Canon 550D and Canon 400mm 5.6 L Combo - Image Quality (1 Viewer)

[xmesox]

Hey guys,

I am currently shooting with a Canon 550D and until recently I was using it with a Sigma 50-500mm lens, but the images were a bit soft for me, so I upgraded to a Canon 400mm 5.6 L, after reading rave reviews from almost all it's users.

Since having the lens my image quality as increased a bit, but not nearly as much as I had thought it may, and doesn't seem to be up to the same standards as most of the other images I've seen with the 400mm 5.6L, I'm not sure if this is an issue with the lens or my camera body. I haven't seen too many images with this combination so it'd hard for me to judge, but having seen images from somewhat similar bodies as far as ISO noise (50D, 60D) my results tend to be inferior to those.

I generally need to shoot at around ISO 800 to keep a shutter speed above 1/1000 at the lenses sharpest F7.1, but in good lighting have it down at ISO 400, or even ISO 200 (black shouldered kite image) for birds that aren't in flight.

My main problem is that the images are just not sharp, the attached image of the Rock Kestral and the Jackal Buzzard were shot at around 1/1250 ISO800 and F7.1 and I'd say they are about 70% and 85% crops respectively. The Black Shouldered Kite image was shot at around ISO 200, F7.1 and 1/1600.

The images were shot in RAW and some sharpening done.

I realize that the 550D has less than great auto-focusing with only 1 cross-focal point, and wonder if that may be to blame? Though even on birds that are perched, such as the Black Shouldered Kite image, which is very lightly cropped, the images aren't as sharp as the images I usually see from this lens.

The attached images have been compressed a bit, but looking at the raw files and these compressed jpegs, the results aren't very different, though if you feel the original less compressed jpegs are imperative, let me know and I'll upload them.

Is using 70% - 100% crops common? Am I trying to crop too much and expecting too much from the crops? Are others just generally much closer to the birds?

Any help would be appreciated.

 

[Roy C]

Hi, I would image your main problem is not getting near enough to the birds, while you can crop images from the 400/5.6 fairly aggressively you cannot put detail in that was not there before. To get really detailed sharp shots you need to be fairly near to your target. BTW I always found the 400/5.6 to be pin sharp at f5.6 and rarely stopped down. Of course when shooting in RAW your processing abilities also play a part to get the best out of a shot.
BTW I have never used the 550D but cannot see any reason why you should not get sharp shots from it - is there micro focus adjustment on the 550D? if so it may pay to run a test just in case it needs a bit of adjusting.

 

[xmesox]

Hi Roy,

Thanks for your comment.

I will post an uncropped image later which may help in allowing to see if it is a factor of over-cropping or not.

Unfortunately the 550D has no focus adjustment, and I really wish it did since I do have some focal troubles at times.

 

[hampers]

May also help if you post the camera settings you were using, particularly focus. As Roy says he has produced some excellent images from a 400 f5.6, I've also had good results.

Cheers

Phil

 

[xmesox]

My main settings for those shots are described in the post, varying a bit for each shot.

As for the AF settings: AF Servo mode. Shooting in manual with no exposure bias. Using the center focus point.

In custom functions I have the high ISO noise reduction off since I have a rather expensive noise reduction software plugin for photoshop.

 

[Froggy]

I use a 550d and 400mm 5.6 combo .
No problems with focus accuracy on the whole , and sharpness is great (even wide open) .

I agree with Roy , this looks to be a case of not enough pixels on target in the first place .

 

[Hor Kee]

I use a 600D and this lens, so its just about the same. Looks like your birds are rather far away and have been cropped heavily. Rising hot air thermals are always a problem when shooting soaring eagles. I usually deal with that by stopping the lens down to f/8 or f/11. Do check focus adjustment with your nearest Canon service centre to eliminate the possibility of misfocus

 

[SteveClifton]

I'm not clear if any of the 3 images posted are actually heavy crops or not (you said the Kite is not), but I seriously doubt if that would account for the softness we see in this case. You can still have heavy crops that are sharp!

There is a common denominator with both lenses used by the OP, in that results have been softer than expected, so personally I think technique is where i would be looking to make initial improvements. You didn't say whether these were taken hand held or from a tripod? but I'll assume the former?

Tripods seem to be deeply unfashionable amongst birders/photographers, and I know that while some people can get away with an unstabilised 400mm lens hand-held, there are also some (many) of us who just can't! Again, we don't know if the OP has had any sharp results at all. If not (and after trying other lenses on the same body with equally soft results) then yes, I would be looking to blame the camera and/or lens, but first I would put the camera & lens on a tripod in similar conditions (with a static subject) and make some comparisons with the results. Preferably use the self timer or a cable release to eliminate any unnecessary movement. If results are sharp then at least you know it's your technique you need to work on. If results are still soft then you might need to get the lens and body sent to canon for recalibration.

ps. The only thing I can see that might be changed in the settings posted above is to open the lens up to F5.6. As Roy has said it should be almost equal in sharpness to F7.1, but at least you'll get more light in = faster shutter speeds.

 

[Roy C]

I do agree that even for big crops you still should be able to get sharp shots but sometimes atmospheric conditions can play havoc with shooting from afar.
Attached is just a couple of examples of massive crops from the 400/5.6. Both of these were shot were hand held and wide open on my old 40D - the 7D does even better.

