New Sigma 150/600 (7 Viewers)

[Barred Wobbler]

I had similar issues with the Sigma tc-1401 teleconverter. Back focusing that could not be corrected and issues focusing.

No problems with the Kenko 2x pro 300 or the Canon 1.4x (tried all 3 versions)

Ironically, I found that the Canon converter found focus better than the Sigma one.

Still back-focusing, but it did it more quickly and without endless hunting.

 

[Mickr]

No hope.

I've persevered and I'm still suffering from rear focusing with a converter. I've even dialled in maximum adjustment in-camera (-20 on the adjuster) and also tuned the lens on the USB dock to give the maximum -20 on the 30m to infinity setting.

I've just taken this photo of a felt roof with the camera set to -20 and the lens set to -20. There's nowhere else to go. Tripod-mounted with the stabiliser turned off. The range is in excess of 30m and I focused on the white dropping next to the seam in the centre of the frame. Several repetitions gave the same result. The subject is still in front of the extreme front edge of the focus zone, rather than where it should be.

I even tried it with a Sigma 1.4 converter in case there was a conflict between my lens and my Canon 1.4x Mk III. No difference.

Bare, the lens is great, but putting a converter on just sends it haywire.

I give up.

Do you think you have enough contrast for the Autofocus to work properly?

 

[Barred Wobbler]

Do you think you have enough contrast for the Autofocus to work properly?

I'd say the avocet in bright sunlight at a range of about 40 yards that I was trying to photograph this morning was contrasty enough, as was the oystercatcher that was slightly closer.

A couple of uncropped photos from today below that I've pulled from the recycle bin.

I think they are 'contrasty', the others of the same birds exhibited the same results, as did the garganeys at Druridge, so not a case of missed focus. (EDIT. The camera micro-adjustment wasn't set to the maximum for these shots, minus 10, I think, but the lens tuning was nearly maximum at minus 16 and they illustrate the problem.)

The photos with the bare lens were spot on (see pipit and lesser black back, the latter cropped to about a quarter of the frame.).

 

[the black fox]

Is that with or without the tc Jeff? I realise the best results are going to be with close subjects but there are many occasions when I want to be able to record birds that are unapproachable - marsh harriers spring to mind. Elmley Marshes is a great place to sit in the car and try and photograph them but they are never that close!

the 70d doesn't take a t.c paul ,the 1d3 does but i have not done enough with it to comment properly .
at this moment in time i am sat on the fence the 1d3 gives me fast /accurate focus and lovely smooth files ,albeit only 10mp ,the 70d gives me superb close detail ,moderate a/f but falls flat on its face over distance especially in overcast conditions . i could sell both and get a 7D2 that will take a t.c as well but it would be a case of all eggs in one basket and if its not what i expect then i'm up the creek .think i will find someone with a 7d2 to try before i commit myself further .the lad put some new settings in the 70d last night so i will give it another final try ,as i feel like launching it at times

 

[the black fox]

I'd say the avocet in bright sunlight at a range of about 40 yards that I was trying to photograph this morning was contrasty enough, as was the oystercatcher that was slightly closer.

A couple of uncropped photos from today below that I've pulled from the recycle bin.

I think they are 'contrasty', the others of the same birds exhibited the same results, as did the garganeys at Druridge, so not a case of missed focus. (EDIT. The camera micro-adjustment wasn't set to the maximum for these shots, minus 10, I think, but the lens tuning was nearly maximum at minus 16 and they illustrate the problem.)

The photos with the bare lens were spot on (see pipit and lesser black back, the latter cropped to about a quarter of the frame.).

looking at your pics there your suffering the same effect with the t.c as i,m getting with the bare 70d at long range ,the bare lens shots are superb b.t.w ,i seem to hit a hyperlocal distance with the 70d where it changes from incredibly sharp to total crap in a couple of feet .its definitely not the lens as it works fine on the 1D3 over close and distance .
the frustrating part is on the camera screen the pics look super just the problem with densely packed sensors i suppose.

i would suggest trying a canon mk2 tc to see if thats any better ,it has less electronics

 

[the black fox]

heres a 50% cropped image from yesterday with the 70d unprocessed RAW file to illustrate whats happening .yet close ups to medium range are incredibly sharp

 

[Barred Wobbler]

Chalk and Cheese

I've just been out the back and fired off a couple of shots with the Canon 1.4 telecon. Unedited, but resized for uploading.

