Upload & Sell: On
| p.1 #10 · p.1 #10 · State tournament boys lax with Canon the 200-400 f/4 |
This focal length is the only reason I contemplated switching back to Nikon at one point. If the shots look soft, it may be operator error or my processing. I remember one shot in particular that was tack sharp on screen but came out inexplicably soft when processed in LR. That's an issue I have to explore further.
In the first shot, btw, I overexposed slightly to lighten the shadows under the helmet. The 1dx, unlike previous 1 series models, seems to be more sensitive to this, and over exposed whites are less recoverable. They have a tendency to "bloom" like the numbers on his chest in the first shot. On the 1d4 I could have pulled them back completely. But everything is a trade off. On the plus side, this lens did a decent job dealing with heat shimmer.
I'm just starting to process shots from last night's games for the paper. So far, I don't see much difference in sharpening required. With the 400 2.8 II + 1Dx combo (and the 300 2.8 II) I've had to back off my earlier sharpening amounts to avoid over sharpening. Same with this lens.
This lens does vignette noticeably at 400mm and slightly below, and it is noticeable even in the viewfinder. There is discussion of this in the hands on thread in the Canon forum. For me it is not a huge issue, since my action shots are invariably cropped. For other uses, it could be a consideration. I haven't tried to correct this phenomenon yet.
Shot with it at ISO 25,600 last night, and also played around a bit more with the TC. I'll post a couple examples once I've finished.