p.2 #2 · Show images taken with Canon 500mm f/4 plus 1.4X TC at wide open, please!
Joshua,
I had a similar experience to what you described. I've been using my 500/4 with a 1.4x for years and always felt that any loss in image quality when using the converter was negligible. A few months ago, it seemed like my shots with the converter were not as sharp as they once were. I saw the same thing on both my 7D and 1D Mark IV. After doing some experimenting, I realized that I was getting the same results with both my 500/4 and my 400 DO on both bodies. Shots with the bare lens were great, but there was a severe loss in quality with the 1.4x. When I experimented further, I tried both lenses and both bodies with my other 1.4x (a Tamron SP), and the results were as sharp, with both lenses and both bodies, as they had ever been, and, once again, I could see almost no difference with and without the converter.
Putting all of this together, it seemed like the variable that made the difference between good results and lower quality results was my Canon 1.4x. So, I sent it in to Canon. When it came back, performance was better, but still not where it once had been. So, I sent it back to give them another shot. The second time when it came back, it was superb, and I was back to being able to see only insignificant differences in image quality with and without the converter.
I wouldn't have thought that a converter could have "gone bad" since it has no moving parts, but mine evidently did. The first time it was at Canon, the paper work said that they had adjusted the alignment of the elements. The second time, which is when it really improved, they replaced the rubber on the mount on the end that mounts to the camera. My guess is that, over years of use, the original rubber had either gotten worn or had, perhaps, become compressed. Either of those things could have slightly changed the distance between the lens/converter and the sensor on the camera. From what I've read, especially with the current generation of high pixel density cameras, even a few microns of difference can affect critical focus.
I can't tell you for sure that this is your issue, but it is a possibility that you might want to consider.
Below are a few shots taken with the 500 and 1.4x after the 1.4x came back from Canon. (Note that some of these are pretty severe crops.) Most are at 5.6. A few are at 6.3.
p.2 #3 · Show images taken with Canon 500mm f/4 plus 1.4X TC at wide open, please!
During the last week, I've been shooting pelicans with the 500 and 1.4x. As with the eagle shots I posted earlier, I've been especially pleased with the combination since I got the 1.4x back from its second visit to Canon Service. From my own experience and from what I'm seeing others say, I think it may genuinely be the case that the newer cameras with higher pixel densities will show issues with any part of the the system (in this case, with the converter) more easily than would have been the case with the cameras from even a few years ago. I know that, before the converter came back from its repair, I couldn't get a sharp shot with it if my life depended on it. So, again, I would not dismiss the possibility that this issue is with the converter.
p.2 #6 · Show images taken with Canon 500mm f/4 plus 1.4X TC at wide open, please!
The 500 f4.5 is really a fine lens for wildlife photography. It is not as heavy as the f4, and of course, it is also more compact too, and yes, less expensive than the f4 with no loss in focal length reach. Nothing against the f4 lens but if push comes to shove, this lens can be handheld easier than the f4.
p.2 #8 · Show images taken with Canon 500mm f/4 plus 1.4X TC at wide open, please!
Handheld 500 f/4 + 1.4xTC.
Not a very good combo for small/fast BIF photography:
* too heavy
* AF slows down
* hard to find and frame a small/fast bird in flight at 700mm.
(Bare 400 f/5.6 or 500 f/4.5L are better for this type of photography.
Now, if you can reduce the distance to target, 300 f/2.8 IS and 300 f/4 non-IS are perfect here. )
p.2 #9 · Show images taken with Canon 500mm f/4 plus 1.4X TC at wide open, please!
Pete,
Please don't say that 400 f5.6 is better here I just made my choice 2 hours ago
Here is mine with 400 f5.6 and 1dii, almost 100% crop since the action is far away and 400mm is barely enough:
p.2 #10 · Show images taken with Canon 500mm f/4 plus 1.4X TC at wide open, please!
hsk06 wrote:
Pete,
Please don't say that 400 f5.6 is better here I just made my choice 2 hours ago
If you can shoot off a gimbal, then you'd be OK .....however, even as flexible a tripod head as gimbal might be , handheld allows maximum flexibility and speed of response. And it is by no accident that 400 f/5.6 is considered by many to be one of the best, if not the best, lens for hand-held BIF photography.
p.2 #11 · Show images taken with Canon 500mm f/4 plus 1.4X TC at wide open, please!
how is the bare lens (500) handheld?
I plan to use it mostly handheld or monopod for actions, and on the Arca-swiss B1 for static subjects.
Gimbal head is cumbersome and little expensive for me at this point.
p.2 #12 · Show images taken with Canon 500mm f/4 plus 1.4X TC at wide open, please!
hsk06 wrote:
how is the bare lens (500) handheld?
Easier to find/frame a bird and AF speed is good.
The weight remains a problem. Unless you are very well conditioned and strong, you will not be able to swing the lens back and forth for an hour shooting, as an example, terns in flight. As you know, the lens has to move very fast and then stop on a dime without much shake and then continue tracking the bird smoothly. Those are simply very difficult motions to execute smoothly with a heavy lens, not to mention the muscle fatigue that results from it.
p.2 #13 · Show images taken with Canon 500mm f/4 plus 1.4X TC at wide open, please!
Thanks Pete, that makes sense.
i am thinking of having the lens on RRS level-quick release clamp on a monopod or on a tripod (by the way, i have the gitzo 2530, hope it is not to week). So i use it as a solid support for subjects that don't move much (let say less then 90 degree).
I can quickly remove the lens from the monopod for BIF or something like that for 5-10 min and put it back. Hopefully that's doable.
p.2 #17 · Show images taken with Canon 500mm f/4 plus 1.4X TC at wide open, please!
Well done again, Ruhikant.
We know how much patience and forethought goes into Red wing IF captures like those. However, your lens choice surprises me. The 500 f/4(even 4.5) +1.4xTC would be one of the last instruments I'd use for the BIF photography of that kind:
* Weight (if hand-held)
* Speedy aiming and framing difficulty (700mm)
* AF on the slower side.
Besides, in my area those birds when in flight can generally be approached well within 200 to 400mm lens range.
p.2 #18 · Show images taken with Canon 500mm f/4 plus 1.4X TC at wide open, please!
PetKal wrote:
Well done again, Ruhikant.
We know how much patience and forethought goes into Red wing IF captures like those. However, your lens choice surprises me. The 500 f/4(even 4.5) +1.4xTC would be one of the last instruments I'd use for the BIF photography of that kind:
* Weight (if hand-held)
* Speedy aiming and framing difficulty (700mm)
* AF on the slower side.
Besides, in my area those birds when in flight can generally be approached well within 200 to 400mm lens range.
Thanks Peter, I did not go for this but I just found them. Black rapid straps really helped me to carry this combo and I can carry around for 2-3hrs without any problem.
)
I just made my choice 2 hours ago 