Looking for your advice and input
Hello All,
It's been a while since I've posted here as for a period, I got away from my love of photography. Life gets in the way sometimes...
I wanted to query folks here for input that might very well save my sanity. After shooting a Canon 30D for years, I've bought a Canon 5D Mark III. I'm struggling to get the image clarity that I expected from a 5D. For me most part, I often shoot my Canon 100-400L 4/5.6 lens. I find often that I'm also shooting at 400mm. The image below was taken at 400mm.
When viewing the image at 100% (Figure 2), the degree of clarity equates to roughly that of a cheap cell phone camera taken out the window of a vehicle traveling at least 50 mph down a rough gravel rough (ergo my frustration).
Granted here are a few additional details to aid in analysis.
The image is hand shot (i.e. no tripod) - Con
The subjects were some distance away (roughly 75-100 yards) - Con
The lens has image stabilization (and it was enabled) - Pro
The subjects were well lit by early evening sun - Pro
EXIF:
F-Stop: f/13
Exposure: 1/320 Sec
ISO: 640 (Auto ISO Mode)
Exposure Bias: 0 step
Exposure Mode: Av
Focal Length: 400mm
Metering Mode: Partial
I know telephoto lenses all have a "sweet" spot which is typically not the extreme end of the focal range. What I'm wondering or trying to determine are:
1) Is the Canon 100-400L 4/5.6 lens simply a poor performer at 400mm?
2) Were the subjects simply too far away from me for a 100-400 lens to provide suitable clarity?
3) Am I not using the correct auto-focus mode and/or setting with the 5D? (I confess I still need to study this aspect of the camera more.)
4) Why would f/13 not provide sufficient clarity? Must I shoot f/22+ to see suitable results?
5) For distances such as this, should be be shooting a 1.4x or 2.0x multiplier despite sacrifices in f-stops?
This lens has at times performed well and at others, not so well. I know the reason is often a multitude of factors but in this case, the subjects were not moving, I was not moving, I had sufficient light, and was using an f/13 f-stop so I expected FAR clearer captures from a 5D Mark III and an L-series lens.
Before I leave my lifelong companion in Canon and jump ship for Nikon, can anyone PLEASE provide some insight to at least reign in my expectations. I'm horribly tired of coming home from photo shoots to be disappointed with image clarity after spending as much $$$ as I've have on a 5D and L-series 100-400mm lens.
Thank you in advance SO MUCH for any advice that you can lend.
Michael
Figure 1: Full sized image
Figure 2: Image at 100% but cropped
It's been a while since I've posted here as for a period, I got away from my love of photography. Life gets in the way sometimes...
I wanted to query folks here for input that might very well save my sanity. After shooting a Canon 30D for years, I've bought a Canon 5D Mark III. I'm struggling to get the image clarity that I expected from a 5D. For me most part, I often shoot my Canon 100-400L 4/5.6 lens. I find often that I'm also shooting at 400mm. The image below was taken at 400mm.
When viewing the image at 100% (Figure 2), the degree of clarity equates to roughly that of a cheap cell phone camera taken out the window of a vehicle traveling at least 50 mph down a rough gravel rough (ergo my frustration).
Granted here are a few additional details to aid in analysis.
The image is hand shot (i.e. no tripod) - Con
The subjects were some distance away (roughly 75-100 yards) - Con
The lens has image stabilization (and it was enabled) - Pro
The subjects were well lit by early evening sun - Pro
EXIF:
F-Stop: f/13
Exposure: 1/320 Sec
ISO: 640 (Auto ISO Mode)
Exposure Bias: 0 step
Exposure Mode: Av
Focal Length: 400mm
Metering Mode: Partial
I know telephoto lenses all have a "sweet" spot which is typically not the extreme end of the focal range. What I'm wondering or trying to determine are:
1) Is the Canon 100-400L 4/5.6 lens simply a poor performer at 400mm?
2) Were the subjects simply too far away from me for a 100-400 lens to provide suitable clarity?
3) Am I not using the correct auto-focus mode and/or setting with the 5D? (I confess I still need to study this aspect of the camera more.)