Tripod-mounted, stabilisation off, aperture priority, Auto ISO (to take care of the changing light).

First shot, standard in-camera focussing.

Second shot, Live View.

Now that's what it should look like!

 

[Paul - Herts]

heres a 50% cropped image from yesterday with the 70d unprocessed RAW file to illustrate whats happening .yet close ups to medium range are incredibly sharp

Not good is it! Shame but that's no use to me

 

[the black fox]

Not good is it! Shame but that's no use to me

nor me paul ,my first inclination was to blame the lens ,but its spot on near and far with the id3 paul. ,i have tried m/a ,back ,forward and upside down there just seems to be a range limit with the 70d ,either that or its not grabbing focus properly this though was bang on the bird .i am now tending to think its more a camera problem ,so i'll try the settings my lad put in and go from there ,really strange as i want to like it .and its making me very hesitant in getting a 7d2 with basically the same sensor

 

[Barred Wobbler]

nor me paul ,my first inclination was to blame the lens ,but its spot on near and far with the id3 paul. ,i have tried m/a ,back ,forward and upside down there just seems to be a range limit with the 70d ,either that or its not grabbing focus properly this though was bang on the bird .i am now tending to think its more a camera problem ,so i'll try the settings my lad put in and go from there ,really strange as i want to like it .and its making me very hesitant in getting a 7d2 with basically the same sensor

These were taken yesterday with the 7DII at 600mm full zoom. The first is near enough full frame and the second is about one quarter to one third of the frame. The lesser black back was very active and quick-moving because the black-headed gull was pestering it. The camera coped.

Just a thought, you didn't have the image stabilisation on for your heron, by any chance? It looks like some of the flight shots I've had when I've been taken by surprise and forgotten to disable it.

 

[the black fox]

been out today and tried both cameras again and i have come to the conclusion that i can't trust the 70d to give me consistent results with the sigma lens ,so its back to the 1d3for now till i can try out a 7d2 properly ..the proof of the pudding as they say is in ..... so heres some shots in various lighting all 600mm hand held

 

[Paul - Herts]

Shot of a distant (ish) plane, 70D and contemporary. Looks sharper than your heron Jeff which must have been considerably closer.

Not having a go just saying there must be some reason why yours is so far out. Would it be worth contacting Sigma UK?

 

[the black fox]

Shot of a distant (ish) plane, 70D and contemporary. Looks sharper than your heron Jeff which must have been considerably closer.

Not having a go just saying there must be some reason why yours is so far out. Would it be worth contacting Sigma UK?

where paul .i,m starting to wonder but i am 90% certain its not the lens ,took a long range shot with the 70-200 f4 on today and same results .

 

[Paul - Herts]

Sorry, I forgot to add the link, what a Muppet! Will find it again I'm sure and will post it when I do

 

[Paul - Herts]

similar to the shot I referred to you

https://www.flickr.com/photos/genge...NrU-rxJAXP-ssfpSo-ssfsvE-ssgA93-rxx54C-scXrG5

one of mine taken with 400 - sharpened and cropped

https://www.flickr.com/photos/43324529@N04/14000870106/in/album-72157624936614517/

 

[Roy C]

Some great theories about Cameras and distant shots here lol. I think a lot of it is people expecting the impossible and trying to blame the Camera and or Lens when they do not achieve it. Even with close-ups the quality of light is a big factor but for distant shots it is much more important still as there is lots more room for atmospherics distortions to come into play.
A 600mm lens does not give the reach advantage that a lot of folks seems to imagine it should - over some thing like a 400mm lens it just gives and extra 4-5 metres for reasonably close to mid distance bird shots. As for long distant shots, even when the light is perfect this is where a top quality lens will shine through over a lesser third party zoom - this is one reason why top bird togs are willing to pay mega bucks for their lenses.
Its all about working within the limitations of the tools you have.
Here is some food for thought that I saw a while back, 'most Cameras and or lenses will out resolve most photographers' .

