Am I expecting too much from the 100-400?

So I have had the 100-400 4.5 - 5.6 for about a month now and have had some success. But, some shots I feel should be more sharp. Here is a Kingfisher shot about 40 yards uncropped and then cropped. The cropped version is not as sharp as I think it should be held with a monopod. Am I asking too much from the lens?

I've got no experience with this lens, but that's a pretty heavy crop.

Lol with a crop like that even a 10000$ lens is gonna look like sh**

Yes, subject way too far away. And the heavy compression from attaching the image (instead of a linked image) doesn't help either.

When we look at stunning bird photos from pros, not only do they use extremely expensive lenses, BUT they also do everything in their power to get close to birds and frame them in a way that they won't have to crop a lot (if any) when they process their images.
Bird photography is a tough art, requires equipment but also a lot of skills and planning.

Is that enlarged beyond 100%? If so, I would say that's probably about what you would expect out of the 100-400L.

First, do you have a filter on that 100-400mm? A lot of folks with the lens have noted that it really doesn't like filters. Even high quality filters mess with it's sharpness. So, if you've got a filter on it... try again without it.

Plus IS can only do so much.... you shot that at 1/1000, but it's possible to get too much camera shake even at higher shutter speeds. That might have happened here, hard to tell.

In general, too, I agree, that's an insane level of cropping... nothing is going to look very good cropped that much.

You could do yourself a favor and get a crop camera for use with the 100-400mm. That would "put a lot more pixels on target", than your full frame 5DIII. It's not quite like using a "free 1.6X teleconverter", due to some loss of sharpness with the smaller sensor... However, by the time you crop a 5DIII image down to the equivalent 15x22mm of a crop camera, you are left with little more than an 8 or 9MP image (compared to 18MP with a 7D, 60D, T5i/700D, etc.)

The alternative is to get a much longer lens to use on your 5DIII, and that's a much more expensive proposition.... upwards of $10,000 US. You'll also need a sturdy tripod to put the rig on... add another $1000 to $2000 for that.

But anything you do will struggle to some extent unless and until you get closer to your subject. It takes a lot of patience and stalking skills... plus a dash of luck. Spend hours sitting and waiting in a blind, use attractants, get to know your subject and their habits, etc.

I've been into bird photography for many years and in my experience, you're just too far way from your subject. If you want to get more serious about capturing bird pictures, a portable blind and a feeder will help.

Nice try Eric, but like everyone said its just too much of an enlargement/crop to be pleasing. You don't necessarily need different equip you but you can use the equipment you have...your legs! Just walk closer slowly, quietly and with patience. You will find that done correctly your current setup will yield better results. I'm not being sarcastic either. We all have to do the above and have had to learn how to do it. I'm sure you can/will succeed!

All great advice already given. The 100-400 is a very good lens but this bird was way to distant. You did really well to get focus with so much branch clutter.

If you want to get more pixels on your subject you'll need to hone your technique for getting close. I've always said that if bird photography was easy I wouldn't do it. The challenge to get close is a big part of what I enjoy about this type of photography. Kingfishers are among the toughest subjects I like to photograph. I like them for a lot of reasons but their skittish nature and intelligence are a fun challenge to be reckoned with that helps keep them atop my favorites list.

Here's what I like to do to tilt the odds in my favor. Some days the birds are more nervous than others but with persistence and patience you can fill the frame with a Kingfisher at 400mm. Learn their habits, get there before they do and they'll come right to you.

http://www.wildlifesou​th.com …11/Belted_Kingf​isher.html

If you search the Bird section here you can see more of my recent Kingfishers as well. Good luck on your quest.

if that shot is at the 400mm end, you need to be closer for a crisp clear picture. I have a Canon L 600mm and my lens would struggle with that crop. I would also tripod your camera and lens at 400, the slightest movement will cause blur. Also remember the long tele's like lots of light, even a hazy day will not produce good results.
Good luck and keep shooting

Echoing what others said, given how much you cropped, I'd say you did splendidly. Can't expect too much more.

As said you're too far away & cropping too deeply. I'd bet the crop is well under .1% of the full frame.

Here's a sample shot and hard crop I took with the 100-400L and 5D Classic. I don't normally push the crop this hard but it held up ok. I was considerably closer to this Prothonotary Warbler than you were to the Kingfisher which helped make this crop more possible. This small bird was about 20 meters away at 380mm, had it been 20-30 meters further this would not have worked nearly as well. With some testing I found that my copy of the 100-400L is a bit sharper just under full zoom, 380-390mm.

Thanks for all of the advice! I assumed I was expecting too much but wanted to be sure since this lens is new to me. Thanks again.

It takes time...a solid support, fast AF, and closer is all expected. Here is my combo..again I realise the price we paid for a 400 f5=2.8/ 600 f4