# Need advice: 60D + 100-400L



## Orangutan (Jun 22, 2014)

I'm struggling to get good photos with my 60D + 100-400L. I experience this problem primarily with birds, which is the main use for this lens. I compare the photos I get against photos others post from similar combinations (60D or 7D + 100-400) and I'm just not getting that quality. I realize that people post only their best photos, but I'm not getting those results even under ideal conditions. My assumption is that it's user error, and I'm hoping someone would be willing to help.

The unhappy result is photos that seem "crunchy." See the 100% crop of the Oriole attached.

The settings were: 1/500th sec at f/5.6, ISO 100. It was hand-held with IS on, and I have fairly steady hands. As you can see, the bird is in pretty good light, and the histogram shows it was a reasonable exposure, though not fully ETTR for the bird.

I just tested the lens in my back yard on a tripod. I compared liveview with stand PD focus, and the focus results seemed similar, so I'm not (yet) willing to blame focus problems.

Any advice is appreciated.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jun 22, 2014)

How are you processing the image?


----------



## AlanF (Jun 22, 2014)

The 100-400 L also is quite variable in IQ and you might have a bad one. Whereas a good copy of the 100-400mm L is a decent lens, I found it sharp enough only when I got close enough to birds that they filled quite a lot of the frame. So. I invested a fortune in the 300/2.8 II + 2xTCIII to get tack sharp images. I subsequently sold my 100-400 and bought a Tamron 150-600mm for not much more. The Tamron at 600 mm has a real edge over a good copy of the Canon for bird photography.


----------



## Orangutan (Jun 22, 2014)

neuroanatomist said:


> How are you processing the image?



LR4. For this image I just clicked the "Auto" button. Settings attached as images.

Thanks.


----------



## Kestrel (Jun 22, 2014)

Something definitely doesn't look right... should be much sharper. What is the output like if you shoot something static under test conditions (i.e.: black and white type from a magazine under good light taped to side of house) with the camera and lens on good tripod? If it still looks as blurry, I would try a different copy of the lens. It doesn't look like a simple focus issue, nothing in frame looks sharp. Is the lens new, or second hand?


----------



## weixing (Jun 22, 2014)

Hi,
Do you use any filter on the lens?? If yes, try remove the filter and try again.
Also, is the weather hot when you took this image?? Do you notice any turbulence when you shot this image?? I once shoot in a very hot afternoon and the image come out with similar result.... low contrast and blurry.

Have a nice day.


----------



## Orangutan (Jun 22, 2014)

Kestrel said:


> Something definitely doesn't look right... should be much sharper. What is the output like if you shoot something static under test conditions (i.e.: black and white type from a magazine under good light taped to side of house) with the camera and lens on good tripod? If it still looks as blurry, I would try a different copy of the lens. It doesn't look like a simple focus issue, nothing in frame looks sharp. Is the lens new, or second hand?



I'll do a static test on Monday, I won't have time before then. The lens is a factory refurb, purchased directly from Canon. It's long out of warranty. I've just been assuming it was my technique.



weixing said:


> Hi,
> Do you use any filter on the lens?? If yes, try remove the filter and try again.
> Also, is the weather hot when you took this image?? Do you notice any turbulence when you shot this image?? I once shoot in a very hot afternoon and the image come out with similar result.... low contrast and blurry.
> 
> Have a nice day.



This photo (and most of my bird photos) are taken without a filter. The weather was 60's (F) and fairly clear, and the bird was about 25ft up. Winds were calm.

Thank you for your time.


----------



## IslanderMV (Jun 22, 2014)

Sorry to see you are having problems. So for what it is worth ....

In my area I know of at least 5 folks with 60D or 7D and the 100-400. None are having any problems.
( you still might have a bad copy I suppose )

I have been using the same combo as you for the last 3 years. If I was out shooting small birds and had enough light to use ISO 100, I would have been shooting much faster. I use manual mode with auto ISO.