 

[the black fox]

to to true roy ,but you should still get better results than with a 400 prime or theres no point .been talking this over with my lad and he is blaming camera shake obviously thrown up by a smaller sensor with more reach ,a american guy suggested higher than normal shutter speeds ,which in turn means higher than normal iso values .that is one path that can be tried .especially with a 7d2 ,the bloody unseasonal weather is not helping either its like winter up here with this northerly wind .
a friend has offered to let me have a trial out with his 7d2 when the weather improves if that proves to be no better than i can at least put that one to bed ,thing is its not the ultra long range shots that i,m bothered about its as if i,m hitting a certain distance wall where it all goes smudgy ,as i have repeated before its definitely not the lens or my technique as i have no problems with the same shots on the 1D3 ..even cropped in .i won't let it beat me though

 

[Roy C]

to to true roy ,but you should still get better results than with a 400 prime or theres no point .been talking this over with my lad and he is blaming camera shake obviously thrown up by a smaller sensor with more reach ,a american guy suggested higher than normal shutter speeds ,which in turn means higher than normal iso values .that is one path that can be tried .especially with a 7d2 ,the bloody unseasonal weather is not helping either its like winter up here with this northerly wind .
a friend has offered to let me have a trial out with his 7d2 when the weather improves if that proves to be no better than i can at least put that one to bed ,thing is its not the ultra long range shots that i,m bothered about its as if i,m hitting a certain distance wall where it all goes smudgy ,as i have repeated before its definitely not the lens or my technique as i have no problems with the same shots on the 1D3 ..even cropped in .i won't let it beat me though

You always have to be more careful with a higher density sensor Jeff especially with long lenses - there is nothing new with that as it has been especially relevant with APS-C sensors since they moved to around 18+ MPs, this all all part of the technique needed. You have to have better support or higher shutter speeds than you would need on a full frame sensor to counteract possible 'pixel bleed' - the 1.3x croppers obviously fall somewhere in between. I have to be far more careful with my 7D2 then I have to be with the 5D3 simply because of the sensor size, APS-C sensors are far less forgiving. Having said that I can still get more detail from the 7D2 then I can by cropping a 5D3 image to the same FOV.
As far as AF speed and accuracy from my experience and everything I have read the 7D2 will beat any xxD Camera (it beats the original 7D by a long chalk IMO).
BTW Jeff what is the approx distance you are having trouble with? and what size birds are you talking about. Attached is a hand held snap from around 40 metres I guess with the Siggy C and 7D2 (the full frame and a heavy crop). Obviously not mega detail in the bird but as much as could be expected really from that distance and plenty sharp enough. Your sport should be equally as sharp if not better still. Could it be that you are asking too much from your set-up.

 

[the black fox]

i have now tried out a friends 7d2 ,and while not an amazing amount of difference it was enough to see that the problem lies with the 70d .yes i know the pics below are not what we would normally use ,the first is a full frame un-edited j.peg and then a highly cropped raw ,but that i know is pushing out the limits to the extreme and i wouldn't be unhappy if i could achieve results like it consistently ,i can with the 1d3 though so whether its worth laying out another 500 quid for minor improvements is debatable.
as stated this is just a extreme test but proves a point

 

[Roy C]

i have now tried out a friends 7d2 ,and while not an amazing amount of difference it was enough to see that the problem lies with the 70d .yes i know the pics below are not what we would normally use ,the first is a full frame un-edited j.peg and then a highly cropped raw ,but that i know is pushing out the limits to the extreme and i wouldn't be unhappy if i could achieve results like it consistently ,i can with the 1d3 though so whether its worth laying out another 500 quid for minor improvements is debatable.
as stated this is just a extreme test but proves a point

That's as good as to be expected from that distance I would say, not bad for ISO 2000 either, I see you had a nice shutter speed as well (better to have slightly more noise than a soft image). And I guess that is without even checking the AFMA for the combo - just because a lens is right with one Camera it does not mean it will necessarily be right on another Camera. Have you AFMA'd the Siggy with the 70D as well as the 1D3?. Having said that I find it odd that the 70D is not up to focusing on something like that although I have never tried one, perhaps it suffers from the same inconsistency AF issues that the original 7D had (it was great when it nailed one but far too many just did not hit absolute focus).
If you had taken the same shot with the 1D3 the bird would have been smaller still in the frame and it would have less scope for cropping so heavily as well so a double wammy!.