[dcstep]

Originally Posted by Weebl

Dave,
If I take the tele off, shoot without it and crop it, there is a noticeable difference. So, I'm starting to think that only at distance with the 300 it's funky.
It's a Canon 1.4xii bought new

.

Wow. There's something wrong.

You're doing just the opposite of my mantra (more pixels) when you, in effect, digitally zoom by cropping and prefer it to optical reach. I can't imagine what's going wrong, but I've never had a Canon TC that bad.

Have you tried micro adjusting the AF with the TC attached? Quite often you'll get a different micro adjustment, with and without your TC. The camera may be front or back-focusing with the TC and yet still be accurate without the TC. I'd check this out before sending anything off to Canon.

Dave

[Weebl]

Been there done that.
There is nothing wrong with either item, just the combination under certain specific conditions. I'm using at least 1/1200th on a tripod with cable release too.
Probably caused by more glass in the optical path.

[ddk632]

Wow, lots of great insight on the long lens topic. The explanation regarding 3" glass makes sense. Problem is, I like Ed's response about having the versatility of a zoom (100-400) for anything but birds, which I don't shoot.

So I guess with a 100-400 and a 2x TC, you'd get the range of 200-800 with 2 mm focal length increments. Seems good to me.

It's hard to follow you guys with the huge lenses. I think I will follow the "start small" and see what goes from there...

I got the Motorsport photography bug kicking in and want to shoot these events with my full frame 6D as the up close and personal detail should be awesome. Not as awesome as Dave's "biker" shot, but that lens is too much lens for me just getting into this.

I'm with Dave on the "more pixels on the subject" approach, as I usually dislike heavy cropping, being old school and all wanting to get my composition as I want it when I am shooting, not in post.

I initially inquired about the 400L, and now I am thinking a 100-400L might be the answer. I would still use my 24-105, the 40mm Pancake, or the TS-E 17 for the pits and detail shots.

I will go to another race in a few weekends, might rent the 100-400L and give it a whirl.

[Weebl]

Nothing like a zoom for moving objects. Although I don't have one, someday I'll get one. (28-135s and 18-55s don't count)

[M_Six]

Originally Posted by ddk632

Wow, lots of great insight on the long lens topic. The explanation regarding 3" glass makes sense. Problem is, I like Ed's response about having the versatility of a zoom (100-400) for anything but birds, which I don't shoot.

So I guess with a 100-400 and a 2x TC, you'd get the range of 200-800 with 2 mm focal length increments. Seems good to me.

It's hard to follow you guys with the huge lenses. I think I will follow the "start small" and see what goes from there...

I got the Motorsport photography bug kicking in and want to shoot these events with my full frame 6D as the up close and personal detail should be awesome. Not as awesome as Dave's "biker" shot, but that lens is too much lens for me just getting into this.

I'm with Dave on the "more pixels on the subject" approach, as I usually dislike heavy cropping, being old school and all wanting to get my composition as I want it when I am shooting, not in post.

I initially inquired about the 400L, and now I am thinking a 100-400L might be the answer. I would still use my 24-105, the 40mm Pancake, or the TS-E 17 for the pits and detail shots.

I will go to another race in a few weekends, might rent the 100-400L and give it a whirl.

Just remember that a 100-400 with a Canon 2x TC will not give you AF on the 6D. The Kenko 2x TC will allow AF at f4 (which will be f8), but not reliably above that.

You might want to consider spending a bit more and get the 70-200 f2.8 IS. Then when you add a Canon 2x TC you get to 400mm f5.6 with IS. I'm seriously considering selling my 70-300L and getting a 70-200 f2.8. It's a super sharp lens.

This is a 100% crop from the center of an image I just shot outside. This is my 70-300L using the Kenko 1.4x TC for 420mm f8. It AF'd fine. The one thing I've never liked about the 70-300L is the bokeh at extreme crops. You can see it's fidgety here. One reason I want to move to the 70-200 f2.8.

