Herons with the Canon 100-400MkII

[Tronhard]

This is my first attempt in using this lens to take photos of wildlife. In Victoria Herons are building nests and starting to breed. Not surprisingly their nests are not obvious and my best point of view was across a small lake, so I was about 100m from the base of the trees they were in.

I enclose the original images as taken and a cropped version with a single dose of sharpening, plus simple modifications to contrast and brightness.


Original #1


Cropped #1


Original #2


Cropped #2


Original #3


Cropped #3

Considering the distance from the targets, and in this case the photos were taken without a support I think the lens is doing a reasonable job.

CCs welcome

[Wavelength]

Excellent set of images

[Dave Humphries]

Considering the distance from the targets, and in this case the photos were taken without a support I think the lens is doing a reasonable job.

.... and not just the lens, the photographer and post processor (esp. on #3) did a pretty good job too.

[Tronhard]

Just processed a couple more shots:


Original #4


Processed #4


Original #5


Processed #5

[Geoff F]

Obviously some difficult light angles there but the edited versions of #2 and #3 are looking good.

#5 edit with the second set is also excellent.

[Tronhard]

I had tried a brand new Canon MkIII 2x teleconverter, but the results were pretty rubbish - I found that letting the lens do its thing and just cropping seemed to give me the best results. There is more testing to be done, so this is no the end of the story.

By the way the images were taken on a Canon 7D on Aperture Priority mode with automatic colour balance, spot metering.

[rpcrowe]

Great stuff... This lens and your skills are a winning combination.

I just love my copy of the 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS II lens. It is just great and fun to use!

[joebranko]

Very impressive!

[Shadowman]

Nice captures, originals and crops.

[Rita]

Nice shots Trev. You and Richard are confirming all of the wonderful reviews I have read about this lens. Just wanted to make a comment about the 2x teleconverter, I have the same one that I sometimes use on my 70-200. I find that if the subject is fairly close then the images with the 2x are fantastic but if there is too much distance to the subject then the images are very mushy. So, I am wondering if you have tried it with closer objects? Just curious to see if it acts the same.

[Dave Humphries]

Just wanted to make a comment about the 2x teleconverter, I have the same one that I sometimes use on my 70-200. I find that if the subject is fairly close then the images with the 2x are fantastic but if there is too much distance to the subject then the images are very mushy. So, I am wondering if you have tried it with closer objects? Just curious to see if it acts the same.

Hi Rita (and Trev),

You may have something here, when I was shooting even with a bridge super-duper zoom camera (1000mm FFE), half the problem with the poor results were due to atmospheric issues (typ. heat shimmer, even on the average day) when shooting distant subjects and trying to 'bring them closer' - which is usually why we bought the long lens in the first place.

Of course there are other factors that will need twice as much attention using a 2x converter such as camera shake and/or the effects of subject movement, etc.

Except in certain specific circumstances, I am forming the opinion that trying to bring far distant subjects closer with anything over 500mm FFE is a bit of a lost cause in most climates. I'd guess that even in cooler climates, shooting a distant subject 'over' an intermediate heat generating area (be that surface or even a herd of animals) is going to be a challenge.

Not to mention any particulates suspended in the atmosphere; sand, dust or smog throughout the extended shooting distance.

Cheers, Dave

[Sam W]

Nice shots Trev. I'm glad you are happy with your new lens.

[Tronhard]

Thanks also to Rita for her input on this:

It's logical, but slightly frustrating that the amount of atmospheric clutter should degrade the quality of an image, especially on a converter. Still, that said, I was a bit disappointed with the results of the 2x unit, considering that I was using a tripod for the shots (but not with the lens alone), and the distance was barely 100m. I found that the images were very soft - and I had focused VERY carefully. By the way I tried the trick that Bill recommended to get the autofocus to work and it DID, however it hunted pretty much continuously, so I just set the lens at manual focus to keep the shreds of my sanity...

Here is a shot of a nest without the converter, at 400mm


Now the nest with the 2x converter, also at max focal length (so 800mm) - no other settings changed

Hi Rita (and Trev),

You may have something here, when I was shooting even with a bridge super-duper zoom camera (1000mm FFE), half the problem with the poor results were due to atmospheric issues (typ. heat shimmer, even on the average day) when shooting distant subjects and trying to 'bring them closer' - which is usually why we bought the long lens in the first place.

Of course there are other factors that will need twice as much attention using a 2x converter such as camera shake and/or the effects of subject movement, etc.

Except in certain specific circumstances, I am forming the opinion that trying to bring far distant subjects closer with anything over 500mm FFE is a bit of a lost cause in most climates. I'd guess that even in cooler climates, shooting a distant subject 'over' an intermediate heat generating area (be that surface or even a herd of animals) is going to be a challenge.

Not to mention any particulates suspended in the atmosphere; sand, dust or smog throughout the extended shooting distance.

Cheers, Dave