100-400 mm Just got it

So I just got my canon 100-400mm couple of days ago and finally got the chance to use it in the local woods, For some reason the image quality doesn't look right to me especially when compared to the images posted on the 100-400mm archive thread.

Do these look sharp enough to you for this lens since i haven't owned any other long telephoto I don't know whether this amount of out of the camera image sharpness is fine or not.

exif should be intact

using 5d mk ii

1930 x 1013

EMBED PREVENTED, IMAGE TOO LARGE: http://img401.imagesha​ck.us/img401/4186/nopp​test.jpg Click here to see our image rules.

IMAGE LINK: http://img710.imagesha​ck.us/i/nopptest2.jpg/

A few quick responses:

- Make sure you don't have a UV/skylight filter installed. The 100-400 doesn't seem to like filters.

- The first shot was at 1/250th sec at 400mm. This is really too slow if hand-held. The IS on the 100-400 isn't that great and you need at least 1/focal length IMHO to be sure of a good result.

Thanks for the advice dude, really appreciated. However I wasn't using any filters but your right about the slow shutter speed.

how does the second shot look to you, I think it was at 600+ shutter speed.

I think I used tripod for these too

Are these full images without any cropping?

they are all 100% crops without any other pp

abuha wrote in post #14321626
they are all 100% crops without any other pp

Then I'd say these are fine and sharp. Just a bit overexposed in #1.

Yea, I agree - especially the second at the faster shutter speed. Just go out and enjoy it. Take a look at my flicker page - I took some shots of gulls in flight recently with my 100-400 and I think they turned out ok. It's a great lens for the money.

If you're using a tripod make sure you have IS turned off. That will foul you up. The 100-400 doesn't have the auto-tripod detect feature like some of the newer IS lenses. I use mine for car races and the range works out well. It's a great lens - enjoy.

If those are 100% crops, I would say that they look great

I would not be happy with those. I was about to pull the trigger on a 100-400 but not real sure now. Looks like color fringing and tons of noise and not very sharp at all. I can't tell what the camera setting were....I'm new here. Could you elaborate? Shot a smaller JPEG size maybe

Crops without any PP? they look fine. I just got the same lens also at a pretty good used price. I haven't done any sharpness test etc. Just been snapping photos. Had a few prints made and I'm real happy with them.

Looks to me like you have a good lens. I've read so many pro's and con's that its just not pratical to go there. I just have to use it and learn it. Not every snap is gona be a keeper. But I think your well on your way with the ducks.

I know one thing I'm glad I finally broke down and got one.

Congratulations on the new purchase. Ive seen a lot of great shots with that lens and once you find your groove you will get some too..

Congratulations, very jealous.

thanks for all of your input guys, I sat down and had a look at all of the images, found out the crap ones were all at a very low shutter speed. Still I am going to the shops to test out the prime to see how it performs.

Dean_Fuller wrote in post #14323678
I would not be happy with those. I was about to pull the trigger on a 100-400 but not real sure now. Looks like color fringing and tons of noise and not very sharp at all. I can't tell what the camera setting were....I'm new here. Could you elaborate? Shot a smaller JPEG size maybe

These are 100% crops with no PP.

If these are RAW shots they are excellent.

You have a very good lens there. I think SS was the culprit for the first. Also you may want to check that it's not front focusing at all, or maybe you just missed the eye by a hair. Even if it was bang on target, it still looks great for SOOC 100%