New Lens is NOT sharp around the outside of the picture ? Please help

[PerfectPicture]

Hi All,

Recently purchased the Canon 10-22mm Lens from Citiwideonline last Wednesday and received it on Saturday (after driving down to the Derrimut depot in laverton). Turnaround time is quite good from O/S.

Went down to Williamstown and took some pictures, seems ok, but got home and noticed the centre focus seems to be OK? BUT all around the outside, like the left-hand side and right-hand-side its blurry??
And took pictures in different modes and spot metering on the day as well.
Is this a common thing with UWA lens?
Does it need micro-adjusting to get right?
Or .. did l get a dodgy lens perhaps?
If so .. what are my recourse of actions?? (l'm writing up an email to citiwide now, should l request another lens?? OR .. just request my full money back??).
geez..what a buggar!

Example of pictures to follow soon ...

Cheers
Robert

[kiwi]

should be sharp edge to edge, sounds like one of the elements is out of alignment - id return

[PerfectPicture]

should be sharp edge to edge, sounds like one of the elements is out of alignment - id return

Thanks Kiwi

should l ask for a replacement or try to get full money back, and try elsewhere?

[kiwi]

Up to you. Id ring them/email them and see what they say

[PerfectPicture]

Up to you. Id ring them/email them and see what they say

Thanks Kiwi, l sent an email to citiwide explaining the situation, and requesting to send this lens back to them ASAP and get a replacement OR my Full money back.
Now l have to wait for their response.

Have other people used Citiwide .. and are they reputable and do they provide a replacement or Full refund back if requested.

Has anybody else bought Lenses from overseas and if so, have they being SPOT On and clear in focus or dodgy first time around ??

[Art Vandelay]

Has anybody else bought Lenses from overseas and if so, have they being SPOT On and clear in focus or dodgy first time around ??

yep, no problem.

It's not an overseas vs local purchase issue. They're all from the same factory. Occasionally they'll spit out a dud.

Interested to see some samples.

[PH005]

I'm sure it's just a case of one slipping through the QC. Hope you get a satisfactory outcome very quickly. Keep us posted.

[arthurking83]

should be sharp edge to edge .....

Not nececellery!!

Robert!! .... the problem with diagnosing such an issue is that you haven't given any details as to what you did, what settings, what the scene is/was ... etc.

Best thing to do before you go an create yourself some fuss over nothing, is to take a few test shots and post them with full exif intact.

All UWA angle lenses suffer from massive distortion(except the Nikon 14-24/2.8) and therefore have a fair amount of softening at the image edges.. that is compared to the centre of the frame.
The other very well designed UWA lens of note is Sigma's new 8-16mm(APS-C only).

If you look at any test example of this particular lens, you'll see that the difference in sharpness of the centre of the frame compared to the edges can be as much as 50% difference in resolving ability.
eg. check Photozone's test results and notice that the centre of the frame is in the excellent range in terms of sharpness, whereas the borders are only struggling in the good range.

Also as I said before, you haven't yet explained what camera settings you've used ... in particular aperture value. Also what is hard to determine from any image that you post, is field curvature(which all lenses will have to a degree) and UWA are notorious for field curvature. So! if you simply shoot a brick wall even tho your focused correctly at the central spot, the issue of field curvature is going to place the outside edges of the frame well out of the plane of focus(stopping down a lot helps with that). if you fully understand/measure the amount/degree of field curvature that the lens is burdened with, you can take a perfectly sharp image across the entire frame of a curved subject.

Post a few sample pics(remember with full exif intact) and see how you go. Don't worry about going back to the store yet, until you are armed with all the relevant proof that this lens is faulty(unless you have time to waste).

[PerfectPicture]

thanks for responses guys ... here are a few examples >
HERE
the centre of the image seems clear, but the ousides of it, is blurry? p.s. l'm using a CPL filter as well.
Just, click on the images to see larger file output.

and > HERE.

This one is the Williamstown beach, middle is OK, but near the horizon on both sides its blurry? > HERE

[kiwi]

i agree with ak re distortion effects as opposed to corner softness.

both the examples you have posted will be more likely, and i actually think are more due to distortion becuase of the nature of what you are shooting here - i dont think anything in the horizon is sharp in #2 anywhere....focus seems in the front 3rd of the photo

more testing i think

[William]

No probs mate, Thats the way Wideys work, I have a Sigma 10-20 , Does the same thing around the edges at 10mm , There is a Technical word for it (Not Distortion) , But it escapes me now , They all give distortion at full wide , They can be a bit of a beast to get used to I think you'll find that thats the nature of the beast as they say

[PerfectPicture]

Thanks for the responses guys

So the sample pictures are fine to you guys??

