Getting sharp pictures with 7DII - need advice please

[Kerry B]

Until now there have been very helpful comments, also about the testing modes. Thank you all.
In real life shooting it is, of course, often necessary to match adjustments adequate to the given conditions.

So I´ll be lucky - and all others, who posted - to see some satisfaying (tack sharp) results and some others, just to see, what the 7DII is capable to achieve in IQ in combination with the new MarkII-Telezooms.

For myself, I need any comments on the posted deer. Shooting technique there seems close to optimal to me, but the deer is so-so...

The deer is some distance away and air quality comes into play at that distance. I am not convinced about the 400 f5.6 with extender but I am prepared to be told otherwise. I never shoot hand held and will always use either a tripod or some other stable device. Many people complain about sharp images when it is technique to blame, if you expect to get a sharp image using the 7dii with a 300mm + lens at slowish shutter speeds forget it. In your situation you are shooting from a tripod using a cable release it will not be technique it will be the limitations of your equipment and environmental qualities.
Here is an image i took recently at approx 75 metres with 7dii and 100-400ii lens. Taken on a tripod with a little heat haze. Sharpness is not bad but could be better.

 

[gregorywood]

I've been reading this thread with great interest, as well as other similar thread as I prepare to determine the upgrade path for my body (bodies). I bought my 7D in 2012 and struggled at first with the learning curve of how to get the best results from the tool. I wasn't very experienced at the time and I think that helped me greatly in my quest for understanding what was wrong (what "I" was doing wrong). I think for the APS-C format, shutter speed is critically important, whether the subject is in motion or not. Aperture and ISO are as well, but in my mind, it's the shutter speed that rules somewhat over the other two at least on the crop format.

A question that comes to mind is that when trying to achieve the optimal sharpness, where is the balance between ISO and shutter speed? When faced with less than desirable light, where is the optimal tradeoff between ISO and shutter speed? It is a noise vs sharpness tradeoff to a degree. Is it easier/better (better results) to remove noise, or to sharpen?

I'm considering a 7D2 upgrade, but the 80D reviews are certainly getting my attention. I like features of both.

 

[neuroanatomist]

For myself, I need any comments on the posted deer. Shooting technique there seems close to optimal to me, but the deer is so-so...

Sorry, but your shooting technique for the deer shot is far from optimal. Let's compare two images you stated you feel are soft and one image you say is tack sharp. Notice the main difference between your shots and Bryan's? For some reason, you are expecting a subject that covers only a tiny portion of your sensor to be 'tack sharp' – it doesn't work that way. Optimal technique is to fill your frame with your desired composition - that's what Bryan did, and he describes the process in detail with that GBH image. Cropping will decrease IQ, more cropping will decrease IQ to the point where the image isn't usable.

As a general rule of thumb, if the image subject fits within the metering circle (which would have been the case for the peach and the deer), I don't even bother pressing the shutter button...period. If the subject fills at least 1/4 of the area of the frame, I'll probably take the image and hope I can generate a sufficiently good output. For me, that's starting with a FF camera so for the same final output size I need to enlarge the images less than with an APS-C sensor. Basically, I would see your shot of the deer as a non-starter if the goal was anything other than a toss-away shot or just low quality documentation of something rare.

 

[picturefan]

For myself, I need any comments on the posted deer. Shooting technique there seems close to optimal to me, but the deer is so-so...

Sorry, but your shooting technique for the deer shot is far from optimal. Let's compare two images you stated you feel are soft and one image you say is tack sharp. Notice the main difference between your shots and Bryan's? For some reason, you are expecting a subject that covers only a tiny portion of your sensor to be 'tack sharp' – it doesn't work that way. Optimal technique is to fill your frame with your desired composition - that's what Bryan did, and he describes the process in detail with that GBH image. Cropping will decrease IQ, more cropping will decrease IQ to the point where the image isn't usable.

As a general rule of thumb, if the image subject fits within the metering circle (which would have been the case for the peach and the deer), I don't even bother pressing the shutter button...period. If the subject fills at least 1/4 of the area of the frame, I'll probably take the image and hope I can generate a sufficiently good output. For me, that's starting with a FF camera so for the same final output size I need to enlarge the images less than with an APS-C sensor. Basically, I would see your shot of the deer as a non-starter if the goal was anything other than a toss-away shot or just low quality documentation of something rare.

That´s a very good argument, especially for FF (when we are taking about pixel size). The heron fills quite the whole frame, while the others don´t.
Let´s say shooting technique is close to optimal (=every technique is used to high extend to get as much sharpness out of the shot), but distance is too far for being a revealing shot.

For me the problem with wildlife shooting and same time the solution is cropping, as animal distance in Europe often is very far. I can imagine that many wildlife/birders are finding themselves in the situation that the object distance is much further than the heron. So on a budget you go for 7DII and high-quality telezoom.

Coming back to technique: would you say that (for the given perspective) the deer is the maximum of sharpness one can get with this settings?

 

[privatebydesign]

Coming back to technique: would you say that (for the given perspective) the deer is the maximum of sharpness one can get with this settings?

Yes.

