100-400mm - not so sharp? (1 Viewer)

Chris Mayne · Oct 10, 2007

I moved from digiscoping to DSLR bird photography using a 30D + 100-400mm set-up several months ago, but I feel the sharpness of the images does not seem to meet those from other users of this kit that I have seen.

Obviously to start with I thought it may be technique, but the more I use it, the more I am concerned about the quality of the lens (I have read mixed reviews). I almost always use some form of support, IS switched on, and I have tried many combinations of aperture, taking the zoom in from 400mm slightly, ISO setting, IS on/off....

Does anyone with this lens (that they are really happy with) have any standard sharpness test to compare results? (ie. photographing text at a set distance etc.) Or even anyone local who would be interested in swapping lenses for a few shots?

Keith Reeder · Oct 10, 2007

Could you post some examples, Chris? With Exif intact, please...

When you say "some sort of support", what do you mean, exactly?

Chris Mayne · Oct 10, 2007

Hi Keith,

Do you want to see original images or cropped versions (at 400mm I still need to crop a lot). What is the max size for posting pictures?

This was one thing I thought might be an issue - if the subject is small in the frame, although I use centre point focus, and aim for the eye/head - could this result in non optimal focus? (I have just ordered a 1.4x converter).

As for support, very often I am out with my scope+tripod, so I rest the lens across the scope (with its padded case), or if I am shooting low to the ground I rest the lens across the top of my rucksack that is standing upright (bit like a big beanbag I guess).

Chris

Malcolm Stewart · Oct 10, 2007

Chris Mayne said:
I moved ... to DSLR bird photography using a 30D + 100-400mm set-up several months ago, but I feel the sharpness of the images does not seem to meet those from other users of this kit that I have seen.

...

Hi Chris,

I wonder if you're having similar problems to me with your 30D. I've had mine checked and adjusted for AF by Lehmanns, and using my EF300 f2.8L IS (with and without extenders) and shooting an extended target, sharpness is fine. (My type of) Birds aren't extended targets, and I'm pretty sure that I get consistently sharper images when using my 5D - despite loosing the 1.6x "advantage". So, I'm just wondering if the alignment of the 30D's viewfinder focus rectangles is slightly off wrt to the AF sensors.

I can see I need to do yet more testing..., or get myself a 1D MkIIN. (They seem to be flying off S/H dealers' shelves at the moment!)

RoyH · Oct 10, 2007

Chris Mayne said:
I moved from digiscoping to DSLR bird photography using a 30D + 100-400mm set-up several months ago, but I feel the sharpness of the images does not seem to meet those from other users of this kit that I have seen.

Obviously to start with I thought it may be technique, but the more I use it, the more I am concerned about the quality of the lens (I have read mixed reviews). I almost always use some form of support, IS switched on, and I have tried many combinations of aperture, taking the zoom in from 400mm slightly, ISO setting, IS on/off....

Does anyone with this lens (that they are really happy with) have any standard sharpness test to compare results? (ie. photographing text at a set distance etc.) Or even anyone local who would be interested in swapping lenses for a few shots?

Hi Chris
I own the same lens, I also have the 300f4 that I use with a 1.4x. The converter will not work auto focus on your lens so I would think twice about buying that. Nigel Blake advised me to stop down when at 400mm full focal that advice was most useful, it cut out the soft images, I usually shoot at f8 light permitting using my 10D but I am upgrading before the end of this month to the 40D thinking about the 300 f2.8 also. Don't think I would want to part with either of my two lenses they both work well. The zoom is ideal for motorsport but I prefer the prime lens for birds etc.

www.royhowell.co.uk

You may have a problem with the camera/lens but I would doubt that. I always shoot in IS one unless I am taking crossing shots, someone on one of the threads sugggested shooting in IS position two, that was bad advice. I have taken still shots in the wrong IS setting by mistake they were not sharp. Try A1 Servo, Partial metering, centre focus that seems to work for me. Please post some images.

Roy.

Jos Stratford · Oct 10, 2007

Chris Mayne said:
I almost always use some form of support, IS switched on,

I understood that if using a tripod or similar support, IS should be turned off, no?

Keith Reeder · Oct 10, 2007

Yes.

That's why I asked about that.