 

[xmesox]

Wow, those are some amazing crops... Can't believe the quality, especially on the right images. I do crop very aggressively, and it has always been my primary concern - that it may be what causes the lack of quality images. But then I see other images of raptors flying overhead and think that there is no way people are getting close without cropping as heavily as I am. I mean, even when I get what I feel is a near fly-by it still requires some heavy cropping.

Attached is an example of one of the 'closer' subjects that has been moderately cropped in comparison to some of the others. The one uncropped, the other cropped to 100%.

If it turns out that the cropping is a factor, I guess I can focus my attention away from the equipment and more onto the concept of getting close enough to raptors for a good sharp shot.

EDIT to add: In regards to the previous equipment, my Sigma 50-500mm was soft even through controlled tests. It was usable at F9, but not great. I realize that user error may well be at play, but I understand the requirements of eliminating camera shake and balancing shutter speed with ISO, which is why I rarely shoot below 1/1000. I have gotten some amazingly sharp images from this lens when the subject is in good light and cropping isn't required. I may just have assumed everyone crops a lot more than they actually do.

 

[Robert L Jarvis]

I would think that those last two shots demonstrate what Roy was saying, the target is too far away i,e too small for the focus point to get too grips with hence the crop shot is lacking in detail and sharpness. Certainly a fair bit of noise showing in the cropped image. What settings did you use for this shot?

 

[xmesox]

Thanks for the reply. I thought it may be an issue of the focus points, the reason for the thread was mainly to see if perhaps my problem is related to the 550Ds very less than spectacular focal points, with only a single center cross focal point, I'm assuming the images may be better on a camera with better AF points?

The settings for that shot were: 1/2000 , F7.1 and ISO 800.

 

[Robert L Jarvis]

Have you not tried shooting wide open at F5.6 as suggested, surely in the light you have do you really need ISO800?

I use a Canon 100-400 zoom telephoto and always use F5.6 even though many say the "sweet" spot is F8.

 

[xmesox]

I've only had the lens for 3 months so I haven't used it too much wide open, it also seemed a bit more forgiving on F7.1 when the AF looked on to the wings of a bird instead of the eye. But I may well try shooting more at F5.6 and around 1/1250 and ISO 400.

 

[Roy C]

I've only had the lens for 3 months so I haven't used it too much wide open, it also seemed a bit more forgiving on F7.1 when the AF looked on to the wings of a bird instead of the eye. But I may well try shooting more at F5.6 and around 1/1250 and ISO 400.

There is nothing wrong with your logic in stopping down a tad to increase the chances of correcting a minor miss focus. Yes the sample shot at ISO 800 is noisy but that does not really account for the softness IMO.
EDIT: just had a thought, have you tried a distant subject with live view AF? (probably too slow for flyers though). Live view uses contrast based AF as opposed to phase AF in normal mode and is very accurate providing you have adequate contrast - bit of a long shot but it may show if the lens needs calibrating.

 

[xmesox]

It is something I have considered before, but as you've mentioned - it'd be very slow for flyers and that is probably the situation it would strive best at (the bird against a plain sky backdrop) as opposed to a bird with a background of trees. Maybe I should look in trying to borrow another camera from someone and see if there are any differences in how the focus handles.

I keep referring back to your examples of crops from your 40D and has made me dig into my files to look for shots taken at similar distances to compare the results if I were to crop near to the same as you did.

I will say there are times when the result seems to be better than others, and some are passable, I think it may well be an AF issue. I'm going to try find more examples of in flight shots that are taken from a distance and then cropped on the same body and see if I can see a difference.

(If those posting with the same setup and have any shots as mentioned above, it would also be helpful)

Appreciate everyone's posts.

 

[pthompson]

Hi,

I also have been using exactly the same combination for more than 18 months, usually at 5.6 and without a tripod, and am generally very happy with the results. This is almost always in tropical conditions, and I would say that more distant birds are more likely not to appear sharp, and besides the fewer pixels on subject put this down to heat haze and or humidity. Close subjects in good light usually come out fine.

 

[xmesox]

So today I took the time to perform some controlled tests to see if there was perhaps an AF issue and it would appear as though I have quite a back-focusing problem. Not sure if this is usually a body or a lens problem, but attached you can see that the AF sensor vs the Live View focus has large differences. The live view focus also seems to be a lot more sharper than the regular AF.

Both were shot at the same settings on a tripod with a remote shutter.

I'm not sure on the specifics of focusing problems, but does this off-focus increase exponentially with the distance of the subject, with my birds in flight shots I assume this could be the case, where the focus is actually occurring behind the bird itself maybe? Leaving the bird out of focus.

Input will be greatly appreciated.

The blue dots on the image are were the focus point was.

 

[BodyResults]

From this test it does look like you have some back focus going on. This test would be better if you had a vertical panel to focus on right at same distance as the blue dot point. Focusing on a angle plane is considered not as accurate.

Looks like you might want to send the camera and lens to Canon to calibrate together.

Doug

 

[jimthomson]

Not sure if this is usually a body or a lens problem,

It could be either. You really need to get them calibrated together.

Thats why my next body will have MFA.

You can try to repeat the test with another lens and if it focuses correctly then the culprit is likely the lens.