Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 
Thread started 17 Dec 2014 (Wednesday) 10:12
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS II USM Review WOW!

 
Pondrader
"now I'm no rocket scientist but I do get a shot or two"
Avatar
14,531 posts
Gallery: 2171 photos
Best ofs: 5
Likes: 45053
Joined Aug 2012
Location: Minden, Ontario, Canada
Post edited over 1 year ago by Pondrader.
     
Jan 13, 2017 19:21 |  #5191

Tc202 wrote in post #18243662 (external link)
Thanks; I love seeing the details our eyes can't see :-)

You were very close on the Bison lol in a car I do suppose.


HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.


Jeff ........7D Mark II, 7D, 70-300L, 100-400LII
flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
DionM
Senior Member
353 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 20
Joined Oct 2004
Location: Brisbane, Australia
     
Jan 14, 2017 08:33 |  #5192

I took my 100-400 II out for the first time in a while today bird shooting. I had the 1.4x TCIII attached. I will add that my usual birding lens is a 600/4 II. Today I wanted a light setup.

I had it attached to my 7D2, on a Wimberley gimbal on a monopod.

While I am quite satisfied with the overall IQ of photos of birds where the bird was quite close, when the bird was farther away the IQ is significantly worse. Note that I am not talking about cropping artefacts - a close-in shot of a small bird vs a large bird at a further distance (and thus, appearing about the same size in the captured image) has a better IQ. The shots of birds further away have poor detail and a smeary, even at ISO200 to 400.

Anyone care to comment? Today was a hot day, so no doubt atmospheric conditions were at play, but I've never noticed this with my 600mm lens.


Gear List
Gallery (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
wallstreetoneil
Goldmember
Avatar
2,085 posts
Gallery: 14 photos
Likes: 1201
Joined Nov 2014
Location: Toronto Canada
     
Jan 14, 2017 09:46 |  #5193

DionM wrote in post #18244036 (external link)
I took my 100-400 II out for the first time in a while today bird shooting. I had the 1.4x TCIII attached. I will add that my usual birding lens is a 600/4 II. Today I wanted a light setup.

I had it attached to my 7D2, on a Wimberley gimbal on a monopod.

While I am quite satisfied with the overall IQ of photos of birds where the bird was quite close, when the bird was farther away the IQ is significantly worse. Note that I am not talking about cropping artefacts - a close-in shot of a small bird vs a large bird at a further distance (and thus, appearing about the same size in the captured image) has a better IQ. The shots of birds further away have poor detail and a smeary, even at ISO200 to 400.

Anyone care to comment? Today was a hot day, so no doubt atmospheric conditions were at play, but I've never noticed this with my 600mm lens.


Since it would seem your issue is not the lens per say but the lens when shoot at distance, the most obvious question would be stability of the rig or SS
- given you were at 560mm F8 vs 600mm F4, i.e. 1/4 the light, did you lower your SS to keep similar ISOs?
- the 100-400II with 1.4x would be significantly lighter than the 600mmF4 - maybe your big rig was better dampened overall and you have more experience with the much heavier 600F4
- are you shooting with the same IS setup on both lenses? - if IS was on, I might guess that while I know the IS on the 100-400Lii is truly excellent, maybe the 600F4's is even better - plus the size of the lens making it more stable overall
- while the 1.4xiii reportedly works very well on the 100-400Lii, I have both, I have yet to see any concrete proof that you aren't better just not using it and then performing additional cropping - on this point, have you had the chance to test whether you get the same experience if the 1.4xiii was not attached and shooting at fF5.6 and then cropping?

Concerning the small pixel 7D2 & 5DSR
- my experience, having owned both (I am also a 1DxII owner), is that the pixel size of these cameras is more sensitive than larger pixel FF cameras to anything but perfectly bright conditions and stopping lenses down - thus I personally would not use the 1.4Xii so that I can shoot at F5.6 rather than F8 on the 7D2
- i did a lot of testing of both of these cameras against 5D3s and 1DXii, and when you do the right type of low contrast + back light type AF tests, these small pixel cameras begin to really struggle - whereas, put then in good light and they are both amazing in terms of focus