Keith Reeder · Oct 10, 2007

RoyH said:
The converter will not work auto focus on your lens

It will, Roy - just tape the pins.

Many of my gallery pics are with the 30D/100-400mm/Kenko 1.4x and in my experience (and for my requirements!

), performance is excellent.

The lens is always wide open too.

RoyH · Oct 10, 2007

Keith Reeder said:
It will, Roy - just tape the pins.

Many of my gallery pics are with the 30D/100-400mm/Kenko 1.4x and in my experience (and for my requirements! ), performance is excellent.

The lens is always wide open too.

Hi Keith
Yes was was aware of taping pins but never tried it yet.
Most impressed with your web page, thank you for the 40D reveiw looking forwards to upgrading at the end of this month.
Roy.

Clarke Robinson · Oct 10, 2007

Chris Mayne said:
(at 400mm I still need to crop a lot).
Chris

Hi Chris

This particular phrase about cropping a lot stuck out at me when reading your second post. I too own a 100-400L and am very happy with it. However, I find that if a small bird doesn't fill a fair percentage of the frame and I end up cropping heavily, the quality will be rather poor. Combine distance with dull british weather and I won't get sharp shots. With practice, I can now kinda judge when it's not even worth taking a shot as the bird is too far away. I think this is pretty normal for most lenses, no matter how expensive they are (though I could be wrong as I haven't used anything longer than 400mm). Heavy cropping on a bird that is already far from your lens (I'd say 20 feet as an example for a small garden tit) will for me anyway generally be a waste of time.

As Keith mentioned, it would be good if you could show an example of the types of shots you are getting including their EXIF data.

Hope this helps.

Chris Mayne · Oct 10, 2007

I have tried to do a few controlled shots in the garden of static subjects - like flowers about 5 meters away, supported with a tripod, turning IS on and off, and I saw no difference (I thought this was the case with IS, but had never really seen any odd affects with it switched on and supported). I also moved from f5.6 to f10, with barely any noticable difference either.

I will need to retrieve some images from my home PC and will post later/tomorrow.

I always use the centre spot focus only. I did try a few manual focuses the other day, but that was even worse! I've also tried shooting a static object that extends away from the camera to see if the point at which autofocus locks is actually the point that is in focus on the resulting image. No problems found there.

If I get home in reasonable daylight today I might try a few more test shots in the garden.

Chris

mjmw · Oct 10, 2007

Chris, post the original image resized to 800 pixels on the long side and post a cropped version, again resized to 800 pixels. It is near impossible to help without seeing an example.

EDIT: Sorry Chris, this crossed with your last post.

davem · Oct 10, 2007

Hi Chris,

I was warned about the 400mm end of this lens before I bought it and true to form it was a tad soft at the top end (as you'd expect at the upper extreme from a zoom - the MTF curves (sweet spot areas as far as I understand) can't be everywhere!

I tried to use it only up to about 380mm to avoid this but soon found that in poor light it was front-focussing on occasion and sometimes quite alarmingly so, even though it all looked fine through the viewfinder.

I asked Canon (Elstree) about it and they offered to calibrate the 20D body with the 100-400 and 17-85. They did it free of charge and it was the body's AF that was slightly out but it needed the upgrade from the 75-300 to the 100-400L to show this up in image quality.

I shot the Buff-bellied Pipit at Farmoor in poor light last night with this lens at ISO 800 and not that fast a shutter speed - the results are on Surfbirds Stop Press and I have to say that ever since it was calibrated it's been brilliant and I can even use the 400mm end with confidence if I have to.

HTH,

Dave.

Chris Mayne · Oct 10, 2007

Clarke,

The cropping factor was something I had thought about (hence going for the converter to see if that helps), although I have seen images of small birds taken in poor light at 30ft with this lens with no photoshop editing that are very sharp.

This is really why I need to try and work out the relative performance of my kit before I
a. work out a better photography technique, or
b. go back to Canon and see if there really is a problem

Chris

Duck_Pond · Oct 10, 2007

I've had a 100-400 for almost a year now, and from my limited experience, nothing beats being close to the subject. Take the pics attached for an example. Both are of green sandpipers, but the first one was at a distance and heavily cropped, while the second one was literally in front of me, within 10 feet.

