Canon 100-400mm lookin soft

[mboucher]

Hey,

I'm fairly new to bird photography and just recently picked up a used Canon 400D and a new Canon 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 L IS lens. I don't know if I'm doing anything wrong but the image quality seems to be severely lacking at the 400mm end.

I've heard reports of people receiving soft lenses, which I hope isn't the case with the one I got, I hope I'm just doing something wrong.

All my shots have been handheld with IS-1 turned on. I try to use f/8 when I'm at 400 mm with a shutter speed of around 1/350 and ISO no more that 400 otherwise the photos seem to have a lot of noise.

I really have no idea how to fix the seemingly soft images I'm getting at 400mm so any help would be much appreciated. Thanks.

- Mike

[a.dancy]

It would help if you could post a few large size pics (800 pix wide) with little or no processing. Downsize to quality 9 or 10.

You might also try some test shots with the camera on a firm base and check the focusing.

[GYRob]

Test it on a static subject (clear writing) on a tripod, use the self timer, 100 iso shutter around 1/500 sec
this way you will find out how sharp the lens really is Birds are not the best thing to test on .
Rob.

[mike from ebbw]

I agree with Rob.This can also be done indoors with anything static with writing on it.I use a Ketchup bottle usually when testing a lens.

[RoyH]

Hey,

I'm fairly new to bird photography and just recently picked up a used Canon 400D and a new Canon 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 L IS lens. I don't know if I'm doing anything wrong but the image quality seems to be severely lacking at the 400mm end.

I've heard reports of people receiving soft lenses, which I hope isn't the case with the one I got, I hope I'm just doing something wrong.

All my shots have been handheld with IS-1 turned on. I try to use f/8 when I'm at 400 mm with a shutter speed of around 1/350 and ISO no more that 400 otherwise the photos seem to have a lot of noise.

Others may disagree but I have found shooting still subjects with the IS set to position Two I found that dregrades the sharpness, I mostly shoot IS set to position One unless I am taking a crossing shot.

I really have no idea how to fix the seemingly soft images I'm getting at 400mm so any help would be much appreciated. Thanks.

- Mike

Hello Mike, I have used my 100-400 for a number of years with the 10D, I still have that lens but I have purchased a 40D and 300 f2.8 & f4. I was advised many years ago by Nigel Blake to stop down to f8 at the long end that did improve the soft situation. I agree with Rob, fur and feather are not the best subjects. Done quite well using that lens for motorsport. I still have the 10D the IQ and low noise takes some beating. Pity that camera is slow compared to the 40D. Check my site most of the pre 40D bird images were taken using the 10D/100-400 @ f8 ISO 200. www.royhowell.co.uk . The downside of stopping down you need good light.

Regards

Roy.

[mboucher]

thanks for the help guys.

Today I tried again without a filter and got a little closer and it seemed to make a huge difference.

dancy, when you say I should post a pic in here, do you mean a 100% crop of the jpeg straight from the camera untouched by me? or the raw file 100% crop?

[Keith Reeder]

Just post what you consider to be a typical representative shot to start with.

And - just to encourage you - this is what I consider to be representative of my 100-400mm. Some aren't at 400mm, but I doubt you could tell which are which without looking at the Exif.

None of them are stopped down far either - they're all f/6.3, but I use f/5.6 in the main.

[mboucher]

Here are a few sample images of what I've been getting at 400mm. all are completely unedited.

142390 142391142392

[Keith Reeder]

So these are full images resized?

I don't actually see anything too worrying about these to be honest - they're not "soft", they're just in need of some PP and (no offence intended!) some more effort put into getting the exposure and composition closer to right in the camera.

The cardinal, for example is at 1/60 at f/5.6 which is always going to run the risk of some camera/lens shake, even with an IS lens, even though you used flash - and it looks almost black in there, so you're not going to get the kind of contrast that makes the image pop and look sharp (you need some light for sharp images with the 100-400mm! ;))

It's a similar story with the wren: it's only at 1/250, which is a marginal shutter speed for 400mm and IS if you're not used to the lens and perhaps haven't learned effective handholding technique - and again, it's a backlit but low contrast scene which is going to be hard to get anything out of.

The finch is not too bad really. Again, the light isn't where you'd want it, putting the bird's head into shadow: but with a bit of PP - lifting the shadows and sharpening - there's detail in the pine buds under the bird, and (given that this is effectively like working on a big crop from the centre of the full-sized image) it's about as good as you can expect, really.

