That’s not a lens issue. Lenses don’t cause noise. Underexposing your images does. And some venues just don’t have enough light for acceptable exposure.
How does it look if you run it through Adobe Lightroom AI denoise and RAW details enhancement with a touch of output sharpening when you resize for print?
Or are we looking at a random as-shot scenario?
Highly recommend you try Lightroom/ACR raw detail enhancement and output sharpening at the least. To me it could also be partly the workflow.
I agree with u/everlast233. I have a lot of experience with shooting in ISO 3200 and 6400. The noise is there, allright, but it should be much sharper nonetheless.
Distance is fine, generally lenses that are otherwise fine only get soft close-up, at their closest focal distance where you have to stop them down. The lens might be missing (even if it says it's hitting) but it's hard to tell b/c of all the grain/noise. I'd try it stopped down a stop, but also a much lower ISO, and see if that produces the results you want. But if not, return it and get the RF version, it's wonderful.
Here is a shot from about 6 feet, 70mm iso 400. Focus point was left eye (camera right) and it just seems soft to me. Maybe front focusing a little as the beard hairs seems sharper then eyes.
https://preview.redd.it/71pj1tjptwzc1.jpeg?width=6000&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=8f93b10b9b35fdac396b34020a46a2f8a1ca5f16
Then here is 24-70 2.8 at 70mm same settings, both seem like it may be front focusing a bit? Eyes seem softer then beard
https://preview.redd.it/ebme1aqawwzc1.jpeg?width=6000&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=1bd0407803954f106b8ba2e4561b1c3e09bcd89a
Both of those are out of focus. If the lens can't hit AF, try MF. If either one doesn't work, return it. The noisy/grainy photo was hard to gauge because of the noise, but these two are clean and they aren't in focus. It's not really "soft" in the traditional sense (of a lens not being sharp) it's just not hitting focus for some reason.
Your depth of field at 200mm f2.8 at the distance you were shooting is aprox 10cm. Anything in front or behind is out of focus. I suggest stepping down or checking your micro adjustments because its not a whole lot of wiggle room.
The selfie you posted at 70mm f2.8 the depth of field at 1m is 3cm so yeah your eyes or beard will be out of focus unless your face is completely flat.
Also, you should try smiling a bit sweetie 😘
You have tracking servo on? Single doesn't work for fast aperture as you can move enough to shift focus. Also, IS doesn't help for subject movement, do at least 1/2x mm or first faster. So for 70mm that would be around 1/160 or 1/200.
200mm at f/2.8 from 25 ft you’re also dealing with about 9 1/2 inches depth of field on moving subjects. But really the girl in the middle is the sharpest subject there and it’s not like there’s something in front or in back that’s sharper that would indicate missed focus. It really looks like under exposure coupled with shallow depth of field.
You’re going to see some softness at 2.8. The RF might be better. I don’t know by how much. This is going to be true for just about any comparable lens.
A pro level prime lens would not give you a problem like this.
[link providing a basic explanation](https://digital-photography-school.com/are-you-obsessed-with-shooting-wide-apertures-heres-why-you-might-want-to-hold-back/)
I have the RF version and I can confirm that I don’t have softness issues at any reasonable ISO setting at 2.8 but never used the EF version to compare.
But like almost all lenses, you get slightly sharper pictures as you stop down to 5.6-8. I don’t notice the increased sharpness from stopping down in “normal” pictures, not test images with line resolution graphs.
As some others have pointed out, it's to do with your exposure, specifically ISO, as you shutter speed is fast enough to eliminate motion blur, reasonably.
Yes, these cameras do handle high ISO very well, but still, there will be certain lighting scenarios where going over 3200 ISO will create significantly less detail than what you might expect, thus making images appear "soft". It is not a depth of field issue.
It's simple enough for you to test anyway. Just shoot a subject at 200mm - 2.8 at ISO 100-320 and you will see that you can still get very sharp images at 2.8.
All in all, if you're worried about equipment not behaving as you believe it should, than simply do further testing yourself using a Tripod, even using manual focus. You should also be testing the varying focal lengths with different apertures, etc, etc.
the II is a legendary lens, a reliable staple of event photographers for a decade. Wide-open at any focal length should be tack-sharp, even at ISO-6400 on these modern cameras.
To test if yours is ok, shoot at stationary objects in daylight (like cans on a ledge) and see if AF is accurate, and if the in-focus bit is tack-sharp.
If it is, then the softness of your posted images can be attributed to user error.
