Canon IS 600 4.0 30D Sharpness Question

[rick_vetter]

I recently bought this lens and after many photos I am disappointed at the

lack of consistent photo sharpness. On the other hand, I am pleased with the

feel and function of using the lens in the field. The results are the issue. I

have experimented between 300 and 1000 speed but usually at 500 and at 100-200

ISO. When viewed in PhotoShop at actual pixels (100%), most photos are not

sharp. Once in a while (1 in 20) I get a sharp one from a group of photos of

the same bird under exactly the same settings that I can improve upon with

unsharp mask. However, I thought the number of sharp photos would be higher

for this quality lens. Therefore, is it my technique, or is it just a hard

lens to learn to use? I have been stabilizing it on a polypropylene bead bag

on the hood of the truck which should be equal to a tripod? I even tried a

wgtd bag on top of the lens.

 

I shoot at 600mm and with the Canon 1.4x with a Canon 30D. A friend has the

same disappointing results with a Whimberley head and tripod, which I was

going to test next. The poly bag sure seems stable, esp with another bag on

top. Also wonder if it is vibration in the camera. Guess I should try the

mirror lock up mode. According to the instr book, the IS mode will not

function on a tripod and maybe not on a poly bag as well, but I still use it.

Any suggestions on proper or better techniques? On a different note, I love

the results of the Canon 400DO 4.0 with the 1.4x.<div></div>

[enrico_faini]

"I shoot at 600mm and with the Canon 1.4x with a Canon 30D"

 

600mm x 1.4 Teleconverter x 1.6 Focal Length Conversion Factor = an equivalent focal lenght of 1344mm

 

 

I have never used such a long lens, but I believe that it would be quite challenging

[cnhoff]

"I have been stabilizing it on a polypropylene bead bag on the hood of the truck which should be equal to a tripod?"

 

I think at that focal length stability is a real problem. When i use my 500mm (in 35mm terms) lens on a stable tripod without locking down the controls completely (e.g. in the zoo) i have to use shutter speeds of at least 1/350 to be sure all pics are sharp. 1/180 is not consistently sharp.

 

I don't know what the long lens pros will say, but i would guess you need at least 1/1000 with a bean bag at 1344mm to get consistent sharp results.

[keith_lubow]

That's some serious CIA and paparazzo stuff you're trying to pull off! Image quality is generally not the most pressing concern for these folks. The picture looks pretty darned sharp to me. Have you tried using mirror lockup, remote firing, and hanging a bag of dirt from your tripod's center post?

 

Keith

[mark_chappell]

<I> According to the instr book, the IS mode will not function on a tripod and maybe not

on a poly bag as well, but I still use it. </i><P>

 

The instruction book is NOT correct -- it's OK to keep IS on when using a tripod, and in

fact it's highly recommended (apparently that directive to turn off IS on a tripod dates from

earlier versions of IS which DID need to be shut down when a tripod was in use). I use the

500/4 with both 1.4X and 2X converters on a 1DII and a 30D (with the latter, it's manual

focus with the 2X). Not quite the same reach as a 600 but I routinely get very sharp

images down to mabye 1/60 sec, on either a Wimberley Sidekick or a simple beanbag.

Mirror lockup is definitely not necessary at those speeds and obviously it's not at all

feasible for moving subjects. So I think something is wrong with your equipment, or your

technique (if you do well with the 400 DO then it's probably not your technique). <P>

 

What happens if you manually focus, or fine-tune the focus after letting one-shot mode

AF do its thing? I've heard of AF being out of calibration for certain lens-camera

combinations. You could try the standard test: take a ruler, orient it at a 45-degree angle

to the camera, aim at a particular inch (or cm) mark, and see if that's in focus in the image,

or if you have front- or back-focus problems. Or you could simply have a lemon lens --

never heard of that with a 500 or 600 IS but it's possible. If you are having that much

trouble getting consistently sharp images, then maybe it's time to have Canon look at both

lens and camera.

[peter_white2]

Autofocus or manual focus? If autofocus, try manual. It may be that the lens needs adjustment.

[ken munn]

Even at f9, dof is not going be abundant. Looking at your pic, there may be parts of it which

are sharp (the post?). Maybe there's just not enough dof?

 

Also, that's serious magnification, and any atmospheric instability like heat shimmer gets

magnified as well and is going to screw your images if the subject is too far away.

[dave_holland]

At that kind of focal length, be sure shutter speed is at least 1/1000 sec, even with IS on. Remember that IS protects against camera shake somewhat, but it does nothing for movement blur from the subject. If you are using a vehicle to brace your camera, make sure the engine is off. You need really good light to do this well, as you will otherwise end up boosting ISO so high that grain may be a competing issue. If you can add some flash with a flash extender and high speed sync, it might help.

