I MOVED THIS POST TO ANOTHER SECTION OF THE BOARD AND WILL REQUEST REMOVAL HERE. MY APOLOGIES.
Hello.
Desperate times...
I've been shooting wildlife with Canon--40D, 7D, just purchased the 7D Mll, and original 100-400 mm IS zoom and 500 mm f/4 IS--for about 10 years and have virtually never taken a sharp image. But it's gotten worse since I started using the latter camera.
I live 20 minutes from the Jamesburg, NJ repair center and have tried to address this with phone tech support and this location on and off for years. I've sent many images and have been told very often (save from early on) that it is not user error (though often enough I'm sure it is and I'm allowing for that).
Full disclosure, I have cognitive issues akin to ADD that keep me from having more than a rudimentary understanding of the camera and how to use it most effectively/correctly, but after sharpening/NR, I've gotten many beautiful images (8 x 10, 11 x 14, some 16 x 20), prints of which I've sold/am selling for good money at art shows. Most of these were taken with the original 7D and the 500 f/4.
That said, having updated to the Mll (which I bought upon multiple recommendations to help solve the focusing/sharpness issue), I was first told a calibration between it and the 500 would solve my problem. When it did not, I was told by the same rep that the problem can't be solved, that the technology between the two pieces of equipment are too far apart to achieve optimum results. All I want are usable images (to print as above or better). We've not come to terms on those definitions and the lens is likely going back there tomorrow.
Other Canon reps tell me this is untrue, and I tend to believe them--that I should be able to get usable images, if not the ones I'd get with the 500 mm Mll. Even with sharpening, very few are usable. I do not want and can't afford to upgrade to the Mll unless absolutely necessary.
While I appreciate technical advice, chances are I might not understand it. I say so simply to not waste anyone's time.
My question is if anyone believes this is true--that I can't expect usable images with this combination. Certainly no one at Canon or even B&H mentioned this before I purchased the camera and while the B&H rep with whom I just spoke doesn't believe it, the Canon rep indicates it's specified in various places. But I assume that doesn't mean the combination won't even produce usable images.
I typically shoot AV, AI servo, with (but also without--same issue) the 1.4 MIII extender), at 5.6 or close to it, still and barely/slowly moving subjects (Forget about flight shots...), single point focus, in bright to reasonable light, 400 ISO more often than not--adjusted when necessary but the problem exists at 400. This served me well enough--if not ideally--with the original 7D. I get there are things I can do to tweak/improve--back of camera focusing, more focal points, etc. But that's not my question/concern now.
If interested, my images are here (Many, especially older ones, are not of the quality I printed--no NR on the Flickr images at all beyond a few years ago.):
https://www.flickr.com/photos/26398858@N02/
The first few down to the chipmunk were taken with the new combo. Nothing is done to those beyond cropping, sharpening, NR, and bits of exposure/color adjustments, all with Canon's DPP software (and there's virtually no Photoshopping done on any of the other shots--maybe less than 20 of the 1000's there and that's almost exclusively minimal removal of foreign objects.). But all those and many to most others required the full sharpening DPP allows--and the detail I see in comparable photos (person shooting next to me with smaller lens) is not as great.
Would appreciate any help. Unless I can sort this out within days, as I was set to book a month long rental in FL last Friday--the disparity is likely going to cost me my first vacation in five years.
Brett