[ddk632]

Originally Posted by M_Six

Just remember that a 100-400 with a Canon 2x TC will not give you AF on the 6D. The Kenko 2x TC will allow AF at f4 (which will be f8), but not reliably above that.

True, good point. I honestly was thinking I'd be manual focusing anyway.

At the last races, I was manually pre-focusing on the warm-up lap and would proper shoot on the next lap. If I wanted to adjust my spot, I'd use empty track or the stragglers in the race to pre-focus on the new spot.

Although the last race of the day, I shot with the 6D and 24-105 from a closer spot - and because the XTi battery ran out and I forgot my spare - and it was nice to be able to use AF

Anyway my 70-300 IS USM lens is so slow autofocusing when fully zoomed in at 300mm, even without the TC, that I am faster with manual focus!

[M_Six]

I just updated the post above with a pic. It's not bad for what it is, but not as sharp as the 400 5.6 with the 1.4x TC. And the bokeh is much worse. But this had the advantage of IS and it didn't really help here.

[Weebl]

Mark,
Unless you need the faster lens on the 70-200/2.8 the F4 is supposed to be a tad sharper. I think Dave has the F4.
If you are hunting bokeh, then you have no choice.

[M_Six]

The speed is needed when you start adding TCs. The f2.8 only goes to f5.6 with a 2x TC. Speed is good.

Just because, I went out with the Tamron 70-200 f2.8 VC mounted with the Kenko 1.4x TC. So this is a 100 crop from the center of a 280mm f4 shot.

[M_Six]

The drumline from the summer camp is practicing in the gymnasium in my building and the windows are open, so I need to leave before my head explodes.

[dcstep]

Originally Posted by Weebl

Been there done that.
There is nothing wrong with either item, just the combination under certain specific conditions. I'm using at least 1/1200th on a tripod with cable release too.
Probably caused by more glass in the optical path.

It's not the glass. Really.

There must be some technique issue. Even on the tripod, if you've left the IS on (which I do most of the time) you have to make certain that the IS has spooled up before depressing the shutter the rest of the way down. If you use back-button AF, then IS may not spool up when you hit the release.

If it were the glass, then you'd see it both close and far.

Here's a hand held, 1,000mm shot taken at 1/4 to 1/2 mile. You can see atmospheric distortion in it if you pixel-peep. That's unavoidable, but not due to the glass. I think you're either seeing that, or your super-tele technique is not up to speed yet. (It took me over a year to get really consistent).


Wake Setter! Just what we need... by dcstep, on Flickr

A few minutes later I took this shot with the same set up (blew out the reds trying to get the blacks full range):


Brrrrreee. by dcstep, on Flickr

[dcstep]

Originally Posted by M_Six

The speed is needed when you start adding TCs. The f2.8 only goes to f5.6 with a 2x TC. Speed is good.

Just because, I went out with the Tamron 70-200 f2.8 VC mounted with the Kenko 1.4x TC. So this is a 100 crop from the center of a 280mm f4 shot.

My default ISO is 800 with the super-teles, so that I can get the shutter speed up where needed. When it's really bright, I'll pull it down to ISO 400 and go up to 1600 when the clouds roll in.

[dcstep]

Originally Posted by Weebl

Mark,
Unless you need the faster lens on the 70-200/2.8 the F4 is supposed to be a tad sharper. I think Dave has the F4.
If you are hunting bokeh, then you have no choice.

Yes, I've got the 70-200/f4. It's got nice bokeh, but you have to be relatively close to the subject to throw it. The 500/f4 is bokeh champ. It's super creamy and smooth.