not sure if any of that helps


Hockey and wedding photographer. Favourite camera / lens combos: a 1DX II with a Tamron 45 1.8 VC, an A7Rii with a Canon 24-70F2.8L II, and a 5DSR with a Tamron 85 1.8 VC. Every lens I own I strongly recommend [Canon (35Lii, 100L Macro, 24-70F2.8ii, 70-200F2.8ii, 100-400Lii), Tamron (45 1.8, 85 1.8), Sigma 24-105]. If there are better lenses out there let me know because I haven't found them.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
CyberDyneSystems
THREAD ­ STARTER
Admin (type T-2000)
Avatar
48,765 posts
Gallery: 151 photos
Likes: 5329
Joined Apr 2003
Location: Rhode Island USA
     
Jan 14, 2017 14:37 |  #5194

DionM wrote in post #18244036 (external link)
...

Anyone care to comment? ....

Not without example images and exif :)


GEAR LIST
CDS' HOT LINKS
Jake Hegnauer Photography (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
DionM
Senior Member
353 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 20
Joined Oct 2004
Location: Brisbane, Australia
     
Jan 15, 2017 06:29 |  #5195

Here's a couple - not a perfect example but hopefully enough to be illustrative.

Both images have been cropped a little in Lightroom.

The first shot I'm happy with - its a much smaller bird who was closer. Second image is muddy in the detail.


HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.


HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.


Gear List
Gallery (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
DionM
Senior Member
353 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 20
Joined Oct 2004
Location: Brisbane, Australia
     
Jan 15, 2017 06:32 |  #5196

wallstreetoneil wrote in post #18244106 (external link)
Since it would seem your issue is not the lens per say but the lens when shoot at distance, the most obvious question would be stability of the rig or SS
- given you were at 560mm F8 vs 600mm F4, i.e. 1/4 the light, did you lower your SS to keep similar ISOs?
- the 100-400II with 1.4x would be significantly lighter than the 600mmF4 - maybe your big rig was better dampened overall and you have more experience with the much heavier 600F4
- are you shooting with the same IS setup on both lenses? - if IS was on, I might guess that while I know the IS on the 100-400Lii is truly excellent, maybe the 600F4's is even better - plus the size of the lens making it more stable overall
- while the 1.4xiii reportedly works very well on the 100-400Lii, I have both, I have yet to see any concrete proof that you aren't better just not using it and then performing additional cropping - on this point, have you had the chance to test whether you get the same experience if the 1.4xiii was not attached and shooting at fF5.6 and then cropping?

Concerning the small pixel 7D2 & 5DSR
- my experience, having owned both (I am also a 1DxII owner), is that the pixel size of these cameras is more sensitive than larger pixel FF cameras to anything but perfectly bright conditions and stopping lenses down - thus I personally would not use the 1.4Xii so that I can shoot at F5.6 rather than F8 on the 7D2
- i did a lot of testing of both of these cameras against 5D3s and 1DXii, and when you do the right type of low contrast + back light type AF tests, these small pixel cameras begin to really struggle - whereas, put then in good light and they are both amazing in terms of focus

not sure if any of that helps

I kept my shutter speeds around the same. I generally don't go below 1/320th at all with birds, and try to be higher if the light allows. My typical shooting style is manual aperture and shutter, auto-ISO, with exp. comp dialled in as I see fit.

I had the 100-400 on a monopod so tried to keep my handholding out of it (same monopod I use with the 600).

Just to reiterate I was happy with the 100-400 II and TC when shooting close in subjects, it was just subjects further away I wasn't as happy with.


Gear List
Gallery (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Pondrader
"now I'm no rocket scientist but I do get a shot or two"
Avatar
14,531 posts
Gallery: 2171 photos
Best ofs: 5
Likes: 45053
Joined Aug 2012
Location: Minden, Ontario, Canada
Post edited over 1 year ago by Pondrader.
     
