Hi Chris.
I do shoot in RAW only. I don't use the back focus button though, I use the shutter (halfway down) to focus and then recompose.
I can't help but agree with you on the UV lens since I'm sure it's not made out of L quality glass. I also use my lens hood but I find that I can't use it if I'm using my hotshoe flash.
I'm going to try taking it off to compare and I will see if turning on the default sharpening will help at all.
Here's another example of a shot that should have been razor sharp, but is just short of that.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/23500832@N06/2242888373/
I have been sharpening in LR too and using the clarity to get by for now.
Thanks!
Ed

Eddie,
It's either your eyes or mine because that shot is looking pretty dang good to me.

Let me know how the UV Filter test goes.

Cris...

Hi Chris.
Well, I sure hope it's not MY eyes! LOL
I'll keep you posted.
Ed

What do you use for your RAW conversion? Adobe products do not support the canon picture styles, so I have no idea what they're doing with your in-camera settings.

I use canon's DPP and it works great. I have my camera set to Faithful, then I moved the tones one to the right (less red) and have sharpening on 4. (40D) On my 30D I found 4 to over do the noise on higher ISO settings.

I then use DPP for the conversion to JPG and these settings stay as DPP can read them. No more work is done for prints.

For the web or if I want super sharp prints then the first stop in PS is USM of 150%, .4 and 4. I edit, resize for web, and do the same USM again before save for web.

I do mostly portraiture and too sharp isn't a good thing, pore and complexion wise .
My main lenses are 10-22, 17-55 IS and 70-200, but I also have the 85 1.8 and recently got the 50 1.2 - all are sharp wide open IMO.

Post Processing can make a HUGE difference in what 'sharp' really is.

I currently use Adobe Lightroom/CS3 for processing and conversion to jpegs.
I have not tried using DPP I will try that. Thanks very much!