Your expectations are entirely unrealistic.

1: Your image cropped with no sharpening at 100%.
2: Your image cropped with sharpening at 100%.
3: As above with red crop zone of blade of grass.
4: Screen shot of that rectangle, you are getting close to pixel level detail in this image, the blade of grass running diagonally across the crop bottom right to top left is not much more than 1 pixel wide yet is clearly visible in the bigger crop.

You need to reevaluate your expectations. You need to learn to post process. You need to learn optimal technique (1/20 sec on a beanbag is not going to give you pixel sharp images).

 

[Otus]

Hi picturefan,

i started to do Birdphotography one year ago and what you experience now is what i learned in my first steps too. I am shooting with a 7d mkI and the Canon 400mm f5,6. Since i am from europe too i know what you mean with animals and their distance

If you want to go deeper in wildlife photography then maybe you could check some books about this topic. For example the Handbook of Bird Photography by Mate, Varesvuo ...

To get sharp images you have to be closer to your subject. You can try to sneak closer. But i have read a lot from well know wildlife photographers and i also talked to some here in my area. Almost all of them using hides/blinds to get as close as possible. This works for birds as well as for other animals. Learn about their behaviour, try to lure them in the position you want them etc.

As i said i am using the old 400mm prime from canon with the 7d mkI and this combo is capable of shooting even small birds almost full frame without cropping the image. I am mostly abround 5-6 meters away. So if you using a hide you dont necessary need a zoom or a 800mm + 2x teleconverter. Sure there are situations where you could need more focal length. But in that cases there is a larger distance to your subject and then heatwaves, fuzzy air etc. could spoil your image. You need good climate air conditions when shooting over higher distances. You will find them often in the early morning or just before sunset. Dont try to make such pictures on a warm and sunny afternoon.

Also shooting in full sunlight is not always the best situation. If the sky is slightly covered with clouds its better - of course i dont mean dark grey rainclouds ;D

If you wish i could upload a few images so that you can see that it is fairly possible to get close and good results with a combination that is almost equivalent to yours.

 

[AlanF]

Otus, you are right, getting really close always wins, and you don't need fancy equipment. But, a decent lens, camera and good technique gets you shots you would never get in a hide. And there are countries where there are few hides. I carry my gear on hikes, when I am cycling around, and when I get out of a car, and find an amazing number of opportunistic shots.
This afternoon I got a juvenile Greenfinch, a tiny dot at the top of a tree, while cycling home, yesterday a Robin close up and a Peregrine Falcon a couple of days ago on a building, all at 400-600mm on my 5DS R, which is somewhat sharper than my 7DII, but not greatly so.

 

[fegari]

My 2cents here.

First some background info: Have owned 7D, 5D3 and now own 7DII and 5DSR.

I've also had the issues described. Remember the first time with the 7D2 had this - not sharp at all pics with my long teles, 300 or 500mm- shooting flamingos over the water at long distance. Almost no matter how fast the shutter was could not do sharp frames. Next days problem magically went away and in some other cases back. Also thought I had a problematic unit. Until I realized problem was me and well, planet earth :=)

1- hand held the 1/focal shutter rule goes out the window: for hand held you need at leat x2 (I'd even say minimun x3) the focal length as shutter sped. For tripod, with a 500, anything below 1/500 is a lottery

2- Realized that invariable the "blurry" shots were always shooting through a "thick" chunck or air between me and the subject, specially mid morning when humidity from the ground evaporated.

How did I find out?

a) brought along the 5D3 (before buying the 5DSR) in one of those shootings and guess what, the 5D3 appeared to have the same issue. Suspecting it was indeed "real" athmospheric haze tried the folowing

- shot with both cameras and same lens a subject near the ground => hazy
-right away shot a higher subject at the same distance (mountain, hill or high electrical tower) and the hazy either went away or gratly diminished


Even more, acouple of weeks ago went to a hide to shoot vultures, brough th 7d2 and the 5DSR (had sold the 5D3 by then) and the whole morning I got crappy "hazy" photos with both cameras, tripod mounted (Gitzo carbon 3 series and wimberley gimbal) with both the 300, 500 with or without extenders. A couple of hours later in that damp morning, after the sun kinda evaporated the grass "humidity" everything back to normal...

So, to me, the cameras are fine, it's largelly due to nature conspiring against high density sensors paired with long lenses and when shooting towards subjects close to the ground.

The rest are the usual suspects: you need very fast shutther speeds with those cameras and the DoF is tricky for them with long lenses so small AFMA diferrences count too.

Invariably as well, shooting very close range (and sufficient speed) or wider angles never shows any problem, regardless of atmospheric conditions.

 

[picturefan]

As i said i am using the old 400mm prime from canon with the 7d mkI and this combo is capable of shooting even small birds almost full frame without cropping the image. I am mostly abround 5-6 meters away. So if you using a hide you dont necessary need a zoom or a 800mm + 2x teleconverter. Sure there are situations where you could need more focal length. But in that cases there is a larger distance to your subject and then heatwaves, fuzzy air etc. could spoil your image. You need good climate air conditions when shooting over higher distances. You will find them often in the early morning or just before sunset. Dont try to make such pictures on a warm and sunny afternoon.

