Originally Posted by Tabazan
Sending lenses in for AF calibration used to be usual (often requiring the body to be sent as well) - but it's made mostly unnecessary with AF microadjustment (which both of your cameras offer).
I'm not sure how, other than AF, a camera could be 'tuned for sharpness' (in hardware terms). It's true that different cameras have different strengths of anti-aliasing filters, and thus require different amounts of sharpening (the 7D will require more than the 5DII, for example).
Even if it's a problem with a camera, it seems unlikely that you'd be having that problem with both of them. I suppose it may partly depend on how you define a 'sharp' image - it means different things to different people.
As I said above, it also depends on how your using your lenses. The red L is not a guarantee of tack-sharpness at all settings. Want an example? Consider the EF 28-200mm f/3.5-5.6 - a cheap consumer zoom that Bryan calls, "flawed,"and states that, "image quality delivered by this lens is ... well ... poor." Also consider the EF 50mm f/1.2L, a professional L-series prime lens that offers, "the best image quality ... from f/1.2 to f/2 (at 50mm). Now, compare the 50mm f/1.2L at f/1.2 to the 28-200mm zoom at 135mm f/8. Which delivers more sharpness - the 'good gear' or the cheap piece of c-r-a-p?
Reply With Quote