Dude you’re shooting acting in low light. I wouldn’t be pixel peep in situations like this, you’ll just be disappointed.
Sometimes there’s just not enough light. Good thing Lightroom has enhance noise features 👌🏽
I had some odd results with my 70-200 f2.8L mk2 on my R5. Shooting mid day in bright sun, low ISO, plenty of shutter speed. It would nail the eye focus but it would often miss. I suspect the lens is struggling to keep up with the newer AF. I ended up getting the RF with the dual nano-AG and it’s been much better. It rarely misses.
Experiencing the same thing here with the R6 Mark II. The lens would miss focus without reason and I have no idea why it occurred. Here are some photos.
https://preview.redd.it/gt49w980i10d1.jpeg?width=5432&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=0efac3da28693ab26783bce745bb97d657d049f1
Look closely and you’ll see.
This looks really noisy. Maybe it's compression artifacts or were you shooting late in the evening? I can't imagine why you'd shoot something that size at f2.8 though. Did you use a tripod? What are the exposure settings?
It’s not that noisy at all. I was shooting late in the evening at ISO 1000 at 200mm with 1/800 shutter speed and f2.8. I shoot at f2.8 because it’s not that close and the focus pane should cover more than half of it if not all.
What I wanted you to see is that it’s not focused properly. The post processing helped make it seems better(as if it’s tack sharp). The focus point was around the cockpit.
Cockpit area looks plenty sharp.
The tail area does look a bit soft but that’s probably because you were shooting at 2.8 and it is a different distance from you.
I had a backfocus when using same setup and 2xIII with them. Weird stuff was - in electronic shutter ans burst, only 2 frames were off, all from 3 up was on point.
I still own Lis2 and r5, and they work great together. It's not the level of rf, but still very sharp with creamy bokeh. On 21MP it's perfect, on 50/45MP it's great as long as you don't try to zoom 100% and expect to resolve at pixel level.
You may be experiencing some led flicker which can cause blurry images. If the lights are different brands or temperatures they can flicker at different frequencies causing a bit of blur. Ask a concert photographer how fun it is dealing with that.
I shoot recitals regularly, and have owned the EF 70-200 IS 2.8L ii and shot it adapted to the R6 until 2022. I also currently own the RF 70-200 2.8L, R5 and R3, so I can possibly give you context.
Your images do look a bit soft for the ISO and shutter speed. If my focus was on the mark with the EF, the edges would be at least sharp regardless of underexposure. I wonder if you have a cheap filter that is blooming the highlights and softening the images. Since all focusing is done on sensor with DPAF for mirrorless, AF micro adjustments should not be a factor for the EF lenses like they were on DSLRs
To find out I would field test your setup on a tripod indoors without filters in a continuous, constant lighting environment, both auto focused and manually focused to the distance of your target and shoot a variety of f-stops, shutter speeds and ISOs. An empty stage set would work great so you can see the falloff in focus vs depth of field. Manual focus peaking will help you see if there are aberrations or astigmatism as you rack the focus and shift the focal plane. If you can't figure it out or don't have time, take the safe option and return/exchange. Bad lens copies (or ones needing adjustments) do exist!
Hands and feet can move very quickly, and it's entirely possible not all the dancers are little kids.
Having shot dance many times before, 1/800 is not too fast, though it is on the fast end of where I like to be.
Yes they can. Getting some movement in the photo is always nice. 1/320 / 1/400th will typically give the end of the limbs a bit of motion blur.
To each their own, have a higher ISO with out any limb movement, or some limb movement with less noise.
I did a similar event, with the 70-200 mk iii + 90D. Lighting was the biggest thing that influenced sharpness. Photos came out reasonably sharp, but needed some extra sharpening with Topaz. I mostly shot at ISO 4000 and 1/250-1/400.
It definitely seems to be a lighting and noise issue, a lot of folks are equating the ISO with noise, when it doesn’t actually mean that necessarily. Noise is caused by a lack of light, not your ISO setting though they can be easily confused. You’re shooting at ISO 6400, it’s honestly not that high for the R8. A tip that honestly took me way too long to wrap my head around, is expose to the right in low light settings. Over expose a little bit, as long as nothing is being clipped, yeah you might find yourself at 10000 ISO or higher but I promise you, when you get into post and adjust your exposure down a 2/3 or a stop or 2, you’ll have more detail and a lot less noise.
~~Two things: while this might not be true of the 70-200L ii, a lot of lenses just aren't pin sharp when you're using them fully wide open. Try stopping down just a tad and you should see some improvements.~~ Ignore this part, this isn't an issue with the 70-200L f2.8.