4) Why would f/13 not provide sufficient clarity? Must I shoot f/22+ to see suitable results?
5) For distances such as this, should be be shooting a 1.4x or 2.0x multiplier despite sacrifices in f-stops?
This lens has at times performed well and at others, not so well. I know the reason is often a multitude of factors but in this case, the subjects were not moving, I was not moving, I had sufficient light, and was using an f/13 f-stop so I expected FAR clearer captures from a 5D Mark III and an L-series lens.
Before I leave my lifelong companion in Canon and jump ship for Nikon, can anyone PLEASE provide some insight to at least reign in my expectations. I'm horribly tired of coming home from photo shoots to be disappointed with image clarity after spending as much $$$ as I've have on a 5D and L-series 100-400mm lens.
Thank you in advance SO MUCH for any advice that you can lend.
Michael
Figure 1: Full sized image
Figure 2: Image at 100% but cropped
0
Comments
Are you shooting RAW, and if so, how's the image been processed?
Was the AF locked on and had the IS settled?
Have you checked the lens with the body to see if it needs any micro adjustment? (I've no idea whether the 5Dm3 can adjust for both W and T ends, btw)
With my 100 - 400, I probably would've shot at f5.6 or f8 max under similar conditions with much higher SS and adjusted iso as necessary (not on auto iso)
I generally use Servo, Manual mode and Eval metering, but use whatever works for you.
Have no idea whether a 5Dm3 will AF above f5.6 ... if it won't, you'll not be able to use AF with a 1.4x TC attached... and it certainly won't AF with a 2x TC and that lens @ 400mm, because the total hit is f11.
I don't think that lens is particularly brilliant with TCs, btw ... but testing would be a better way to go, rather than believe anything I (or others) might say, because you might have a setup / combo that works particularly well together
Try some sort of support if at all possible, keep check of when you do and compare results with HHeld shots - long lenses aren't very forgiving
Yes, at the end of the day, with fewer pixels on a (distant) subject, there's more scope for all manner of issues ... and whilst this isn't a low-level shot over water, that scenario can also provide plenty of scope for less than perfect results imo.
pp
Flickr
I have the same body/lens kit and I add the 1.4III Extender also - here's some thoughts... forgive me if I ramble.
*As a general rule, when shooting tele, you want a SS of 1/focal length - so, 400mm @ 1/400 would be a good starting point.
* I don't expect IS to make-up entirely for poor technique - it is still important to steady your kit as much as possible... anything you can rest it on is a benefit.
* There is no advantage to shooting at f22 over f13 - depending on the glass, f22 and higher can produce less IQ due to refraction. Sweet spot is more likely f8-f16.
* The 5DIII, with the latest firmware, will AF at f8... this makes using the 100-400mm with tele-extenders and AF (center point) possible - I do it and it works very, very, well.
* The 100-400mm is an excellent lens, given an excellent copy - if you got great results before, chances-are your copy is good.
* Those particular subjects do seem very distant for anything approaching 100% crop.
* If I think of more, I'll add 'em ;-)
Good luck, keep testing/shooting, and don't even think about Nikon!!
Cheers!
The 100-400 IS L is an older lens that some folks love and create fine images with, and that some folks do not hold in that high a regard. I am somewhere in between, I have had my 100-400 for a number of years, and it is capable of fine images, even thigh it is not my favorite lens these days. Long glass technique is far more important than when shooting a 50mm lens.
The first thing I would suggest if your images are not sharp is to rent or borrow a good tripod and use it. Turn you r IS off on the tripod with the 100-400. Use a cable release on the tripod if your images are less than tack sharp. Blurry images with long lenses make me think of camera/lens movement first and foremost. While there are bad lenses out there, with long lenses I think much of the issue is poor technique, not poor glass, until proven otherwise. If the tripod and cable release get sharp images for you with your 100-400, then you have your answer.
For 400 mm focal length, if your images are less than tack sharp, I would suggest a minimum shutter speed of 1/1000th fi you are hand holding. Yes, folks say 1/the focal length, but short shutter speeds are better. Roll you finger across the shutter button, do not stab it.
