Canon 5D Mark IV -- Time to Discuss!

Talley wrote in post #18164983
Yup. This is the reason I don't shoot long glass. I don't have the skills needed. Just know from personal experience beyond 400mm on FF that you really need equal amount of shutter with IS and having 30MP makes it a bit more of a requirement.

I find the same. I am a lousy hand held shooter, on non IS lenses I try to go for double the focal length for the shutter speed if I can.

But, If Don was having success previously on his 6D, you would think he would be having a higher hit rate even taking into account the larger sensor, if that is in fact the issue.

I posted the above before looking at the RAW file, for what it's worth, looking at the provided RAW file in DPP, there is a lack of detail front to back again. I think shutter speed could easily be the culprit here. Tripod, IS etc,. if there is a breeze, the foliage is moving, etc. shutter speed is required.

Don, maybe you could look back at some 6D examples,. was it better lighting and higher shutter speeds?

One thing I have done is in the camera settings, under "ISO Speed settings" - "Min Shutter Speed" - "Auto" - is I increased the slider up one notch to the right. That setting roughly doubles the shutter speed when in AV mode, which is a mode I use a lot of the time for general shooting. When in manual I tend not to not overlook shutter speed because you are thinking about what you are doing as opposed to letting the camera do the calculations.

Obviously there is an ISO penalty, but I would much rather have nosier sharp photos, than non noisy camera shake photos. Plus the 5D4 is awesome for high ISO.

don1163 wrote in post #18164800
Here is a link to a raw file from today if you would be good enough to have a look for me...Many thanks.
https://dl.dropboxuser​content.com/u/87087952​/070.cr2

Ferns on the far left, next to the deer's legs are sharp enough, definitely needs some adjustment.

George Zip wrote in post #18165015
One thing I have done is in the camera settings, under "ISO Speed settings" - "Min Shutter Speed" - "Auto" - is I increased the slider up one notch to the right. That setting roughly doubles the shutter speed when in AV mode, which is a mode I use a lot of the time for general shooting. When in manual I tend not to not overlook shutter speed because you are thinking about what you are doing as opposed to letting the camera do the calculations.

Obviously there is an ISO penalty, but I would much rather have nosier sharp photos, than non noisy camera shake photos. Plus the 5D4 is awesome for high ISO.

I imported your RAW file. I come to the conclusion that there is nothing wrong with the shot...except for the diffused light conditions...some noise...and a touch of motion blur. The doe on the left moved her head and nostrils to smell you, the doe on the right moved her ears to hear and locate you, otherwise they are frozen to the spot. Most animals can only see what moves. You may have twitched a touch too.

So fake it and rescue what you can.

John_T wrote in post #18165108
I imported your RAW file. I come to the conclusion that there is nothing wrong with the shot...except for the diffused light conditions...some noise...and a touch of motion blur. The doe on the left moved her head and nostrils to smell you, the doe on the right moved her ears to hear and locate you, otherwise they are frozen to the spot. Most animals can only see what moves. You may have twitched a touch too.

So fake it and rescue what you can.

Hosted photo: posted by John_T in
./showthread.php?p=181​65108&i=i17384970
forum: Canon Digital Cameras

Not my Raw file friend

George Zip wrote in post #18165118
Not my Raw file friend

Sorry, that was Don's. Confusing with so many people in the room.

hqqns wrote in post #18164963
We have to also remember too, that at 100% it's impossible to have perfect sharpness since each pixel site has only 1 colour (red green or blue) and is missing the other 2 components. Let's say a pixel we are looking at only has blue information, the red and green for that pixel comes from the surrounding pixels sites therefore effectively smoothing out the image. The actual colour is a guess at best. This is one reason why an unsharpening mask at preprocess stage can work so well. And should almost always be done.

The Bayer sensor sees luminance at all pixels, unless the color is so saturated that nothing comes through. Most things we shoot have at least some light in all color channels; even the red, green, and blue patches on a color checker have some of the other two primary colors.

100% pixel view is not a standard measure of a lens, however, as different demosaicing and conversion methods have different levels of NR and sharpening, and different pixel sizes and AA filters limit pixel contrast differently, but if you know the pixel size and if there is an AA filter, you get an idea of what the potential is, and NR and sharpening are kind of self-revealing. Not a very precise environment, but much more useful than downsampled pixels; I can make a 1280- or 1024-pixel wide image from a FF camera look sharp even at a high ISO and with a soft lens, or slightly OOF subject.

My first test to see what is going on with a lens and camera (or with a TC, too) is to find a detailed flat surface, set the camera so that I get a fast shutter speed at a low or moderate ISO (or use flash, if it too dark), and shoot that surface at a slight angle to perpendicular, as Teamspeed has mentioned, too, and then zooming into the capture at 100% and seeing if the plane of focus is in the image, how sharp it is, and if it is where the focus point was supposed to be. This gets right to the bottom of things, as far as sharpness and mis-focus are concerned. Shooting scenes where nothing may be in focus is not a good starting point, IMO; too much mystery.