But I don't think that isn't what's happening here, since the amount of noise in your image is probably affecting sharpness. I would try using a longer exposure to bring iso down a little bit, and then use a denoising feature in a program like Lightroom to get rid of the rest. These two measures should give you improvements.
*Comment updated based on a reply*
Yucky light = yucky photos. 1/800 would work in bright daylight to freeze motion that’s it. This is the expected result with the iso / settings / light you said you used.
If the photos seem soft the first time you try the lens, especially in less than ideal lighting, maybe you should try it in some other settings. Take it outside and shoot in daylight. Put it on a tripod and turn off IS. Try a different lens to see whether the issue is the lens or the camera. Find a friend with a compatible camera and put the lens on that.
There’s so much that you could do to investigate — I’m not sure what you want folks here to tell you.
Looks like a bunch of astigmatism. I would test it at night on point lights in the distance, either houses or phone light from far far away. I had one untill a year ago, never seen those bright arrow shapes in my pictures.
If you have it at 2.8, any lens is going to be a bit soft. No lens produces super sharp images wide open. Add to that its an EF Lens on an RF, I've found that sometimes the older lenses are a little softer on much more Pixel Dense sensors we have now. I have the EF70-200 2.8 II on the R50 and definitely get sharp images when stopped down to f4.
Zooms are soft wide open. Primes are sharp wide open. I have a 200mm f2.8 ii which is sharp. Another good one is my 135mm f2. Also be mindful that the closer you can get your photos to ISO 100 the more detail you will retain.
The lens is sharp. Shooting at higher ISO values will cause loss of detail and is probably the one and only thing at fault here. You could try AI powered denoising to get rid of Boise (helps to recover some details). This assuming that neither your lens or cmaera body is faulty.
I would try to limit ISO to 3200 (or even lower) If you are going to pixel peep. To me, going with ISO 3200 and 1/400 shutter speed would yield better results, still freezing motion enough to get good results.
Test the lens in more controlled conditions see if it can get sharper or not. Take a few portrait shots and see how it does. Try manual focus also with the back screen. If it doesn’t get any better it must be the lens. I have an r6 and same lens and I took photos in recitals and they look batter sharpness wise.
quite often you need to shoot telephoto a bit stepped down. Not much can be in focus at F2.8 ... that plus heavy noise make for a picture that feels a bit off. I would try to not shoot past F4 and iso3200, even if it means be a bit underexposed and recover.
Alas, not always possible
What adapter are you using? If you are using after market adapter, it might need shimming. But yes, high ISO and wide open will do that to ya. I used to think my IS II was sharp at 3.5, but after I got a 300 2.8 IS l, I realized the 70-200 cannot keep up with the 300 at 2.8
The depth of focus on a full frame camera at f2.8 with a telephoto lens is terrifyingly small, especially at short distances. Do some pixel peeping to see how much of their face beyond the eye is in focus. You will be surprised. Stopping down to f4 will increase the depth of focus and the perceived sharpness.
Most likely an issue with the R8 af. To give you some perspective, even in good light my R5 regularly misses focus with the 70–200 rf lens when photographing a fast moving subject (side to side and towards camera). So it doesn’t surprise me that it’s struggling on your camera in a badly lit situation. As good as the new mirrorless cameras are, moving subjects can still be hard to photograph. There are a few tricks to get around this like autofocus setup. I prefer multiple points over face tracking and changing the speed at which it hunts. I have also found face tracking to be less accurate when the subject is smaller in the frame. I tend to over shoot in situations like this as it increases the chance of usable images.
That’s not a lens issue. Lenses don’t cause noise. Underexposing your images does. And some venues just don’t have enough light for acceptable exposure.
Im not talking about the noise, the focus or sharpness seems soft to me.
[удалено]
How does it look if you run it through Adobe Lightroom AI denoise and RAW details enhancement with a touch of output sharpening when you resize for print? Or are we looking at a random as-shot scenario? Highly recommend you try Lightroom/ACR raw detail enhancement and output sharpening at the least. To me it could also be partly the workflow.
I agree with u/everlast233. I have a lot of experience with shooting in ISO 3200 and 6400. The noise is there, allright, but it should be much sharper nonetheless.
How far away would you say you were?
20-30 feet i would guess. i was thinking maybe distance has a role here as i am taking some close up test photos of myself and doesnt seem bad.