The 100-400 ( like most lenses ) will be at its sharpest 2-3 stops smaller than wide open, so f8 or f11 is where you want to be. If I had to choose, I would say use f8, unless you have a very specific reason to use a larger or smaller aperture. F13 will not be nearly as sharp as f8.
When I shoot wildlife, especially with slower glass like the 100-400, I shoot Tv with a shutter speed near 1/1000th and use Auto ISO. The 5DMkIII will shoot fine at ISO 800, 1600, or 3200, so keep your shutter speed up, and let the camera choose your ISO. Blurred images are more distressing than a tack sharp image with a bit of color noise. NoiseWare will kill the noise later if it really offends you. I have used this technique in Africa and found I was shooting at ISO 12800 at times. This is an image I shot that way - tell me the noise ruins this image. Now I admit I would never have chosen ISO 12800, but then I might have blurred this shot due to a slow shutter speed and a rapidly falling late afternoon light deep in the bush.
One other thought occurs to me about your images, too. Shooting a long way across a body of water introduces a long path with fairly high humidity levels which compromise image sharpness as well. Wet air is much blurrier to the human eye than nice, dry desert air, we all know that and see it with our own eyes. Camera's record it too. Also there can be significant temperature variations in the air across bodies of water, I noticed this shooting a launch at Kennedy, when I was shooting across the inland waterway, and the temperature variation caused air currents to rise and distort the image also.
While I agree the AI Servo is the way to go for moving subjects like birds in flight or lions running, for stationary elk in the water I would use a single AF point in One Shot AF.
I usually shoot long glass in 3 frame bursts in High frame rate shooting ( when I am shooting handheld anyway), so that I am more likely to get at least one frame in sharpest focus and with the least camera movement.
When someone says sometimes the lens does well, and other times it does poorly, that makes me think technique is the issue, since we already established that the lens is capable "at times"
I don't think your image is that poorly focused anyway. You have not discussed what sharpening method in image editing you used. Was this shot as a Raw file or a jpg? Raw files definitely need sharpening in image editing. The full frame image is more demanding than that of the 30D, especially if you shoot in RAW today.
This image was shot at 400 mm with a 7D and the 100-400mm lens 4 years ago. Does it meet your image quality standards? Be honest now.
This discussion is about shooting technique, not a Tutorial, so I am moving it to the Technique thread. You are more likely to find more responses to your question there I think.
Here is another thread about long glass technique. http://www.dgrin.com/showthread.php?t=248288
Moderator of the Technique Forum and Finishing School on Dgrin
Thank you all so much for the feedback. I just stopped in long enough to see whether there were responses yet. I will look them over and reply tomorrow evening but wanted to first at least send acknowledgements.
I'm really looking forward to your input as thus far I'm somewhat disappointed with the soft focus that seems somewhat common from my D5m3. After saving $$$ for sometime, I thought that with this camera I would have all that a serious amateur like myself would ever need. After all the soft focus images, now I'm not so sure.
Again I will get back with everyone tomorrow evening but in advance, thank you for your time and assistance!
Best regards,
Michael
Hi, puzzledpaul!
As with everyone who has replied, thank you very much for taking the time to respond.
Per your questions:
1) Are you shooting RAW, and if so, how's the image been processed?
I am. I am no expert when it comes to processing the RAW images but in essence I start with Canon's Digital Print Professional application that comes with the 5Dm3. I open the CR2 files, tweak white balance, adjust exposure if necessary, then create my resulting JPG file at 350 dpi. I've worked a little with adding sharpness to the CR2. Maybe it's just me but I only notice a very subtle change when adding sharpness to the image. Am I missing out on better steps here?
2) Was the AF locked on and had the IS settled?
As far as I can tell, the answer would be yes to both. I'm not entirely certain how to know when the IS is settled. I typically half depress the shutter release to allow the AF to dial in then fire the shutter.
3) Have you checked the lens with the body to see if it needs any micro adjustment?
