mffox Loc: Avon, CT

I'd be happy with these results!!!

Tote1940 Loc: Dallas

Bad teleconverters: very short of money as young resident unhappy about T mount 135 preset Vivitar short reach fell for Spiratone “ variable” teleconverter if I can remember over 1/2 Century ago 2 to 3x.
Invariably fuzzy images and up to 3 stop loss!
Kept me away from teleconverters until 1.4 x for Sigma 200-600. A different story.

chevman Loc: Matthews, North Carolina

In my opinion these look very nice. Weather you have done any post processing or not these two photos are very detailed and sharp even coming over the internet. thanks for sharing.

Fredstersphotos Loc: Long Island NY

If you blow your image up 100% there is a ton of of artifacts in it I downloaded your image took it into Topaz Labs Photo AI Enhanced it, removed the noise, then sharpened it you will have to agree it is much sharper.

btbg

I dont own Topaz but thanks.

CHG_CANON Loc: the Windy City

I've been following this discussion. At 9-pages, we see many of the comments seem to come from people who don't actively shoot wildlife and / or don't use these lens 'extender' tools.

The reworking of your image added nothing. "More" software is unneeded. The idea for manual focus for wildlife is nonsensical for AF-capable equipment in 2024. Anyone looking closely at the second image will see extremely sharp details of the misplaced focus on the grass seeds in the foreground and the missed focus on the bird (subject). Here, the photographer -- the human in the equation -- needs to selectively place a single AF point on the bird's eye.

Both images seem to have opportunities to re-process from an original RAW file to obtain different and sharper results. The first image retains a lot of Luminance noise in the blue sky, as well as some odd 'smudges' in that solid blue sky, suggesting an incomplete removal of other aspects of the original image. The details of the second image show a heavier hand in the noise processing, likely removing many of the fine details of the original image.

Personally, I regularly use and rely on my Canon EF 2.0x vIII 'extender' (aka teleconverter). In this bright light on well-lit subjects, I'm confident even better results can be obtained simply with different processing of RAW files from this lens, extender and mirrorless digital body.

btbg

Thanks for the comments. I think you are probably right on the money with your comments. I did remove a cattail, and I probably miss focus by small amounts regularily because my eyesigjt isnt what ot once was and we are not working with a lot of depth of foeld.

CHG_CANON Loc: the Windy City

Personally, I try to shoot wildlife from a tripod, especially for a long lens like your 400mm. If I can get a position / subject that I can shoot over and over in short bursts, I continually refocus / reset the focus on the subject's eye. Many times, I'll even set an AF point where I expect the bird to look, such as when they're preening and looking away and then back again into my preferred composition.

The ideas below are more LR-specific, but you might find useful as you consider your noise processing approach in PS, or maybe will consider LR in your subscription model.

Basics of noise processing

Basics of Lightroom Sharpening

texasdigital Loc: Conroe, Texas

This brings up multiple talking points.
1. Suits ... many have the degrees but lack what my Granny was famous for saying. All the education in the world doesn't do any good if you don't have horse sense.
2. Three hours under a car, during an active shooting and your paper (I refrain from including "news"), makes you eat the photos. Maybe you should have shopped them to other news outlets.
3. For how long was his mental illness known? Had he shot and killed a policeman, depriving his wife and kids of a husband and father, would his mental illness excuse his behavior?
4. Did discussing his mental illness solve any of the problems created by this individual?
5. I find it disturbing to give publicity to the family (via photographs and story), when it is most likely they knew of his condition and most likely protected him.
6. If he suffered from mental illness, how did he get a gun? Since it is apparent the family knew about his condition, what did they do to prevent him from having access to a gun?
7. It would not have been you embarrassing the shooter, his family did that for him.

We have a local newspaper that has gone through many transformations, but few of them included an appreciation for photography unless it was sports. They had to do that since football is a religion in Texas. But other than that, they wouldn't be able to spell "photojournalism", much less define it.

imagemeister Loc: mid east Florida

My conclusion from this excercise is :

1. I would NEVER consider using more the one TC at a time - especially at this time in the digital era.
2. If I were using a 2X TC hand held, I would be using as much bracing/stabilizing as I could muster.....AND, I would not be using in a low light situation or where the subject was briskly moving - for AF concerns.
3. Today, If pressed, I will use an APSC camera, with a 1.4X TC and CROP and use pixel enlargement software - in stead of a 2X. Only in a a very serious/desperate situation and in bright near-direct sun would I consider a 2X ......do I have a 2X ? - Yes, Canon III version - have I used it ? Yes - with the 400 DO.

Years ago, I very happily used the 2X II with the Canon 300 2.8 - BEFORE high MP cropping and pixel enlargement software.
.

Beenthere

You should be proud of these samples.., unless I'm going blind, they look really sharp to me, and the "Bokeh" is great. I wouldn't mess with them.., just shoot more...

ImageCreator Loc: Northern California

Re:the snake
A 12 gauge shotgun would be my approach. Works every time and you don’t need to get real close.

Retired CPO Loc: Travel full time in an RV

Sorry, but I am concerned! Did the snake die after biting you??
And no. I think maybe you should have used a 3x converter. I think the IQ would have been fine!

SuperflyTNT Loc: Manassas VA

Wow, I hope not! Maybe it’s just cataracts or you need to clean your glasses.

btbg

You raise some interesting points.

First he didnt get a gun, he got a compound bow. Bow hunting is big here.

Second no one got shot, he missed when he shot at the police when he came out and two officers tackled him.

Third what caused his mental break was he was being evicted from his home even though he was currwnt on his rent.

Fourth it turns out that hos family had come in to try to get the paper to do a story a couple weeks earlier about both his upcoming eviction and his mental illness.

That makes things a little different. My photos are of him drawing and firing the bow as two officers who were on each side of the door tackled him.

Thing is I think they might have made the right choice if it helped even one other family with mental illness.

As to shopping photos around there isnt a very big market around here and no one else even ran the story of the police arresting him.

One of the things I have learned is that photographing crimes and accidents is not always appreciated and it is not always cut and dried what should or should not go in print.