Jan 15, 2017 08:15 as a reply to  @ DionM's post |  #5197

shooting small birds at 1/400 with the 1.4 T-con on the 100-400LII at 560mm can be done by some sometimes but walking around shooting like that you will get motion blur more often than not. I know its a nice small package but your reaching 560mm and shooting at 1/400. Yes we all do it but if your not floating that camera so as to cut down on your shake your gone get just what you see 90% of the time. and only if your IS is working for you. Grab a stick about 6 feet long and try and hold the other end completely still, bet ya can't do it. now think of the 30 foot stick your thinking you can do easily with every shot. big lenses on tripods are completely different animal. yes you can hand hold them both but motion blur is the killer of detail everytime, along with using servo..like we all do. we expect way more from our cameras than ever before and I think the branch has your focus so the birds eye is not as sharp as you would like but his wing and the branch are. That little point your seeing through the viewfinder is indeed way bigger than your thinking. I would have tried to walk the focus up through his head and pulled the trigger as I was leaving the bird completely and maybe 2 or 3 inches above him. which would have left the bottom edge of the focus on the top of his head. I shoot spot 99% of the time.

For instance... yes its cropped so you cant see the center point put holding on the yellow throat he's really at the back edge of the depth of field and focus is in front of him. I think most of our problems stem from this expectation of where the focus should be.

Now this is my take on this problem of getting focus where we want it. I know theres guys that can explain it so much better, but I'm just a shooter and take from my images what I can to get them to where I want them to be. The second image shows it can happen once in a while.


HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.


HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.


Jeff ........7D Mark II, 7D, 70-300L, 100-400LII
flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
AnnieMacD
Oops, me again
Avatar
3,094 posts
Gallery: 492 photos
Best ofs: 4
Likes: 4963
Joined Aug 2012
Location: Applecross, Scotland
     
Jan 15, 2017 10:37 as a reply to  @ Pondrader's post |  #5198

Thanks, Pondrader, for explaining the way you focus. As you are my wildlife hero I will try to implement your method. I often miss focus on little critters that are far away and often wondered why as my lens focuses fine on my pet sheep. But then he's close and big!


flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Pondrader
"now I'm no rocket scientist but I do get a shot or two"
Avatar
14,531 posts
Gallery: 2171 photos
Best ofs: 5
Likes: 45053
Joined Aug 2012
Location: Minden, Ontario, Canada
Post edited over 1 year ago by Pondrader. (2 edits in all)
     
Jan 15, 2017 10:41 |  #5199

AnnieMacD wrote in post #18245041 (external link)
Thanks, Pondrader, for explaining the way you focus. As you are my wildlife hero I will try to implement your method. I often miss focus on little critters that are far away and often wondered why as my lens focuses fine on my pet sheep. But then he's close and big!

Thanks Annie,. I think it would be great to have a thread where we all share our thoughts on how we got there. I'm in if we do..


Jeff ........7D Mark II, 7D, 70-300L, 100-400LII
flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
AnnieMacD
Oops, me again
Avatar
3,094 posts
Gallery: 492 photos
Best ofs: 4
Likes: 4963
Joined Aug 2012
Location: Applecross, Scotland
     
Jan 15, 2017 10:44 |  #5200

Pondrader wrote in post #18245050 (external link)
Thanks Annie,. I think it would be great to have a thread were we all share our thoughts on how we got there. I'm in if we do..

Me too - you can start it!


flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
wallstreetoneil
Goldmember
Avatar
2,085 posts
Gallery: 14 photos
Likes: 1201
Joined Nov 2014
Location: Toronto Canada
Post edited over 1 year ago by wallstreetoneil.
     
Jan 15, 2017 11:40 |  #5201

DionM wrote in post #18244895 (external link)
Here's a couple - not a perfect example but hopefully enough to be illustrative.

Both images have been cropped a little in Lightroom.

The first shot I'm happy with - its a much smaller bird who was closer. Second image is muddy in the detail.


thumbnail
Hosted photo: posted by DionM in
./showthread.php?p=182​44895&i=i258617902
forum: Canon EF and EF-S Lenses



thumbnail
Hosted photo: posted by DionM in
./showthread.php?p=182​44895&i=i36140847
forum: Canon EF and EF-S Lenses


I remember a line I heard quoted by Tony Northrup on one of his videos when he was shooting wildlife - and it was, first use the proper SS to get a tack sharp image - and once you know that you have a few good ones in the bag, then you can lower your SS, maybe dramatically in order to get a much lower ISO, but be prepared to take 20,30,50 shots and hope for a sharp one.