I use a 350D, so the basic camera isn't as good as what you have, but there are times when the quality of the shot is stunning.

As Clarke said, unless you're taking a "record" shot of a rare bird, if it's really far away, there's little point in taking the shot, as it won't have any real clarity to it.

Clarke Robinson · Oct 10, 2007

Chris Mayne said:
I have seen images of small birds taken in poor light at 30ft with this lens with no photoshop editing that are very sharp.

Chris

I can't speak for others, but I'd be hard pushed to even try to take a picture of a blue tit (for example) at 30 feet in poor light without expecting some degradation in sharpness. Perhaps I'm too picky or my technique is poor. However, sharpness is a very subjective subject at the best of times. Duck_Pond's green sandpipers are a great example (and great pics!) of how distance can affect "sharpness" or detail.

I do hope you don't have a problem with your lens, it is a great lens that I and many other folks here happily use wide open with converters attached. Mine rarely leaves the camera.

Keith Reeder · Oct 10, 2007

Chris Mayne said:
Hi Keith,

Do you want to see original images or cropped versions?

Personally I'd like to see some "finished articles".

For myself, I can't really figure anything out from 100% crops, whereas if a cropped/composed/processed shot is soft, and the Exif is to hand, I think it's OK to draw some Real World conclusions.

Something I don't mind sharing with the class (and have done many times) is that it took me months to get to grips with my first stabilised lens (the very good Sigma 80-400mm OS): all that time I was convinced I had a broken/sub-standard/just plain crap one, then - literally overnight (but after several months!) - it all started to come together and I've been a convert to IS ever since.

tjsimonsen · Oct 10, 2007

Chris Mayne said:
Do you want to see original images or cropped versions (at 400mm I still need to crop a lot).

I wouldn't mind seeing the finished article and a 100% center crop.
As many others have said before; learning how to use this lens takes time. I had mine for almost a year before I started to get constantly (more or less) good results. Before that I most often got dissapointingly soft pictures with the occasionally stunning result (which convinced me that the problem was behind the camera and not in front of it).

I just got a Kenko pro 300 1.4x today, and at least the IS and the AF seem to work fine with taped pins on my Rebel XT. The AF seems to hunt a little bit more, but isn't slower (much at any rate) than on the naked lens. I really can't say much about the IQ as the weather in Edmonton is very glumy today. But the lens plus TC seems to be almost equal to the naked lens.

Thomas

Chris Mayne · Oct 11, 2007

The light was not good enough yesterday evening for any test shots (I thought that IS on/off tests at 1/20th to 1/40th may have been a bit unfair!)

I have however got a few sample images.

I have a feeling it is at this point I will find out that I am trying to get too much out of birds that are just too distant. I seem to be seeing ranges of 10ft appearing in this thread more than 20-30ft!

Duck_Pond - nice shots - where do you get 10ft from a green sanpiper!?

I'll start with a shot of the Barred Warbler at Landguard 30 Sep. Since it took me 6 hours over 4 visits to get something reasonable of this rather shy individual I was quite pleased with the outcome.

Firstly I have included an original frame image (including exif), to show how close (or how distant!) the subject was. I thought 5-7m, but maybe I'm underestimating distances! Then I have included a cropped version, and finally sharpened one. The light was good, and 1/2500th should have eliminated most movement? I was just dissapointed about the 'cotton wool' look to the plumage.

I've got some more examples, but we can start with these.

Chris

Duck_Pond · Oct 11, 2007

Chris - the green sandpiper was in front of a hide at Rutland Water, a couple of months ago. It was very close at times!

Part of the problem might be from the available light. Some of my best pics are from the coast, where the subject is out in the open, perhaps on a bright beach.

Unfortunately, there aren't too many beaches in B'ham!

100-400mm - not so sharp? (1 Viewer)

Well-known member

Watch the birdie...

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Eastern Exile

Watch the birdie...

Watch the birdie...

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

formally known as mw_aurora

Well-known member

Well-known member

Professional Wildlife Photographer And Guide

Attachments

Well-known member

Watch the birdie...

Well-known member

Well-known member

Attachments

Professional Wildlife Photographer And Guide

Attachments

Similar threads

Users who are viewing this thread