imagemeister Loc: mid east Florida

I guess we have the same opinions of each other then .....

chaman

If only I would care.....LOL!

oldtigger Loc: Roanoke Virginia-USA

i'm dissapointed, i was hoping someone would jump in with the cambridge colour article on diffraction limiting:
http://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tutorials/diffraction-photography-2.htm
which mentions that the canon 7D ii becomes diffraction limited at f 6-f 9 and couldn't draw a sharp image no matter what piece of small aperture glass you hang on it.
The internet is full of wonderful small form factor images but if you really care about quality you will end up ditching those toy cameras and step up to a full frame.

chaman

Look what my toy camera can do. Click on the images to see the level of toyness in my pics:

LY2A9220 by Oscar Baez Soria, on Flickr

LY2A8970 by Oscar Baez Soria, on Flickr

LY2A7467 by Oscar Baez Soria, on Flickr

LY2A4890 by Oscar Baez Soria, on Flickr

LY2A3984 by Oscar Baez Soria, on Flickr

LY2A6287 by Oscar Baez Soria, on Flickr


But dont worry I also can do FF

IMG_7792 by Oscar Baez Soria, on Flickr

IMG_8313 by Oscar Baez Soria, on Flickr

IMG_8795-Edit by Oscar Baez Soria, on Flickr

IMG_8937 by Oscar Baez Soria, on Flickr


The only thing I consider a toy in this thread is your brain. You are a pathetic, mediocre "photographer", without any serious basic knowledge... show something worth seeing from your work and your serious equipment. I bet you could not tell if an image was taken with a FF or crop just by seeing it. If you are serious about quality you should actually tried to learn something besides doing copy/paste. But you are late. You were always a mediocre photographer and you will likely STAY that way.

Carolina Wings Loc: Flew from North Carolina to Pennsylvania

Great series...I would love to get photos like that!

oldtigger Loc: Roanoke Virginia-USA

I get a great deal of pleasure out of trying to guess what form factor body was used on all images i see.
I would be lying if i said i was correct more than 60% of the time.
So many people are using PP now that its rare to see a SOOC

Haydon

Then I guess Arthur Morris makes bad images. Don't buy into lab tests, they don't accurately represent what can be made in the field.

chaman

WOW! You know so much...lets see your awesome work. In the past so many used the darkroom....what a bunch of cheaters, right? That Ansel Adams was the worse. Post your work, lets see what you are really made of.

oldtigger Loc: Roanoke Virginia-USA

i've got a better idea, lets get back to Nalu's fuzzy birds and the idea diffraction limiting may be contributing to his problem with fine detail.

oldtigger Loc: Roanoke Virginia-USA

You have had time to think about it, what do you suppose is the OP's problem?

chaman

Go and reread the thread and you will find what I said about it. Almost everyone here gave the OP pretty good advice except for your absurd crap and obvious lack of knowledge both of photography and the OP's equipment. I think its time you check yourself for some senility issues. Have nothing more to say to you.

MikeFromMT Loc: So Cal & MT

Sorry, but get over it and move on. These pictures are excellent! I should only be so lucky.

RRS Loc: Not sure

Very interesting reading as I await my 600mm f/4.0. Will be shooting a 7D MK II and a 5D MK II. Have you done any micro-adjusting on that camera/lens set-up?

Nalu Loc: Southern Arizona

Now, now gentlemen, I didn't mean this post to turn into a pissing match. I do appreciate all of your suggestions and opinions, and you have all been quite helpful. I know the camera/lens/extender combination I used to for this post should generate first rate images and hence my post, looking for suggestions, and you all have provided such. Thank you.

When I first got this lens, I did a microfine adjustment on with my 1DX, but as I got to thinking about, I began to wonder whether I did so with the 7DII. This morning I checked. It appears that I have never done it and I actually do not specifically remember doing so (at least the menu is at the factory settings). I have to remind myself that I am getting somewhat senior and senior moments are getting more frequent. In support of this premise, I recall the results I got with my 7DII and my 400mm DOII were similarly soft until I did the microfine adjustments with that combination. So your responses have been constructive on that point.

I also agree with many of you, the SS were marginal with this series and a wide open aperture may be a factor as well considering its narrow depth of field. Considering IS, is has been suggested to me by Artie Morris to leave it on, which I do. With my 1DX I can get excellent results on a gimbal head on both the 1 and 2 settings. The comments re IS setting 3; a marketing ploy by Canon and it does nothing. Never use it.

Honestly, I know nothing about diffraction issues and will not go there until the last resort. My experience with Canon big white lenses, they are top notch. So my initial thoughts is that it is not an equipment issue, but has to do with the operator.

So, first step, do the microfine adjustment with body lens combo, the lens by it self and with the 1.4 and 2x extenders (I know, the 2x might be a reach. Excuse the pun).

Again, thank you all for your suggestions and the reminder that I have not done a microfine adjustment. This is what this forum is all about! Right?!!!!!!!!

oldtigger Loc: Roanoke Virginia-USA

it will be interesting to hear if you find a distinct difference in image quality.