You've already identified that getting close to the bird is helping - well you're only at 260mm with the finch.

Pick one of your better shots and "work it up" a bit - crop/compose/PP - and post it up as a finished article and we'll see where we are.

It's probably worth mentioning too, that some folk take a while to get used to using stabilised lenses (I'm one) - there's a learning curve to them.

Are you shooting RAW or jpeg?

Again by way of showing you that 100-400mms can be sharp, I've attached another couple of pictures - this time of a small bird (a european stonechat) - getting closer and being aware of the light really helps, as does a shutter speed of 1/3200...

[mboucher]

yep they are full images resized. so I should be increasing my shutter speed by a lot then? I've really only been taking pictures since a week ago, haha so I'm unfamiliar with all the techniques including the post-processing so I really appreciate the help. What do you mean when you say crop/compose/pp what does the compose part entail?

And I am shooting RAW but my camera gives me both the RAW and the jpeg.

[postcardcv]

It's probably worth mentioning too, that some folk take a while to get used to using stabilised lenses (I'm one) - there's a learning curve to them.

Totally agree it took me a good month to really get used to using an IS lens when I first got one, and even longer to work out how to get the best out of it.

[mboucher]

Totally agree it took me a good month to really get used to using an IS lens when I first got one, and even longer to work out how to get the best out of it.

do you have any suggestions or tips? I could really use some, haha

[websurfer]

I do not have any experiences with the EF 100-400 but as we can see some people do have a sharp copy of this lens and I don´t quite believe that there are so many soft copies around as you could believe after reading in different forums. I think there is a learning curve with every long lens. So in many cases I think it all depends of user experinces. I do not have any proof at all - just my feeling.
Essentiel is steady hand or using some kind of support and having an eye on shutter speed. And do not rely too much on IS. IS doesn´t mean everything and is not allowing you to lose concentration on having steady hands.
But some more experienced birders surely may be able to give you some more constructive advices.

[a.dancy]

Because I am right handed and effectively blind in my right eye my technique is slightly different to others.

Only use IS when you need it.

Allow a second or two for IS to kick in and see that the image is stable in your view finder before pressing the shutter release button gently.

At low shutter speeds , go for single shots, rattling off shots introduces too much movement/ vibration etc from the mirror slap and your nerves.

Try not to have loose elbows, if you can pack something under your 'lens supporting arm' it will help by giving you additional rigidity and support , therefore , less shake.

When I am working with a low shutter speed I press the camera to my face (viewing with my left eye) making sure my legs and general position are as solid as a rock. For me this makes a big difference. It may leave an oily mark on the monitor but that does not bother me.

Use the 'f'stop that does the job. It is no good using f8 if you are going to get a low hit rate , even with IS. If you have to use f5.6, use it. It ain't that bad!

When you are working in low light the IS will not freeze the bird or its plumage, so plumage motion brought about by wind , bird breathing or swaying about on a branch or walking will never produce a sharp image. IS is great but it doesn't work miracles.

Just my view.

[trevor.wht]

YOU COULD TRY - AV - DIAL SETTING , WITH COMPENSATION SET ON [ - ONE THIRD ] WITH AVERAGE LIGHT , ALSO WHACK THAT - ISO - UP , I KEEP MYN PERMANENTYLY ON - 1600 - IN ALL CONDITIONS WITH MY 400 d , MY PROOF IS IN THE PUDDING , GOOD LUCK , TREV

[a.dancy]

Attached sparrowhawk 1/80 sec -2 comp (yikes!:eek!:), ISO800 , f5.6:eek!: shot at the 400 end:eek!:. Neat image or blur not applied. I got more than just a handfull of sharp shots of this bird which was not exactly bathed in light. The light was as bad as it gets. The original shot does not need much sharpening (if at all) for an A4 print and the noise is hardly perceptable.

Canon 20D 100-400 lens.

[mboucher]

Thanks again for all the help. I'll try a couple shots without IS and see how they turn out. Its nice to see all these pictures that have turned out so well

ALSO WHACK THAT - ISO - UP , I KEEP MYN PERMANENTYLY ON - 1600 - IN ALL CONDITIONS WITH MY 400 d

Do you not find there to be a lot of noise in your photos at 1600?? (in light conditions anyhow) I'll for sure give it a shot though.