Talley wrote in post #18164888
Looks acceptable for me in dim lit area at ISO 1600. The exact center part of the image is slightly behind the deer, just behind the rear legs. It's obvious in the areas that I've highlighted. I've also can say it's not as sharp as I'd like in the center but the sharpness near the edges are very good. Compared to my personal use of the 300 2.8 IS it seems that what I'm seeing should be the case... the 300 is sharper in the center while the 500 holds better in the edge/corners. See this: http://www.the-digital-picture.com …omp=0&FLIComp=0​&APIComp=0

To me that F4 would be a very very thin overall pure sharpness with a more subtle fall off than say something like a 400mm 2.8 which is obvious here: http://howmuchblur.com …m-f4-on-a-8m-wide-subject

The howmuchblur site shows the 500 to have less blur so it's perceived right at the edge of pure sharpness in focus would seem just soft and thats what I'm seeing here.... combined with ISO 1600 vs some of those other shots you showed me where a lower ISO. 30MP at 500mm you need probably 1/500 at a minimum and more likely 1/800 for ultimate tack sharp. I'd try 1/1000 with the IS turned off to see if the IS is having any issues as well. Shoot in pure daylight though and make sure it's ISO 100.

I know it seems to be a pita but I think with some more work you'll get that lens dialed in.

EDIT: The uploads in my post are really image degraded vs what I'm seeing over here on a 4K monitor in lightroom looking at the RAW.

Hosted photo: posted by Talley in
./showthread.php?p=181​64888&i=i116001676
forum: Canon Digital Cameras

Hosted photo: posted by Talley in
./showthread.php?p=181​64888&i=i181832103
forum: Canon Digital Cameras

Thanks a lot for having a look for me Talley...I think most of what you are saying is right and Im probably expecting too much at 1600 at f4 and slower shutter speeds....The light was very poor and I should not have expected good results...
When you say shoot in pure daylight at ISO 100 you forget I am in the UK....I have owned my 500 for about a year now and I have NEVER shot at ISO 100, if I can shoot as low as ISO 800 I am doing really well
I have spent all afternoon shooting various things at home (even lines of clothes pegs in the garden and have come to the conclusion +7 works best...The weather in the UK is forecast for cloudy all week (probably because I have a weeks holiday) but I am going to shoot some squirrels tomorrow and see what sort of results I get....

Talley wrote in post #18164749
This and to me on these small photos seems front or back focused even the bird shots

Yep, the deer photos look like there's some front focusing going on.

CyberDyneSystems wrote in post #18164991
I posted the above before looking at the RAW file, for what it's worth, looking at the provided RAW file in DPP, there is a lack of detail front to back again. I think shutter speed could easily be the culprit here. Tripod, IS etc,. if there is a breeze, the foliage is moving, etc. shutter speed is required.

Don, maybe you could look back at some 6D examples,. was it better lighting and higher shutter speeds?

Jake I have reviewed some of my 6D samples from a shoot at the same place 2 weeks before...ISO and shutter speeds were the same but I was mainly shooting at f5.6 instead of f4....also the light wasnt as flat it was a bit brighter....There was a massive difference in the sharpness of images between the 2 shoots...
Looking back at previous shots, I very rarely shoot at 1/500 with this lens...normaly between 180th and 400th....maybe it is time I upped my shutter speeds due to the 30mp sensor and tried different techniques...

Look at the shadows of plants and other things before you go out. If the shadows are dark and sharp, good times. If they are faint or non-existent, you know what you are in for.

George Zip wrote in post #18164724
But are you upping the shutter speed to allow for the increase in MP?

I didn't know this. I would love an explanation as to why this is so.

Levina de Ruijter wrote in post #18165519
I didn't know this. I would love an explanation as to why this is so.

Smaller pixels means smaller movement shows motion blur.

don1163 wrote in post #18165488
Thanks a lot for having a look for me Talley...I think most of what you are saying is right and Im probably expecting too much at 1600 at f4 and slower shutter speeds....The light was very poor and I should not have expected good results...
When you say shoot in pure daylight at ISO 100 you forget I am in the UK....I have owned my 500 for about a year now and I have NEVER shot at ISO 100, if I can shoot as low as ISO 800 I am doing really well
I have spent all afternoon shooting various things at home (even lines of clothes pegs in the garden and have come to the conclusion +7 works best...The weather in the UK is forecast for cloudy all week (probably because I have a weeks holiday) but I am going to shoot some squirrels tomorrow and see what sort of results I get....

I share your pain!

I have noticed a huge difference in perceived sharpness, depending on the quantity, and even angles, of light. I've come across a few interesting articles over the years going into the issue of angle of light - especially for birds; for which the apparent sharpness can be hugely affected.

Whilst (as CDS noted) ISO 1600 is nothing in terms of high ISO for the 5D4 (good times ) it will have some noise, and combined with flat/diffuse light it's unlikely to result in that "pop" you see when the light's right.

Most lenses benefit from being stopped down just a bit too, though this http://www.the-digital-picture.com …omp=0&FLIComp=0​&APIComp=2 would hint that the 500L is still pretty good wide open.

John_T wrote in post #18165500
Look at the shadows of plants and other things before you go out. If the shadows are dark and sharp, good times. If they are faint or non-existent, you know what you are in for.

Ironically as a former macro guy, that was the worst kind of light (flat and diffuse tends to be better for flowers)