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

When I ship gear to Canon I put it in a Ziploc bag and I use foam the type you can configure to any shape this keeps it secure in the box.
I may be a bit excessive but I don't want them saying it was damaged in shipping.
One thing to note when I receive the gear back Its usually just wrapped in bubble wrap not really secure in the box.
The other option is to have UPS,FedEx Etc. pack it for you. And be sure to insure it.
I'm in Ct. so for me to ship to their NJ facility ground is basically overnight for me.
John

Another thought. The TC does not take up much room but I don't think Canon can calibrate your camera to your lens and then calibrate your camera, lens and TC. It is either one or the other. Obviously you are going to get your gear checked out as well which includes the TC. I'd get the camera and lens calibrated to each other and then you may have to do some MFA for the TC at home. Something I would ask Canon about.

a couple of shots from last weekends local polo match

Thanks guys.

I use the 100-400II almost exclusively at 400mm. This is why I need it, and I do need the TC - I need all the FL I can get.

Without the TC, the AF MA is at +1. With the TC - it is +4.

Last weekend I had a brief vacation in Florida, and I visited Ritch Grissom Wetland Area. Hundreds and hundreds of birds. I was shooting mostly at 560 mm FL. Some of the shots were fuzzy, some - excellent, and the shutter speed never got longer than 1/1600. Of course in a few instances the ISO went up to 3200 and noise appeared, but I was mostly able to clean it up in the LightRoom. I suspect it may be my technique, but with 1/1600 things should not get blurry, I think.

I will post a few images later for comments on the subject.

Lbsimon wrote in post #18267910
I use the 100-400II almost exclusively at 400mm. This is why I need it, and I do need the TC - I need all the FL I can get.

Without the TC, the AF MA is at +1. With the TC - it is +4.

Honsetly, I just find the AF a little less accurate with the 1.4 III, but I admit I never tried to microadjust it. The lens is solid -/+0 at 100 and 400 for me, so I never tried to repeat it with the TC on.

I may just do that this weekend and report back.

Regardless, I love the TC ♥

IMAGE LINK: https://www.flickr.com …/album-72157679955021366/

_G7C6193.jpg

Iceaero wrote in post #18268134
Honsetly, I just find the AF a little less accurate with the 1.4 III, but I admit I never tried to microadjust it. The lens is solid -/+0 at 100 and 400 for me, so I never tried to repeat it with the TC on.

I may just do that this weekend and report back.

Regardless, I love the TC ♥

IMAGE LINK: https://www.flickr.com …/album-72157679955021366/
_G7C6193.jpg by IceAero on Flickr

I need about +13 on my 100-400mm II/1.4x, but close to zero without the TC.

New to me 100-400ii arrived today, the IS is incredible, equal or better than the 100 2.8L....but at 400mm.

Burchells zebra shot just before the sun cut the horizon in Mokala National Park, South Africa

Loving this lens.

Another image from my trip to Mokala National Park.

Iceaero wrote in post #18268134
Honsetly, I just find the AF a little less accurate with the 1.4 III, but I admit I never tried to microadjust it. The lens is solid -/+0 at 100 and 400 for me, so I never tried to repeat it with the TC on.

I may just do that this weekend and report back.

Regardless, I love the TC ♥

IMAGE LINK: https://www.flickr.com …/album-72157679955021366/
_G7C6193.jpg by IceAero on Flickr

I really like this image. Have you tried different crops?

Power line Sunday.

Coming in hot Sir!!!

Fantastic!

These guys are so smart!!!