[Weebl]

I never use IS on a tripod, I've seen the results on that, the IS will make tiny circles hunting around.( ten to thirty second night exposures) Your 5D and 500 are in a whole different class of IQ than the 300/7D.
It could also be vibration from the wind, I'm not going to get one of those heavy Berlebach tripods either, aluminum was heavy enough.

link to 135 w/1.4x at distance showing heat and wind but still "crisp". Granted my PS sucks but I don't see this with the 300/1.4 at distance. The distance is ~1.5 miles
http://kevingoto.smugmug.com/Sports/...tXhp9&lb=1&s=O

[dcstep]

Originally Posted by Weebl

I never use IS on a tripod, I've seen the results on that, the IS will make tiny circles hunting around.( ten to thirty second night exposures) Your 5D and 500 are in a whole different class of IQ than the 300/7D.
It could also be vibration from the wind, I'm not going to get one of those heavy Berlebach tripods either, aluminum was heavy enough.

link to 135 w/1.4x at distance showing heat and wind but still "crisp". Granted my PS sucks but I don't see this with the 300/1.4 at distance. The distance is ~1.5 miles
http://kevingoto.smugmug.com/Sports/...tXhp9&lb=1&s=O

For long exposures, turn IS off, but Canon is fine with it on for "normal" exposures.

I like that shot a lot. I don't think that you can really expect better sharpness at that distance.

I've got a 7D also. It's AF is VERY inconsistent in AI Servo mode. It'll hunt and blow four to six images out of ten. I thought I was screwing up until I bought the 5D3 and the shots were suddenly all in focus. When you can, shoot the 7D in single shot mode. If they fix that problem on the MkII, I'll start using it again.

Dave

[Weebl]

Dave,
Hmmm. You are saying if I have it on any kind of multiple exposure, you were getting inconsistent focusing? Even if you only took one shot?
I do make it a habit to not trust servo mode and continually "tap" the release to re-focus before taking a shot.
I'll probably end up getting the 5D3 eventually but it is at the tail end of my photo wants.

[dcstep]

Originally Posted by Weebl

Dave,
Hmmm. You are saying if I have it on any kind of multiple exposure, you were getting inconsistent focusing? Even if you only took one shot?
I do make it a habit to not trust servo mode and continually "tap" the release to re-focus before taking a shot.
I'll probably end up getting the 5D3 eventually but it is at the tail end of my photo wants.

The AI Servo mode will hunt, so for multiple shots, it'll go in and out no matter what you do. I don't think that any shot (first, middle or last) is any more likely to be in focus, so you're best off to stay out of that mode (easier said than done) or take a burst twice as long as you might otherwise think is needed (increasing your odds). The tapping may be helpful, but you don't get a confirmation beep in servo and sometimes it's really hard to tell if it's really, really in focus, so you'll tap and there'll be no apparent response. (I tried manual in the past and had a dismal record of getting telephoto shots on distant subjects in sharp focus).

I love my 5D3, but I am looking forward to the MkII 7D in hopes of having a crop sensor body with the AF of the 5D3. Also, I'm really curious to see testing of the new sensor in the 70D, which could end up in the 7D2. I bet the price will go up to $2,400, but it'd be worth it, with those improvements.

Dave

[Weebl]

Better AF and noise handling would make it a tough decision between the two bodies. Though getting a bit wider for landscapes is another goal that a crop can't do for me.

[Chewy734]

[ddk632]

Originally Posted by Chewy734

If someone came to my house for dinner and after having some of my smoked chicken said "you must have an awesome wood-fired smoker grill" - I would be flattered

[Chewy734]

If only Canon would make this 1D body...

[dcstep]

Originally Posted by Weebl

Better AF and noise handling would make it a tough decision between the two bodies. Though getting a bit wider for landscapes is another goal that a crop can't do for me.

Can't beat having both a full-frame and a crop body. If the 7D2 gets the 5D3 AF system, I'll be all over it. It'll be my birds, wildlife and action body and the 5D3 will cover everything else.

When you use a super-tele, you really need a second body in case something big comes up or anything comes by close. You can't change lenses fast enough and I don't like throwing a super-tele onto the ground.