 

Try this. Put your camera on a bomber tripod, focus on a fencepost like the one the bird is sitting on, with good crosslighting, and no wind to move the camera around. Lock the camera down so it won't move, set the camera on timer and set mirror lockup on. Snap a pic like that, hands off, and be amazed at the difference. That difference is camera stability and a stationary subject. If there is no difference then you could rethink whether the camera lens is the problem. I doubt it. Maybe fiddle with different f-stops to see if there is a difference stopping down.

[PuppyDigs]

" I have been stabilizing it on a polypropylene bead bag on the hood of the truck which

should be equal to a tripod? "

 

If the engine is still hot, that may be the problem. The heat dissipating from the hood

distorts the air something terrible when magnified by a 600mm x 1.4. Even with low power

binoculars you can easily see heat distortion.

[andy_jones2]

According to the EXIF, that shot was actually taken at f/5.6 - i.e. wide open and at 1/1250.

The fence post does seem sharper than the bird's eye suggesting v. shallow DoF, but the

shutterspeed should have been fast enough to combat most movements. With my 500 with

1.4x on a 20D I find I need to go to f/9 or beyond to maintain best sharpness AND sufficient

DoF - playing with ISO and shutterspeed depending on conditions/subject movement etc. -

routinely using ISO 800 and often 1600 as the light fades - I use a SideKick. It has taken me

a while to develop good long-lens technique and this (the 600+1.4) combo is almost as long

as it gets so it is definitely a challenge! I think the Wimberley (or equiv) would be a great help

using this lens + extenders

[mark_chappell]

<I>At that kind of focal length, be sure shutter speed is at least 1/1000 sec, even with IS

on.</i><P>

 

My rather extensive experience with the 500 IS tells me that there is no need to go to that

high a shutter

speed -- or even close to it -- to get dependably sharp images. Of course, all bets are off

if the subject is moving. Also, there is no guarantee that the 'hands-off' approach with a

locked tripod head will improve sharpness -- it might be better or it might be worse, and

in any event, it aint gonna work for a moving subject. I have done this test, with both IS

and non-IS teles. Often you will get better results if you keep a hand on the camera and

another one placed firmly on the lens over the tripod mount, with your eye at the

viewfinder. That multi-point bracing can help damp out vibrations. In the hands-off

situation, wind, ground vibrations, or even the small bounce from the mirror or the first

shutter curtain movement can induce oscillations. Of course, hand-bracing is a bad idea

for long exposures (more than maybe 1/30 sec or so -- quite dependent on technique).

You have to experiment and see what works best for you.

[bobatkins]

Long lenses shot from significant distances can be subject the effects of air turbulance. For close subjects it doesn't matter much, but if you're shooting through a significant amount of air, it can be. That's one reason why longer and longer lenses aren't the solution to every problem.

[kk_hui]

Rick,

 

Critical focus appears on the wing/tail instead of the eye/head in your shot. The softness certainly doesn't look like to do with motion blur here. Without more info on AF mode, f/ setting, ss used it's difficult to pin point the flaw(s). Also I'd check the focus accuracy of the 30D body ...

[digitmstr]

The lens seems sharp but, the focus is NOT where you want it. That's either the wrong focus point was selected or the lens my need calibration with the camera body.

 

As you know, at that magnification every little vibration is amplified immensly therefore it's best to use IS all the time, if possible.

 

Wind on the bird's feathers may also cause some occasional blur as can air turbulence (as pointed out) and other non-controllable factors.

 

ON the AF subject it's worth nothing that the 30D is at the very limit of its AF mechanism at f/5.6.

 

If the lens works well without the extender it means it's not faulty. By all accounts that is a great lens.

[yann_muzika]

As others said, you most likely have a focus problem with the lens. If the IS is working properly (another thing to make sure), almost anything on a beanbag or better on a tripod above 1/500s should be good enough. Having the focus exactly where you want it to be is the most difficult : you should use the center point and not hesitate to manually compensate when needed (for close shots of birds, AF might take you to the bill or behind the head instead of the eyes, etc ...).

Good luck.

[mark_chappell]

Rick: After squiting at your yellow-headed blackbird a bit, I tend to agree with many

responders that you simply didn't have the head in focus. Part of the problem is shallow

DOF, and part may be that you didn't aim the AF sensor at the head or neck. I'd suggest

you drop your shutter speed considerably and work with increased DOF. FWIW, I very

often shoot with fill-in flash even on bright days. That keeps my shutter speed to 1/250,

but at moderate ISOs (200-400), the f-stop is usually 11-16 (or even 22). As long as the

subject isn't moving fast enough to induce motion blur, the IS system keeps things stable

enough on the camera end for very sharp images, even with a 2X converter. Like Andy, I

use a Wimberley Sidekick and almost never, ever lock it down (the whole point of a gimbal

head is smooth, easy, well-balanced tracking of moving subjects).