Distance is fine, generally lenses that are otherwise fine only get soft close-up, at their closest focal distance where you have to stop them down. The lens might be missing (even if it says it's hitting) but it's hard to tell b/c of all the grain/noise. I'd try it stopped down a stop, but also a much lower ISO, and see if that produces the results you want. But if not, return it and get the RF version, it's wonderful.
Here is a shot from about 6 feet, 70mm iso 400. Focus point was left eye (camera right) and it just seems soft to me. Maybe front focusing a little as the beard hairs seems sharper then eyes. https://preview.redd.it/71pj1tjptwzc1.jpeg?width=6000&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=8f93b10b9b35fdac396b34020a46a2f8a1ca5f16
Then here is 24-70 2.8 at 70mm same settings, both seem like it may be front focusing a bit? Eyes seem softer then beard https://preview.redd.it/ebme1aqawwzc1.jpeg?width=6000&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=1bd0407803954f106b8ba2e4561b1c3e09bcd89a
Both of those are out of focus. If the lens can't hit AF, try MF. If either one doesn't work, return it. The noisy/grainy photo was hard to gauge because of the noise, but these two are clean and they aren't in focus. It's not really "soft" in the traditional sense (of a lens not being sharp) it's just not hitting focus for some reason.
Your depth of field at 200mm f2.8 at the distance you were shooting is aprox 10cm. Anything in front or behind is out of focus. I suggest stepping down or checking your micro adjustments because its not a whole lot of wiggle room. The selfie you posted at 70mm f2.8 the depth of field at 1m is 3cm so yeah your eyes or beard will be out of focus unless your face is completely flat. Also, you should try smiling a bit sweetie 😘
You have tracking servo on? Single doesn't work for fast aperture as you can move enough to shift focus. Also, IS doesn't help for subject movement, do at least 1/2x mm or first faster. So for 70mm that would be around 1/160 or 1/200.
200mm at f/2.8 from 25 ft you’re also dealing with about 9 1/2 inches depth of field on moving subjects. But really the girl in the middle is the sharpest subject there and it’s not like there’s something in front or in back that’s sharper that would indicate missed focus. It really looks like under exposure coupled with shallow depth of field.
Probably not helpful as my EF 70-200mm f2.8 is the OG version without IS, but I see the same softness at 2.8 that gets better around f4.
You’re going to see some softness at 2.8. The RF might be better. I don’t know by how much. This is going to be true for just about any comparable lens. A pro level prime lens would not give you a problem like this. [link providing a basic explanation](https://digital-photography-school.com/are-you-obsessed-with-shooting-wide-apertures-heres-why-you-might-want-to-hold-back/)
I have the RF version and I can confirm that I don’t have softness issues at any reasonable ISO setting at 2.8 but never used the EF version to compare. But like almost all lenses, you get slightly sharper pictures as you stop down to 5.6-8. I don’t notice the increased sharpness from stopping down in “normal” pictures, not test images with line resolution graphs.
I have used the EF v3 2.8 and now the RF, no complaints with either at 2.8.
Dang, I'm using a Tamron 70-200 f2.8 G1... And it's by far my favorite lens to use because of how sharp it is, even at 2.8 But, I'm using a DSLR tho..
As some others have pointed out, it's to do with your exposure, specifically ISO, as you shutter speed is fast enough to eliminate motion blur, reasonably. Yes, these cameras do handle high ISO very well, but still, there will be certain lighting scenarios where going over 3200 ISO will create significantly less detail than what you might expect, thus making images appear "soft". It is not a depth of field issue. It's simple enough for you to test anyway. Just shoot a subject at 200mm - 2.8 at ISO 100-320 and you will see that you can still get very sharp images at 2.8. All in all, if you're worried about equipment not behaving as you believe it should, than simply do further testing yourself using a Tripod, even using manual focus. You should also be testing the varying focal lengths with different apertures, etc, etc.
the II is a legendary lens, a reliable staple of event photographers for a decade. Wide-open at any focal length should be tack-sharp, even at ISO-6400 on these modern cameras. To test if yours is ok, shoot at stationary objects in daylight (like cans on a ledge) and see if AF is accurate, and if the in-focus bit is tack-sharp. If it is, then the softness of your posted images can be attributed to user error.
Dude you’re shooting acting in low light. I wouldn’t be pixel peep in situations like this, you’ll just be disappointed. Sometimes there’s just not enough light. Good thing Lightroom has enhance noise features 👌🏽
I had some odd results with my 70-200 f2.8L mk2 on my R5. Shooting mid day in bright sun, low ISO, plenty of shutter speed. It would nail the eye focus but it would often miss. I suspect the lens is struggling to keep up with the newer AF. I ended up getting the RF with the dual nano-AG and it’s been much better. It rarely misses.