When I look at your exposure data (F9, 1/400, ISO 500) what I see is something that is half pregnant - i.e. not a fast enough SS at that FL with that pixel density and that distance on a small detailed object to 90% of the time get it tack sharp, and not a scenario I mentioned above trying for ISO 100/200 and accepting that 1 in 30 might work out. As an example your (F9,1/400, ISO 500) is equivalent to (F8, 1/800, ISO 800) - a SS more closer to getting a much higher hit rate (but still not 90% in my opinion) - or maybe even better for tack sharpness (F8, 1/1250, ISO 1250).

There is no question, once you start shooting with a high megapixel density camera (7D2, 5DSR) the tendency is to crop and pixel peep - but that is when we start to really, really see that things are not as sharp as we thought (unless we really nail it). My guess is really the same as I mentioned above, and it is that it is a combo of a bigger steadier rig, and that with more aperture you are using faster shutter speeds. If you had of showed us a 1/800-1/1250 SS picture that wasn't sharp then maybe there might have been a lens problem - as it is, 1/400 at 560mm on a 7D2 pixel density on a fast moving small bird at distance = not unexpected - but take 30 pictures and you should get a few real keepers.


Hockey and wedding photographer. Favourite camera / lens combos: a 1DX II with a Tamron 45 1.8 VC, an A7Rii with a Canon 24-70F2.8L II, and a 5DSR with a Tamron 85 1.8 VC. Every lens I own I strongly recommend [Canon (35Lii, 100L Macro, 24-70F2.8ii, 70-200F2.8ii, 100-400Lii), Tamron (45 1.8, 85 1.8), Sigma 24-105]. If there are better lenses out there let me know because I haven't found them.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
hornrocker
Senior Member
Avatar
323 posts
Gallery: 19 photos
Likes: 152
Joined Nov 2008
Location: Illinois
     
Jan 15, 2017 16:31 |  #5202

Pondrader wrote in post #18243664 (external link)
You were very close on the Bison lol in a car I do suppose.
thumbnail
Hosted photo: posted by Pondrader in
./showthread.php?p=182​43664&i=i108577984
forum: Canon EF and EF-S Lenses

Geez, once again.... just a BEAUTIFUL shot



Mark
Much more gear than talent....

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
dodgyexposure
Goldmember
2,872 posts
Gallery: 14 photos
Likes: 234
Joined Jul 2012
Location: Brisbane, Australia
     
Jan 15, 2017 17:27 |  #5203

Pondrader wrote in post #18244963 (external link)
That little point your seeing through the viewfinder is indeed way bigger than your thinking. I would have tried to walk the focus up through his head and pulled the trigger as I was leaving the bird completely and maybe 2 or 3 inches above him. which would have left the bottom edge of the focus on the top of his head. I shoot spot 99% of the time.

Thanks for the tip, that's a great idea to try out. Now to find me a fox . . .


Cheers, Damien

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Pondrader
"now I'm no rocket scientist but I do get a shot or two"
Avatar
14,531 posts
Gallery: 2171 photos
Best ofs: 5
Likes: 45053
Joined Aug 2012
Location: Minden, Ontario, Canada
     
Jan 15, 2017 19:04 |  #5204

dodgyexposure wrote in post #18245429 (external link)
Thanks for the tip, that's a great idea to try out. Now to find me a fox . . .

Very funny Damien, finding is the easy part. getting close to him is way more difficult, getting a sharp image...Impossible if your panting like a freight train. tip number #2


Jeff ........7D Mark II, 7D, 70-300L, 100-400LII
flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Pondrader
"now I'm no rocket scientist but I do get a shot or two"
Avatar
14,531 posts
Gallery: 2171 photos
Best ofs: 5
Likes: 45053
Joined Aug 2012
Location: Minden, Ontario, Canada
     
Jan 15, 2017 19:04 |  #5205

hornrocker wrote in post #18245366 (external link)
Geez, once again.... just a BEAUTIFUL shot

Thank You Mark..


Jeff ........7D Mark II, 7D, 70-300L, 100-400LII
flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

2,186,500 views & 23,004 likes for this thread
EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS II USM Review WOW!
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is remyzer099
722 guests, 393 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 6430, that happened on Dec 03, 2017

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.