Please post your image with the new Canon 7D2 and Canon 400mm 5.6 & 1.4x teleconveter.
Off course, I ll post a few too
I gave this combination a try yesterday. I had to micro-adjust the combination on the new 7D2 (+15).
A few static bird shots with Canon 7D Mark II and ever reliable 400mm 5.6 prime plus Canon 1.4x teleconverter Image quality does suffer a bit with the combination but with careful post-processing... one can still pull details out of the raw image. Also, 1.4x give slightly better subject magnification. Stopping down to F9 also help in improving the overall image quality.
Overall the focuss speed is good and focus acquisition is quick too. Not a good weather for BiF shot but I tried and combination worked very well in tracking and focusing.
Kathy White wrote:
The first one is just beautiful. Great detail shown in the crop.
Thanks Kathy!
WrightImage wrote:
Thanks for posting these. I have the 400L and wanted to see what the 1.4 and 7DII would do with this combo as I was thinking about adding both
Sure, I ll be posting more as I get the chance. Another one which shows the amount of details.
The detail looks good. I find the Fall Goldfinch a strange bird to shoot sometimes! The light sure makes a big difference! Ive shot some with the 7d and thought I nailed them and they were a smeared mess detail wise lol. Your higher ISO shots with the 7DII have good feather detail.
A 400mm lens with a 1.4X extender is focal length of 560mm. That is what is registered with the data for the photo. Since the 7DII is a 1.6 crop sensor camera, the lens combination will have a field of view of a full frame camera and a 896mm lens, but it is still just a 560mm lens combo focal length.
Don't confuse actual focal length with apparent focal length (dare I say "reach").
If you have a bit of time, you might read the threads on "crop factor" or "reach".
Any crop factor from the camera is not real focal length, and many do not bother calculating the "fake" equivilant focal length. The OP is using a 400 mm lens with a Canon 1.4 extender, and that give a real optical focal length of 560mm, so that is why he is refering to that number, and where it comes from.
bobbyboy uk wrote:
im confused, surely the 7d2 and 400mm is 640mm? if you add the 1.4 its then 896mm?
or am i wrong? how are you getting 560mm
Other in the forum can answer it better but my understanding is that lens is unaware of the camera body it is attached to. It transmits the current focal length (which is always 400mm in case of this prime) to camera and camera stores it as part of the image metadata. This information is standardized in the FF terms.
- In case of intermediary (like 1.4x teleconverter), intermediary modifies the focal length (multiplies the focal lens with 1.4 (400 x 1.4 = 560) ) before sending down to camera.
- Also it appends itself to the name it sends back to camera (EF400mm f/5.6L USM + 1.4x III ). Based on this name, camera performs certain operation like corrections and micro adjustments.
Camera is unaware that a teleconverter is attached. It just sees a lens is attached with this name and focal length.
I have been using my 400/5.6 with the 1.4x v.2 extender on my 7D2 and have been surprised at the softness of a lot of my shots. The camera is mounted on a gimbal on a Gitzo tripod and I use a wired remote. I'm wondering if I need to stop down to get greater depth of field. It seems that images are sharp near the focal point, but not so in the rest of the image. It is also true that I have had to use DPP to batch my images into TIFF format for use in Lightroom since Adobe has yet to release a version that reads RAW files. I wonder if that is part of the problem. Any suggestions are welcome.
jaybrams wrote:
I have been using my 400/5.6 with the 1.4x v.2 extender on my 7D2 and have been surprised at the softness of a lot of my shots. The camera is mounted on a gimbal on a Gitzo tripod and I use a wired remote. I'm wondering if I need to stop down to get greater depth of field. It seems that images are sharp near the focal point, but not so in the rest of the image. It is also true that I have had to use DPP to batch my images into TIFF format for use in Lightroom since Adobe has yet to release a version that reads RAW files. I wonder if that is part of the problem. Any suggestions are welcome.
Best way to provide more info for troubleshooting would be to post a few samples with EXIF attached. Provide an example of a whole frame, and then your final crop of that frame.
jaybrams wrote:
I have been using my 400/5.6 with the 1.4x v.2 extender on my 7D2 and have been surprised at the softness of a lot of my shots. The camera is mounted on a gimbal on a Gitzo tripod and I use a wired remote. I'm wondering if I need to stop down to get greater depth of field. It seems that images are sharp near the focal point, but not so in the rest of the image. It is also true that I have had to use DPP to batch my images into TIFF format for use in Lightroom since Adobe has yet to release a version that reads RAW files. I wonder if that is part of the problem. Any suggestions are welcome.
- Try a static subject like a small toy with Fur etc. Use tripod and Manual Focus (use the 8x zoom on the LCD to focus) on the subject to find the critical focus (let say on eye). Take the shot with wired remote and see if results are good. This will give you the sharpness that lens+1.4x is capable of producing.
- Now try a shot of the same subject with camera Auto Focus system, compare the result... if you see difference.... a micro adjustment is required to correct it. I had to do the micro adjustment with 1.4x III teleconverer (+15 in my case).
mitesh wrote:
Best way to provide more info for troubleshooting would be to post a few samples with EXIF attached. Provide an example of a whole frame, and then your final crop of that frame.
These are all helpful suggestions. I think I need to improve my shooting technique by getting out some more next weekend and then see if there are improvements. If not, I will try to MA. This lens was very sharp with my old 7D and I need to see how it does without the extender, and then try the extender again. After another weekend, I should have enough samples to see if the problem is me or a needed adjustment.
I took this combo to a local park after work. Stupid standard time didn't allow too much time before it got dark, and all the ducks were already in deep shade. 7D2 400 5.6 + 1.4TC (2) by lennycarl08, on Flickr
