means it will be more sensative to colours to the point where some pictures being to haze!
  Quote
Old 13-06-2008, 5:30 PM   #11
Veteran Member
 
1LeeDenton's Avatar
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Stafford
Experience Points:
25,710, Level: 39
Points: 25,710, Level: 39 Points: 25,710, Level: 39 Points: 25,710, Level: 39
Activity: 0.4%
Activity: 0.4% Activity: 0.4% Activity: 0.4%
Thanks: Gave 2,943, Got 1,715
Posts: 7,358
Re: Sigma 17-70: soft?? needs calibration?? faulty??

[pics removed as they didn't highlight the problem, and were oversized for the forums as well].

Last edited by 1LeeDenton; 17-06-2008 at 7:22 AM. Reason: [pics removed as they didn't highlight the problem, and were oversized for the forums as well].
  Quote
Old 13-06-2008, 7:32 PM   #12
Prominent Member
Join Date: Oct 2005
Experience Points:
12,582, Level: 26
Points: 12,582, Level: 26 Points: 12,582, Level: 26 Points: 12,582, Level: 26
Activity: 8.7%
Activity: 8.7% Activity: 8.7% Activity: 8.7%
Thanks: Gave 270, Got 393
Posts: 3,166
Re: Sigma 17-70: soft?? needs calibration?? faulty??

They are not really high enough resolution and/or the picture doesn't show enough specific detail.

What you need to do (sorry should ave said earlier), is to phtograph a book or magazine cover, make sure it has good lighting (the DVD's in the pics might be OK, but they look a little dark), and show 100% crops of the images of a specific part that shows detail (e.g. lettering).

The problem at the moment is that we (I should I say 'I') can't really tell much difference between any of the shots.

Also, (almost forgot this part) - you need to spot focus on the area of the picture that you plan to crop. i.e. not all of the objects in the frame will be the same distance away, so you need to pick one.


Make sense?

BTW, is that Pepper Pig?
  Quote
Thanks from:
1LeeDenton (13-06-2008)
Old 13-06-2008, 7:57 PM   #13
Member
Join Date: Jul 2005
Experience Points:
2,798, Level: 12
Points: 2,798, Level: 12 Points: 2,798, Level: 12 Points: 2,798, Level: 12
Activity: 1.5%
Activity: 1.5% Activity: 1.5% Activity: 1.5%
Thanks: Gave 0, Got 6
Posts: 194
Re: Sigma 17-70: soft?? needs calibration?? faulty??

did you shoot in raw or jpeg any pp

try some in raw then try some sharpening
  Quote
Thanks from:
1LeeDenton (13-06-2008)
Old 14-06-2008, 7:15 AM   #14
Veteran Member
 
1LeeDenton's Avatar
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Stafford
Experience Points:
25,710, Level: 39
Points: 25,710, Level: 39 Points: 25,710, Level: 39 Points: 25,710, Level: 39
Activity: 0.4%
Activity: 0.4% Activity: 0.4% Activity: 0.4%
Thanks: Gave 2,943, Got 1,715
Posts: 7,358
Re: Sigma 17-70: soft?? needs calibration?? faulty??

Thanks Springtide - I'll do that more specific test later today hopefully, and post back the results.

And yes, Jr Sp4rt4n was watching Peppa Pig at the time
  Quote
Old 16-06-2008, 1:17 PM   #15
Veteran Member
 
1LeeDenton's Avatar
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Stafford
Experience Points:
25,710, Level: 39
Points: 25,710, Level: 39 Points: 25,710, Level: 39 Points: 25,710, Level: 39
Activity: 0.4%
Activity: 0.4% Activity: 0.4% Activity: 0.4%
Thanks: Gave 2,943, Got 1,715
Posts: 7,358
Re: Sigma 17-70: soft?? needs calibration?? faulty??

Haven't got round to making some more test images, but I'm wondering the following:

Is it possible that a lens could start off as performing 'correctly' and then get progressively worse?? The reason I ask is that I've just been looking back through some of my saved images, and some from a few months back look really really sharp (though not particularly photogenic, ducks and other random stuff)....is it possible that a Sigma lens could start out as correct and then deteriorate??

All this is leading me to believe that the fault lies with the [out of warranty by a month] camera

EDIT: Mod comment about 300k embedded images duly noted.

Last edited by 1LeeDenton; 16-06-2008 at 2:03 PM.
  Quote
Old 18-06-2008, 2:31 PM   #16
Veteran Member
 
1LeeDenton's Avatar
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Stafford
Experience Points:
25,710, Level: 39
Points: 25,710, Level: 39 Points: 25,710, Level: 39 Points: 25,710, Level: 39
Activity: 0.4%
Activity: 0.4% Activity: 0.4% Activity: 0.4%
Thanks: Gave 2,943, Got 1,715
Posts: 7,358
Re: Sigma 17-70: soft?? needs calibration?? faulty??

Hmmm, the plot thickens....

Having been taking pictures of random [well lit] items throughout my house, I'm now pretty much convinced that I might have been being extremely fussy, and possibly expecting too much from a £200 lens.....

However, in reviewing my images on the camera it appears as though some of them are now classed as 'Unidentified Image' with a big question mark where the image should be ......this can't be right surely [and if one person says "don't call me Shir.."]
  Quote
Old 02-12-2008, 12:28 PM   #17
Veteran Member
 
1LeeDenton's Avatar
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Stafford
Experience Points:
25,710, Level: 39
Points: 25,710, Level: 39 Points: 25,710, Level: 39 Points: 25,710, Level: 39
Activity: 0.4%
Activity: 0.4% Activity: 0.4% Activity: 0.4%
Thanks: Gave 2,943, Got 1,715
Posts: 7,358
Re: Sigma 17-70: soft?? needs calibration?? faulty??

[rhetorical question] Has this been going on this long?!?!? [/rhetorical question]

Just was not convinced that my Sigma 17-70 was doing what it should, so sent it back to Sigma under my Jessops 12 month warranty. They've had it a few weeks (which made me suspect there was something wrong with it)....rang them this morning for an update, and they've had to order a "new circuit from Japan" as the camera was "front focussing".....now, I've read about front focussing, so have an idea what that's all about, but where does a circuit come into a lens, and what does it do?? Any camera techies out there with an idea??

Might be another week or two before the lens is back, but at least it proves [to myself] that I'm not going crazy.
  Quote
Old 05-12-2008, 6:07 PM   #18
Veteran Member
 
1LeeDenton's Avatar
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Stafford
Experience Points:
25,710, Level: 39
Points: 25,710, Level: 39 Points: 25,710, Level: 39 Points: 25,710, Level: 39
Activity: 0.4%
Activity: 0.4% Activity: 0.4% Activity: 0.4%
Thanks: Gave 2,943, Got 1,715
Posts: 7,358
Re: Sigma 17-70: soft?? needs calibration?? faulty??

Spoke to Sigma earlier, who apologised profusely for the delay in the new circuit from Japan, and with a view of getting this 'case' resolved quickly, they are just going to send a brand new 17-70 lens to Jessops for collection on Tuesday, and they will take the wait for the new circuit

Result. Just hope the new one isn't a pup....

EDIT: Perhaps this would have been better as a blog....
  Quote
Post Reply



Thread information and display options
Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off