[a.dancy]

Thanks again for all the help. I'll try a couple shots without IS and see how they turn out. Its nice to see all these pictures that have turned out so well



Do you not find there to be a lot of noise in your photos at 1600?? (in light conditions anyhow) I'll for sure give it a shot though.

Noise will be an issue if you crop, or crop too much. It's nice not to have noise but for printed pictures which are not cropped and sharpened much you can, on a well exposed picture, hardly detect noise. It is more of an issue for reduced file sizes which are sharpened up on computer screens. For 8X6 and A4 printed pictures there is far less of a problem. Besides a bit of noise isn't the worst thing in the world if you have taken a well composed or interesting snap. Of course if your pictures are going to be the size of a barn door then of course it's an issue, but most of us AMs are not in that league. I and others, may be guilty of being too bothered about noise and more recently I am getting to the point of thinking that overdoing Neatimage and blurr can look worse than the noise it is meant to get rid of.

Keep contrast low and do not sharpen much , if at all. Of course the picture you take must be perfectly focused8-P

[paul goode]

Do you not find there to be a lot of noise in your photos at 1600?? (in light conditions anyhow) I'll for sure give it a shot though.

Well I wouldn't.

At iso1600 noise is going to be visible in the image. As Adrian says if you get things right in the first place it won't be a problem, but its not easy and if an image is a bit underexposed then sorting that out will bring the noise out.

When I've used our 400d I've tried to keep to iso800 as a max and lower wherever possible. Neat image or an equivalent can sort these noise levels out well.
Unless the light is very poor i can't see why anyone would use iso 1600 exclusively. Obviously if you've just found a rarity in a bush and its getting dark then needs must but in normal conditions I'd keep the ISO lower and work on the other camera settings.

[GYRob]

being 4 times closer using iso 1600 is like using iso 200 4 times further away then cropping so if you can fill the frame with iso 1600 then it may give a decent shot but its not something i would use unless its the only way i hate going above iso 400 it just does not give the detail iso 100 gives .
Rob.

[postcardcv]

Do you not find there to be a lot of noise in your photos at 1600?? (in light conditions anyhow) I'll for sure give it a shot though.

I used to use the 400D and found that there was too much noise at ISO1600 so I only ever used it in extreme situations. For me ISO400 is the starting point with this camera, no obvious noise, it's fine at ISO800 but you may need to use Neat Image to make the most of your shots.

do you have any suggestions or tips? I could really use some, haha

Tips for using IS... I think Adrian has covered this well, but the thing that took me some time was getting the hang of waiting for the IS to kick in before shooting. Also bear in mind that IS doesn't solve everything, even with IS handholding at slow speeds is tricky. The best advice is just to spend time using it, with practice it will makes more sense and you'll see the results getting better.

[chewie]

Because I am right handed and effectively blind in my right eye my technique is slightly different to others.

Only use IS when you need it.

Allow a second or two for IS to kick in and see that the image is stable in your view finder before pressing the shutter release button gently.

At low shutter speeds , go for single shots, rattling off shots introduces too much movement/ vibration etc from the mirror slap and your nerves.

Try not to have loose elbows, if you can pack something under your 'lens supporting arm' it will help by giving you additional rigidity and support , therefore , less shake.

When I am working with a low shutter speed I press the camera to my face (viewing with my left eye) making sure my legs and general position are as solid as a rock. For me this makes a big difference. It may leave an oily mark on the monitor but that does not bother me.

Use the 'f'stop that does the job. It is no good using f8 if you are going to get a low hit rate , even with IS. If you have to use f5.6, use it. It ain't that bad!

When you are working in low light the IS will not freeze the bird or its plumage, so plumage motion brought about by wind , bird breathing or swaying about on a branch or walking will never produce a sharp image. IS is great but it doesn't work miracles.

Just my view.

a lot of sense spoken. im still new to this photograpy lark, and do wonder why some days i get a batch of great shots, and other days not so great ones. thinking back, most of it is down to too much movement caused by excited panic!

[Hanno]

most of it is down to too much movement caused by excited panic!

I can well relate to that. Oh, and some excellent advice given here, thank you all.

[tzanampeths]

thinking back, most of it is down to too much movement caused by excited panic!

I'll second that too!

Takis