ddub wrote:
Here is the picture again I have checked the store original box.
Owls in particular are prone to looking soft, due to their plumage. Their feathers are "reversed" with the soft, downy surface on the outside. This is essential to the owl's being able to sneak up on it's prey in complete silence. They can even flap their wings without making a sound.
So, unless you are very close with the owl filling the frame in portrait, shooting at base ISO and in good contrasty light, you are not likely to get the fine detail of that downy side.
As far as your picture is concerned, it is more than sharp enough - for an owl shot, that is. If you shot this as a raw file, then you have a few more options with post processing the noise away and enhancing the fine detail, but it's a good shot.
I did play around a little with micro contrast only on the owl, and some modest noise abatement to the entire image, as well as softening, desaturating and darkening only the background, to bring the eye's focus to the main subject. A modest, soft vignette was applied at the end.
Funny thing is (and totally expected), when the two versions (yours and mine), are displayed side by side on a pair of 24" displays, and you step back about 3 ft, there is no sense of lose of sharpness between the two images. My rendition shows some more contrast and darker, less saturated foliage, but yours looks more than fine. I am pretty sure your gear is working just fine.
Not sure why you used exp comp of -1/3. And I am sure you are aware that at 23.7' your DoF is about 3.6" with a 50/50 distribution front/back, leaving you only about 1 3/4" in front of the focal distance for decent sharpness. If you shot this as a jpg, your sharpening settings together with ISO 800 could have munched away some of the finer detail.Also, did you use a 1.4X TC? The metadata shows a 300mm F4 lens but reports an effective focal length of 600mm on a 35mm. That is a little confusing.