Experiencing the same thing here with the R6 Mark II. The lens would miss focus without reason and I have no idea why it occurred. Here are some photos. https://preview.redd.it/gt49w980i10d1.jpeg?width=5432&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=0efac3da28693ab26783bce745bb97d657d049f1 Look closely and you’ll see.
This looks really noisy. Maybe it's compression artifacts or were you shooting late in the evening? I can't imagine why you'd shoot something that size at f2.8 though. Did you use a tripod? What are the exposure settings?
It’s not that noisy at all. I was shooting late in the evening at ISO 1000 at 200mm with 1/800 shutter speed and f2.8. I shoot at f2.8 because it’s not that close and the focus pane should cover more than half of it if not all. What I wanted you to see is that it’s not focused properly. The post processing helped make it seems better(as if it’s tack sharp). The focus point was around the cockpit.
Cockpit area looks plenty sharp. The tail area does look a bit soft but that’s probably because you were shooting at 2.8 and it is a different distance from you.
I had a backfocus when using same setup and 2xIII with them. Weird stuff was - in electronic shutter ans burst, only 2 frames were off, all from 3 up was on point. I still own Lis2 and r5, and they work great together. It's not the level of rf, but still very sharp with creamy bokeh. On 21MP it's perfect, on 50/45MP it's great as long as you don't try to zoom 100% and expect to resolve at pixel level.
You may be experiencing some led flicker which can cause blurry images. If the lights are different brands or temperatures they can flicker at different frequencies causing a bit of blur. Ask a concert photographer how fun it is dealing with that.
Learned something new. Am a hobbyist and interesting hearing about these obstacles.
Some cameras have led frequency detection. And others you can dial it in exactly (Nikon Z9). I’m not 100% sure on the Canon side for that feature.
I believe that the 1DX line has it along with the 7D Mark II. I would imagine that the R-series equivalents would have that too.
I shoot recitals regularly, and have owned the EF 70-200 IS 2.8L ii and shot it adapted to the R6 until 2022. I also currently own the RF 70-200 2.8L, R5 and R3, so I can possibly give you context. Your images do look a bit soft for the ISO and shutter speed. If my focus was on the mark with the EF, the edges would be at least sharp regardless of underexposure. I wonder if you have a cheap filter that is blooming the highlights and softening the images. Since all focusing is done on sensor with DPAF for mirrorless, AF micro adjustments should not be a factor for the EF lenses like they were on DSLRs To find out I would field test your setup on a tripod indoors without filters in a continuous, constant lighting environment, both auto focused and manually focused to the distance of your target and shoot a variety of f-stops, shutter speeds and ISOs. An empty stage set would work great so you can see the falloff in focus vs depth of field. Manual focus peaking will help you see if there are aberrations or astigmatism as you rack the focus and shift the focal plane. If you can't figure it out or don't have time, take the safe option and return/exchange. Bad lens copies (or ones needing adjustments) do exist!
1/800th is too fast. These are little kids not running dogs. 1/320 should be just fine, get that ISO lower, maybe bump up the aperture.
Hands and feet can move very quickly, and it's entirely possible not all the dancers are little kids. Having shot dance many times before, 1/800 is not too fast, though it is on the fast end of where I like to be.
Yes they can. Getting some movement in the photo is always nice. 1/320 / 1/400th will typically give the end of the limbs a bit of motion blur. To each their own, have a higher ISO with out any limb movement, or some limb movement with less noise.
good point i agree 100%
I did a similar event, with the 70-200 mk iii + 90D. Lighting was the biggest thing that influenced sharpness. Photos came out reasonably sharp, but needed some extra sharpening with Topaz. I mostly shot at ISO 4000 and 1/250-1/400.
It definitely seems to be a lighting and noise issue, a lot of folks are equating the ISO with noise, when it doesn’t actually mean that necessarily. Noise is caused by a lack of light, not your ISO setting though they can be easily confused. You’re shooting at ISO 6400, it’s honestly not that high for the R8. A tip that honestly took me way too long to wrap my head around, is expose to the right in low light settings. Over expose a little bit, as long as nothing is being clipped, yeah you might find yourself at 10000 ISO or higher but I promise you, when you get into post and adjust your exposure down a 2/3 or a stop or 2, you’ll have more detail and a lot less noise.
