Picture Style sharpness vs DPP post-treatment ??

[Tabazan]

I can't bring myself to believe that.

Me too.


Maybe I had a very good copy of the 55-250 and a poor 70-200 ... or expected too much difference. it was my first L and on a 50D.


To be clear, I didn't compared pixel to pixel but on the global result at 50% or 30%. I'm not a specialist and surely I missed some CA problems or else, but that's not the point for me.


And no, I don't have a doubt about 70-200 potential superiority. That's just my experience.

[Sheiky]

[:O]

Maybe I had a very good copy of the 55-250 and a poor 70-200 ... or expected too much difference. it was my first L and on a 50D.

Probably! Wow never sell that lens again!!! But no, to be honest you should see a world of difference without even mentioning chromatic aberations. I mean: sharpness, colors, contrast...you name it...

And no, I don't have a doubt about 70-200 potential superiority. That's just my experience.

There must have been something wrong...



<div>

Even though sharpness is not an end in itself, this bad habit comes from the impression of not getting an overall sharpness impression at 30 or 50 (not a 100% peeping).

Ouch...is your monitor okay???


Jan


Ps: I'm quite curious about the sharpness of your 55-250 now...[A] Perhaps you could post a few examples of what you think is sharp and what's not? 100% if possible?
</div>

[Sheiky]

By the way, you still buy L-lenses??? What a waste of money [6]