Assuming I understand you correctly, this I've not done. I've only recently learned of "micro adjustments" and will have to read up on this. Frankly, I attach the lens and shoot.
I appreciate the information and tips very much! I will certainly follow your advice and try this again with my tripod. I will report back with my findings but with my upcoming schedule I see this easily being a week before I'm able to do so.
Thanks again and I look forward to more dialogs.
Best regards,
Michael
Hello, Eric!
Thank you very much for the guidance! I really appreciate it! (Especially the part about avoiding Nikon!
After this shot and the ensuing frustration/disappointment, I explored my options. I had heard there was a firmware update for the 5Dm3 and not having updated mine, decided to give it a try. I've not shot with the camera since the update so I yet have no idea of its impact.
When shooting this trip, my intent was greater detail / sharper images, ergo my thoughts to tighten up the aperture. In doing so I was likely not focusing on my SS like I should have. My mistake to be sure. I will be more mindful of that going forward.
Thank you as well for the information regarding the multiplier. I'm considering renting one from a local camera shop just to see the difference and performance. I love shooting air shows and this could really bring me the closer shots that I want.
I will try some additional tests as soon as possible (largely using my tripod) and report back.
Best regards!
Michael
Hello, Pathfinder!
I'm beginning to understand your meaning regarding the 100-400. Over time I've seen it seemingly handle some shoots better than others. Maybe differences in lighting or my settings (likely the latter). I've often heard the extreme end of the telephoto's focal range is not the lens' strong suit. Unfortunately when attempting to zoom in, 400mm is where I need to be to get the closest shot possible.
I completely follow your suggestion regarding the tripod and cable release, both of which I have. I am certainly planning to repeat a similar effort with this setup to see how improved the shots may be.
One thing that you mentioned does puzzle me a little, "F13 will not be nearly as sharp as f8." While it may be the lens' sweet spot, I've always understood that the smaller the f-stop, the greater the focus over a wider range (i.e. depth of field). I expected f13 to produce a sharper image than f5.6, 7.1, 8, etc. Granted I understand that slower SS due to a smaller f-stop allows for more camera movement to be introduced.
I see your point regarding shooting in Tv with this lens. I'm always so focused on image clarity that I tend to shoot in Av so that as much as possible I can keep the lens from a wide open aperture (as it typically wants to default to).
I had never considered the challenges that you mentioned when shooting across water. VERY good points to take into consideration.
"You have not discussed what sharpening method in image editing you used. Was this shot as a Raw file or a jpg? Raw files definitely need sharpening in image editing. The full frame image is more demanding than that of the 30D, especially if you shoot in RAW today."
As mentioned in my first response to Paul, I'm probably missing out when it comes to my RAW processing. I use Canon's Digital Photo Professional to convert my CR2 files to JPGs. I sometimes add sharpening but not always and often feel that it does not appear to truly sharpen the image a great deal.
"This image was shot at 400 mm with a 7D and the 100-400mm lens 4 years ago. Does it meet your image quality standards? Be honest now."
It does! Both images that you posted are very nice and more what I was expecting from my 5D / L series lens combo. The eagle is especially sharp when considering that he is also moving.
Thank you VERY much for the fantastic direction and advice! I will certainly get back with findings and updates!
Best regards,
Michael
I usually try to shoot my telescopic lenses 1 stop smaller than wide open, all things being equal, if I can do so with an acceptable ISO and shutter speed. Tv Mode will shoot with your lens wide open in dimmer light, but this may be better than too slow a shutter speed. At least I find that usually true in my hands.
Usually when you are shooting wide open with a long lens, you are not dealing with shallow depth of field because the subject is far enough away from the lens. If the subject is real close, then the solution to obtain a smaller aperture, may be to add flash.
Long lens technique is important to sharp images, but air quality is another factor which does not get mentioned that much, but definitely will play a role in image quality. When you shoot in fog, no one really expects your images to be tack sharp, but the spread from fog to desert air is a continuum , not a dis-conjugate step.
Moderator of the Technique Forum and Finishing School on Dgrin