My default speed is 1/1250, If possible 1/1600. I find many handheld shots in the field are soft because of camera shake. Higher shutter speeds help quite a bit. I also find using archery techniques for breath control to actually make a difference. 

Having said that... the image is also flat, low contrast and only 922 pixels wide. A 60D is 5184 pixels wide, 922 is a REALLY heavy crop for a 60D.


----------



## Orangutan (Jun 22, 2014)

IslanderMV said:


> I have been using the same combo as you for the last 3 years. If I was out shooting small birds and had enough light to use ISO 100, I would have been shooting much faster. I use manual mode with auto ISO.
> 
> My default speed is 1/1250, If possible 1/1600. I find many handheld shots in the field are soft because of camera shake. Higher shutter speeds help quite a bit.



See the sandpiper image attached: 1/1600th at f/5.6 ISO 1600. At that ISO I expect a bit of noise, but it still looks "off" to me. This image is ETTR (very nearly overexposed) and larger.



> A 60D is 5184 pixels wide, 922 is a REALLY heavy crop for a 60D.



I don't expect 1DX quality from a 60D, but I've seen 100% crops from this combo that were a lot better than this.

Thanks for your input.


----------



## IslanderMV (Jun 22, 2014)

See the sandpiper image attached: 1/1600th at f/5.6 ISO 1600. At that ISO I expect a bit of noise, but it still looks "off" to me. This image is ETTR (very nearly overexposed) and larger.

Some of the debris in the foreground seem "almost" in focus. - The 60D high ISO performance sucks. Bird shots over 640 seldom seem right. ( unless you get really close )

One of my friends upgraded to the new Tamron SP 150-600mm - He is producing some great images. ( I am starting to save ) Perhaps that is the best solution. Maybe rent one to see if you like it.


----------



## Kestrel (Jun 22, 2014)

Do you have any examples that have more pixels on the subject? The sandpiper itself is about 550x367 pixels, you can't expect much detail with such a crop. Also, I would lower the ISO in the case you showed. Unless the subject is moving very quickly you could take it down to 1/400th second shutter at ISO 400, which will improve the image.


----------



## Orangutan (Jun 23, 2014)

Kestrel said:


> Do you have any examples that have more pixels on the subject?


I'll look for some and post, or maybe go out next weekend and take some sample shots.



> The sandpiper itself is about 550x367 pixels, you can't expect much detail with such a crop.


I would have thought so also, but I've seen some surprisingly-good heavy crop shots posted (here and other places) from this combo.



> Also, I would lower the ISO in the case you showed. Unless the subject is moving very quickly you could take it down to 1/400th second shutter at ISO 400, which will improve the image.


Someone else suggested never going below 1/1250th due to camera shake.

What I may end up doing is just take all these suggestions, use them to compile a list of test shots to take, then go to a local pond to try them all.


----------



## wsheldon (Jun 23, 2014)

That's frustrating, but as others have pointed out you can get great images with an APS-C camera and that lens if you get a good copy, achieve focus, and optimize ISO and shutter speed.

Here's a recent shot of a sandpiper at the shoreline taken with a 50D and 100-400L at 400mm, f8, ISO 200, 1/400th under good early evening light from a similar distance to what you describe (slight crop):






Lots of good feather detail there.

Of course when you *can* get really close there's way more detail you can achieve, like this (50D, 400mm, ISO 200, 1/400, f6.3):


----------



## wsheldon (Jun 23, 2014)

And here's a 100% crop of that sandpiper above for reference.


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Jun 23, 2014)

Lenses and cameras do vary, and if you pair them up when they have additive errors, it can be tough. 
Lenses also can have problems that make sharp images impossible. That's why Roger Cicala of lens rentals tests every lens rental when it returns. I seem to recall him saying that a fair number of them come back needing adjustments.