What is the BEST WAY to run a test on a new lens to confirm sharpness, softness, etc?
also does it need micro-adjustment do you think? as centre seems OK?

l'm perplexed now.

[peterb666]

CPLs and ultrawides don't go together too well as the angle of light towards the edges is very different to that in the centre. If you want to check for sharpness or any other image defect, you need to do it without filters.

That said, the image sharpness does seem to be off but I am not familiar with the Canon lens so I will leave it to others to confirm or otherwise.

[kiwi]

Yeah, I'd take filter off and do the good old brick wAll test, tripod mount etc

[soulman]

i dont think anything in the horizon is sharp in #2 anywhere....focus seems in the front 3rd of the photo

The first two look the same in this regard - focus point is quite close and nothing is sharp in the background. There is no EXIF on the images so I can't be sure, but it looks like you're shooting wide open or close to it. If this is the case then the lens could well be normal. The one I had needed to be at f8 or f11 to be guaranteed reasonably sharp across the frame. That's just the reality with UWA zooms. As noted by Arthur, resolving power at the edges of these kinds of lenses is never anywhere near what it is in the centre. You can make sharp pictures with these lenses but you have to work at it.

[I @ M]

I wouldn't concentrate too much on those images with the filter on. They don't look at all good on the edges but until you have given it a good test there can't be many conclusions drawn.
The one thing that does stand out badly is the amount of purple fringing in the first shot in particular.

There is no EXIF on the images so I can't be sure, but it looks like you're shooting wide open or close to it.

kuso exif viewer is showing F/7.1 for the first and F/8 for the second.

[Allann]

The 10-20 does suffer from soft edges up to about 5.6 at 10mm, but not as badly as shown here, especially since the first was shot at f7.1 and the second at f8. This style of shot would be best taken at about f11 however. The third however at f3.5 has produced blur at the horizon due to the shallow depth of field. Notice in that shot too, that the bottom corners are not as blurry as the first two.

I would suggest you try removing all other obstructions from the lens, i.e. ALL filters, and take some test shots. You can find a review here which shows what to expect. If after doing your tests again, and them failing, then I'd contact the vendor.

[arthurking83]

....

What is the BEST WAY to run a test on a new lens to confirm sharpness, softness, etc?
also does it need micro-adjustment do you think? as centre seems OK?

l'm perplexed now.

for a quick test, to determine if the lens is decentred or not:

brickwall, using liveview(is best!!) focus on about 2/3rd to 3/4's of the frame edge. Live view should allow you to focus over any part of the entire scene.

Of course you'll be on a tripod, and you need to make sure that the camera is as squared up to the brick wall as possible. a millimeter out won't make a difference, but anything more than about 10° or so not square to the wall is going to show up as DOF issues, and not lens abnormalities. 10° out of whack is quite easy to notice by eye.

Try this at a few focal lengths.

Also note, with a UWA lens you do capture a massive field of view, so the temptation is to get closer to encompass only the brick wall, this also has side effects, where some lens designs work better at far distance then they do at closer focused distance, and vice versa.

if you do this test, not that some softness on one side can be easily seen relative to the other side of the frame, and this may be due to not perfectly parallel alignment.

Stop down to f/8, f/11 and f/16 and review the images, leave the camera where it is(if possible) and if there is any difference from one side of the frame compared to the other, move the camera to try to get a more parallel position.
That is, if the LHS is soft and the RHS(where you've focused) is sharper, then rotate the camera more towards the right(by a degree or two). Do the test again.. as so on and so forth.

[PerfectPicture]

Thanks alot everybody ... l really do appreciate it.

Question, should l leave the Hoya Super HMS Pro1 UV Filter on, or 100% make sure and take it off as well?

l will do some test shots today .. and post the findings later that evening.

Cheers all.

p.s. l found the lens hood that comes with the Canon 24-105L IS USM lens is perfect for this lens as well, No Vignetting at all .. have to look for a cheap place to buy one for this 10-22mm lens as well.

[ricktas]

take all filters off. You want to test the lens, not the filter. And to be honest the UV filter shouldn't go back on the lens, you don't need it.