[vandit]

For starters, dont go by 100% unsharpened crops. Go by the results when sharpened for appropriate output.

 

FWIW - I have the 500/4 and even with a 2x TC and 1.3 crop body, it produces sharp sharp sharp results. Here is one shot taken while handheld (ok, braced on a car window, which isnt much better) - the small size doesnt do it justice, but in print form, this is a very crisp shot.

http://www.photosafariindia.com/galleries/wildlife/page020.html

 

Vandit

[mark u]

Did you actually try it without IS on your beanbags?

[derek_hammond1]

Vandit, you should turn down the sharpening a bit. The image in your response has fringing due to over sharpening.

[yakim_peled1]

<p> I suggest that you thoroughly test the lens and camera with a good tripod and head. Also, take a look <a href="http://www.cps.canon-europe.com/kb/index.jsp">here</a>. </p>

 

<p> Happy shooting, <br>

Yakim. </p>

[vandit]

Derek, thanks for the headsup. I usually just batchprocess all the images I want to put online, and save the careful sharpening for prints... the sharpening routine doesnt work perfectly in all cases, obviously!

 

Appreciate your letting me know - I'll fix it as soon as I am back home and have access to my database.

 

Cheers,

Vandit

[matt_sallis]

If it's any consolation, I had similar problems when I first bought this lens - don't give up, this is not an easy lens to use but it can produce amazing results. I also use it with a 30D (or 5D) and 1.4 and 2x extenders.

 

First you need to establish that the lens can produce sharp photos in controlled conditions. I found standing the lens on its tripod foot on a solid wooden table, using mirror lock-up and timer setting with a cable release eliminated all camera movement. This should be done indoors so there is also no wind to effect it.

 

Take sample shots at different apertures and you will probably see contrast increase as you stop down. If you can produce sharp photos like this then it is simply down to technique (which I feel sure is the problem, it was for me). If not then the lens needs to go to canon for calibration. Using this technique I found my 600mm will produce razor sharp photos even using the 2x and 1.4x extenders stacked together.

 

As mentioned, depth of field is tiny at this magnification close-up, and stopping down to f11-16 can really help. In the field, resting your left hand on top of then lens and pressing your face against the camera back will reduce vibration. Press the shutter release very carefully (try rolling your fingrertip over it), do not press down hard as the downward movement will be enough to cause blur.

 

I have tried a Gimbal head as many people use (the Jobu version) but found that I get a much higher percentage of sharp photos using a fluid video head (an old manfrotto 136 - I think the 503 would be the latest equivalent and a lot cheaper than a wimberley). You will also need a sturdy tripod (I use the Gitzo 1548).

 

The further away the subject is from you, the more difficult it is to get sharp results. Imagine a pencil extending from the camera to the subject - if the point of the pencil at the subject moves just 1 millimetre it will cause blur. However, with presistance and practice you will get there and you will be amazed at what this lens can capture.

 

Cheers, Matt.

[andrew robertson]

KK Hui is correct. The wings are dead sharp. You just missed focus on the eye, so the

whole bird looks out of focus.

[m_barbu1]

<p><i>FWIW, I very often shoot with fill-in flash even on bright days.</i></p>I'm not sure how effective flash would be at 840mm+.

[mark_chappell]

<I>I'm not sure how effective flash would be at 840mm+.</i><P>

 

With a flash extender ('Better Beamer' or the like), it's quite effective out to 10-20+ meters

for opening up shadows; even more under certain conditions. If you try to fully illuminate

a backlit subject against a brightly-lit background, you'll need to get closer, of course. A

few examples:<P>

 

Emperor goose, photographed against water fairly brightly lit by a sunrise. The range here

was probably> 20 meters:<P>

<center>

<img src="http://www.biology.ucr.edu/personal/MACphotos/birds1/

emperorgoose3.jpg"><P>

</center>

Hooded oriole, photographed in strong sunlight; the sun was fairly high in the sky and off

to the left of the lens axis. Use of fill flash gave much more detail in the shadows around

the bird's belly and undertail than was visible in images shot in 'pure' sunlight. Also, the

flash put a catchlight in the bird's eye (no catchlight was visible in pure sunlight). Range

here was probably 12-14 meters:

<center>

<img src="http://www.biology.ucr.edu/personal/MACphotos/birds6/hooded%

20oriole.jpg"><P>

</center>

Vermillion flycatcher, quite strongly backlit against sky; range maybe 7-8 meters:

<center>

<img src="http://www.biology.ucr.edu/personal/MACphotos/birds4/

vermillion1.jpg"><P>

</center>