If you cannot get the lens / camera combination to perform as it should, send it in, for repair. Be certain that of the issue first. Putting a big lens like that on a tripod and using liveview does not guarantee a sharp image, particularly if its a lightweight tripod, or if the center column is cranked up. I learned that one the hard way.
In any event, don't expect too much of the old design. Its very good, but could be better.


----------



## Orangutan (Jun 24, 2014)

wsheldon said:


> And here's a 100% crop of that sandpiper above for reference.



I searched some earlier photos and found this, possibly the best-quality I have. The first is the full-frame scaled down; the second is a 100%crop. I'm fairly sure this was hand-held, and I couldn't find IS info in the metadata, but I assume it was on.

1/1250, ISO320, f/6.3

I think the two key factors here are: f/6.3 and the lack of any false targets for the AF.

I'd appreciate any thoughts on what made this work when others didn't.

Thanks.


----------



## Omar H (Jun 24, 2014)

i have the exact same combination. My experience has been always _f_8 to _f_16. At _f_5.6 practically everything comes out soft. Also, try to shoot at 1/1000 at least, bump your ISO if needed. Applying the sunny 16 rule has worked for me as well, again bump your ISO. And something else, this is a telephoto lens, not a telescope! I used to do the same thing, try to shoot small birds at a distance and then be upset with the results when doing extreme crops.

When shooting on a tripod, always turn IS off.

Check my set of tests at different apertures with the 60D and 100-400
https://www.flickr.com/photos/omar_h/sets/72157634903424725/


HTH


----------



## wsheldon (Jun 24, 2014)

Most lenses are better stopped down a bit, but the 100-400 is quite good at 5.6, particularly in the center. If your f5.6 shots are noticeably soft then I'd look at focus accuracy (front/back focus), DOF limitations or long lens technique before concluding the lens is soft. Here's a shot at 400mm, f5.6, ISO100, 1/650, hand held on a 50D:






The DOF is so shallow near MFD that the entire dragonfly isn't in focus, but at the plane of focus in the middle of the rear wing the image is very sharp and lines are well resolved.


----------



## wsheldon (Jun 24, 2014)

Orangutan said:


> wsheldon said:
> 
> 
> > And here's a 100% crop of that sandpiper above for reference.
> ...



That's nice, and more in line with what you should expect of that lens and camera under good conditions. If you keep your shutter speed at 1/250-1/500 or better at 400mm with IS on or use a good tripod with IS off, keep ISO <800, nail focus on your subject, and exposure properly you should be able to achieve this quality with other subjects. You're shooting at an effective focal length of 640mm and technique is really critical and makes or breaks an image. It definitely takes practice.


----------



## Orangutan (Jun 24, 2014)

wsheldon said:


> Orangutan said:
> 
> 
> > wsheldon said:
> ...



I'll try f/6.3 and see if my hit rate goes up. Based on this image (and others) I don't think I have a soft lens (optics); if anything, it may be front-focusing a little -- the image seems to lose focus quickly behind the branch. I'll do some front-focus testing and see what I can find. At f/5.6 I'd expect _some_ of the subject to be in focus, but this has often not been the case.


----------



## scaptic (Jun 24, 2014)

This looks a lot like the problems I had with my 60D and 100-400L combo. Finally got rid of the issue by sending the 60D and 100-400L in for calibration.

I used the following procedure to verify I had a calibration error:

Put the combo on a tripod and shoot a picture of a brick wall using live view to make sure the lens is sharp without using AF. Then shoot the same picture using AF. 

If the first picture is noticeably sharper you probably have a calibration issue.


----------



## Lee Jay (Jun 24, 2014)

I have the same problem with mine, and I isolated to a very specific problem.

With the IS in the ON state, the decentering of the IS elements causes a pretty dramatic loss of resolution wide open. I've mitigated this entirely by either turning off the IS when I'm shooting wide open or by shooting at f/8 with the IS engaged.

It is possible to get good shots at f/5.6 with the IS engaged, but it's hit-and-miss because it depends on where the off-center IS elements happen to be during the exposure.


----------

