Canon RF 100-500mm f/4.5-7.1L IS USM images here.

Levina de Ruijter wrote in post #19336333
I love this, Don. Just beautiful.

Thanks, Levina !
Don

Thanks for the example of CA after using Topaz. Also, thanks for your comments about the Canon RF 100-500mm lense with the 1.4 extender. I have the RF 100-500 lens and I’m considering the extender and was concerned about how well the two work. Looks like I’ll be helping the economy again in the near future.

WoodturnerJohn wrote in post #19336387
Thanks for the example of CA after using Topaz. Also, thanks for your comments about the Canon RF 100-500mm lense with the 1.4 extender. I have the RF 100-500 lens and I’m considering the extender and was concerned about how well the two work. Looks like I’ll be helping the economy again in the near future.

You probably know this already, but the RF 100-500 only works in the 300-500 range when the extender is attached. Thus the 100-500 becomes 420-700. That said, the RF 1.4x is frequently on my lens. The image quality is excellent!

I find the 100-500 and 1.4 excellent as well.

Dave63401 wrote in post #19336344
Nice image showing massive crop. I love how deep we can crop on some images with R5.
Was this at 700mm or 454mm as LR shows.

It turned out the shot was indeed at 454mm and not 700mm. I must have confused with my other photos taken at 700mm in the same series. To avoid the heavy crop, I should have taken at 700mm but I get lost in the moment sometimes....

LJ3Jim wrote in post #19336391
You probably know this already, but the RF 100-500 only works in the 300-500 range when the extender is attached. Thus the 100-500 becomes 420-700. That said, the RF 1.4x is frequently on my lens. The image quality is excellent!

I did know about the 300mm limitation, but I sure appreciate the reminder. Also good to know your pleased with the 1.4 extender. Thanks!

Levina de Ruijter wrote in post #19336225
AFAIK CA happens when there is high contrast, like branches against a light sky. But the CA here is caused entirely by Topaz Denoise, it isn’t present in the raw file. And it is a very specific type of CA. I did some testing and it does seem to be Topaz’ Low Light mode where it’s caused. A mode to avoid then.

I've seen these color effects in Topaz. I would call them color artifacts. Has nothing to do with aberration.

Archibald wrote in post #19336417

Levina de Ruijter wrote in post #19336225
AFAIK CA happens when there is high contrast, like branches against a light sky. But the CA here is caused entirely by Topaz Denoise, it isn’t present in the raw file. And it is a very specific type of CA. I did some testing and it does seem to be Topaz’ Low Light mode where it’s caused. A mode to avoid then.

I've seen these color effects in Topaz. I would call them color artifacts. Has nothing to do with aberration.

Well, it is an aberration of sorts, isn’t it? And it does look like chromatic aberration. Still, your term is probably more accurate.

WoodturnerJohn wrote in post #19336387
Thanks for the example of CA after using Topaz. Also, thanks for your comments about the Canon RF 100-500mm lense with the 1.4 extender. I have the RF 100-500 lens and I’m considering the extender and was concerned about how well the two work. Looks like I’ll be helping the economy again in the near future.

I was a bit puzzled about the 100-500 with the 1.4xTC as I haven’t used that combo yet. So I looked at my post and part of my answer apparently was accidentally erased. I had planned to say that I had not seen any CA with the 800/11+1.4xTC but that I had yet to try out the TC with the 100-500. Sorry about that,

I tried to edit my post but in the end just deleted that whole bit as it adds nothing and only left the part about the CA in Topaz Denoise.

SYS wrote in post #19336407
It turned out the shot was indeed at 454mm and not 700mm. I must have confused with my other photos taken at 700mm in the same series. To avoid the heavy crop, I should have taken at 700mm but I get lost in the moment sometimes....

Glad I am not the only one who does that with this lens sometimes.

Levina de Ruijter wrote in post #19336423
Well, it is an aberration of sorts, isn’t it? And it does look like chromatic aberration. Still, your term is probably more accurate.

Yes, it is an aberration of a sort. Usually in photography when we say aberration we mean a fault in the optics. With Topaz we have an aberration that is more an AI fault.

Verdin...

Flicker.
Don

Photo from Littlefield's gallery.
Image hosted by forum (1142559)

Gambel's Quail in a perch dispute...