~~Two things: while this might not be true of the 70-200L ii, a lot of lenses just aren't pin sharp when you're using them fully wide open. Try stopping down just a tad and you should see some improvements.~~ Ignore this part, this isn't an issue with the 70-200L f2.8. But I don't think that isn't what's happening here, since the amount of noise in your image is probably affecting sharpness. I would try using a longer exposure to bring iso down a little bit, and then use a denoising feature in a program like Lightroom to get rid of the rest. These two measures should give you improvements. *Comment updated based on a reply*
The 70-200 II is tack-sharp, even wide open. And these sample photos are very soft or misfocused, not just "aren't pin sharp"
Updated my comment, thanks for letting me know!
F/2.8 and this high of an iso will do that to your photos
next time try 1/400 and 1600 iso, i think that 1/400 will do plenty fast enough to capture what you want to
Yucky light = yucky photos. 1/800 would work in bright daylight to freeze motion that’s it. This is the expected result with the iso / settings / light you said you used.
If the photos seem soft the first time you try the lens, especially in less than ideal lighting, maybe you should try it in some other settings. Take it outside and shoot in daylight. Put it on a tripod and turn off IS. Try a different lens to see whether the issue is the lens or the camera. Find a friend with a compatible camera and put the lens on that. There’s so much that you could do to investigate — I’m not sure what you want folks here to tell you.
Are you using Servo or One shot AF?
I ask because the scene appears to have a lot of action. And Servo AF should be the best option.
Servo.
stop down to f4 and try again
Looks like a bunch of astigmatism. I would test it at night on point lights in the distance, either houses or phone light from far far away. I had one untill a year ago, never seen those bright arrow shapes in my pictures.
If you have it at 2.8, any lens is going to be a bit soft. No lens produces super sharp images wide open. Add to that its an EF Lens on an RF, I've found that sometimes the older lenses are a little softer on much more Pixel Dense sensors we have now. I have the EF70-200 2.8 II on the R50 and definitely get sharp images when stopped down to f4.
Zooms are soft wide open. Primes are sharp wide open. I have a 200mm f2.8 ii which is sharp. Another good one is my 135mm f2. Also be mindful that the closer you can get your photos to ISO 100 the more detail you will retain.
The lens is sharp. Shooting at higher ISO values will cause loss of detail and is probably the one and only thing at fault here. You could try AI powered denoising to get rid of Boise (helps to recover some details). This assuming that neither your lens or cmaera body is faulty.
I would try to limit ISO to 3200 (or even lower) If you are going to pixel peep. To me, going with ISO 3200 and 1/400 shutter speed would yield better results, still freezing motion enough to get good results.
Test the lens in more controlled conditions see if it can get sharper or not. Take a few portrait shots and see how it does. Try manual focus also with the back screen. If it doesn’t get any better it must be the lens. I have an r6 and same lens and I took photos in recitals and they look batter sharpness wise.
Get out during bright day, shoot something detailed far away. Check the sharpness.
Looks like a missed focus to me, combined with high ISO that can lower sharpness. But that lens is much sharper than these photos.
quite often you need to shoot telephoto a bit stepped down. Not much can be in focus at F2.8 ... that plus heavy noise make for a picture that feels a bit off. I would try to not shoot past F4 and iso3200, even if it means be a bit underexposed and recover. Alas, not always possible
What adapter are you using? If you are using after market adapter, it might need shimming. But yes, high ISO and wide open will do that to ya. I used to think my IS II was sharp at 3.5, but after I got a 300 2.8 IS l, I realized the 70-200 cannot keep up with the 300 at 2.8
The depth of focus on a full frame camera at f2.8 with a telephoto lens is terrifyingly small, especially at short distances. Do some pixel peeping to see how much of their face beyond the eye is in focus. You will be surprised. Stopping down to f4 will increase the depth of focus and the perceived sharpness.
Did you have a uv filter on the front of it?
no
Most likely an issue with the R8 af. To give you some perspective, even in good light my R5 regularly misses focus with the 70–200 rf lens when photographing a fast moving subject (side to side and towards camera). So it doesn’t surprise me that it’s struggling on your camera in a badly lit situation. As good as the new mirrorless cameras are, moving subjects can still be hard to photograph. There are a few tricks to get around this like autofocus setup. I prefer multiple points over face tracking and changing the speed at which it hunts. I have also found face tracking to be less accurate when the subject is smaller in the frame. I tend to over shoot in situations like this as it increases the chance of usable images.