Also shooting in full sunlight is not always the best situation. If the sky is slightly covered with clouds its better - of course i dont mean dark grey rainclouds ;D

If you wish i could upload a few images so that you can see that it is fairly possible to get close and good results with a combination that is almost equivalent to yours.

Hi Otus!
Would be a great pleasure to see some of your examples. Please show, if you don`t mind, closer and further distant shots to compare. Doesn´t need to be birds...

 

[picturefan]

Thanks for sharing. This is very interesting for me.

And also: here we are - at the beginning of the thread, when we found out that many of the people in the thread have no problems at all with close distance shots. Is it because the subjects are more filling the frame?

I´m really surprised, because it would mean that all of these tack-sharpo images I have seen has been made under closer distances, let´s say around 10m. But does it mean in consequence that, for example, animal shots from farther away with smaller subjects are only some kind of "finger exercise" - when the subjects only covers the metering circle... Can´t imagine all of you come so close / are using camouflage. I guess most of you are depending on cropping. What does that mean for wildlife-photography? It´s the key-skill of the 7DII...

For some of you this may sound like a beginner question but I am photographing for more than 20 years now and never had this kind of problems before getting the new 7DII.

 

[picturefan]

Coming back to technique: would you say that (for the given perspective) the deer is the maximum of sharpness one can get with this settings?

Yes.

Your expectations are entirely unrealistic.

1: Your image cropped with no sharpening at 100%.
2: Your image cropped with sharpening at 100%.
3: As above with red crop zone of blade of grass.
4: Screen shot of that rectangle, you are getting close to pixel level detail in this image, the blade of grass running diagonally across the crop bottom right to top left is not much more than 1 pixel wide yet is clearly visible in the bigger crop.

You need to reevaluate your expectations. You need to learn to post process. You need to learn optimal technique (1/20 sec on a beanbag is not going to give you pixel sharp images).

Thank you for your efforts. Very helpful, especially when looking at the pixel-size red-frame. #4 demonstrates what is possible.

It shows me that without post, the out-of-the-cam pictures often are dingy, sometimes "crappy" (not really depending on format - jpg or raw). It also shows that my expectations were wrong - not entirely unrealistic - but just to high.

It seems you don`t like beans - respectively bean-bags. Disagree here, very often a good technique

 

[Otus]

Picturefan, i will show you a few pictures tomorrow. But i have "only" birds from closer distances. But you dont need to be that clos to your subject. Even more, it always looks more interesting if the animal does not fill the frame almost completely. But if you shoot your deer from 150 meters away you cant crop it down as if it was 20 meters away and expect a perfect quality.

Alan, i dont know if hide is the right word. Is that the fixed cabin like those from (example) Bence Mate? I mean a camouflage tent or a comouflage cloth etc. Sure it would work with other ways too. I dont want to deny that. I made the long eared owl, plovers etc without camo. But i guess i wont have gotten the kingfisher that way too. But i guess that differs from area to area and what the animals are used too.

 

[picturefan]

This afternoon I got a juvenile Greenfinch, a tiny dot at the top of a tree, while cycling home, yesterday a Robin close up and a Peregrine Falcon a couple of days ago on a building, all at 400-600mm on my 5DS R, which is somewhat sharper than my 7DII, but not greatly so.

Making me jealous of your "amazing number of opportunistic shots" . In my area it´s only the robins and the redstarts, sometimes sparrows, which allow closer distances (10m or less).
What have been the distances in your examples?
When you compare your robin with my titmouse at iso 3200 - is it posible to compare to the effect that softness there is only result of high-iso?

 

[Otus]

By the way Alan, the greenfinch looks a lot like a corn bunting. Are you sure its a green finch?

 

[picturefan]

My 2cents here.

First some background info: Have owned 7D, 5D3 and now own 7DII and 5DSR.

I've also had the issues described. Remember the first time with the 7D2 had this - not sharp at all pics with my long teles, 300 or 500mm- shooting flamingos over the water at long distance. Almost no matter how fast the shutter was could not do sharp frames. Next days problem magically went away and in some other cases back. Also thought I had a problematic unit. Until I realized problem was me and well, planet earth :=)

1- hand held the 1/focal shutter rule goes out the window: for hand held you need at leat x2 (I'd even say minimun x3) the focal length as shutter sped. For tripod, with a 500, anything below 1/500 is a lottery

2- Realized that invariable the "blurry" shots were always shooting through a "thick" chunck or air between me and the subject, specially mid morning when humidity from the ground evaporated.

How did I find out?

a) brought along the 5D3 (before buying the 5DSR) in one of those shootings and guess what, the 5D3 appeared to have the same issue. Suspecting it was indeed "real" athmospheric haze tried the folowing

- shot with both cameras and same lens a subject near the ground => hazy
-right away shot a higher subject at the same distance (mountain, hill or high electrical tower) and the hazy either went away or gratly diminished


Even more, acouple of weeks ago went to a hide to shoot vultures, brough th 7d2 and the 5DSR (had sold the 5D3 by then) and the whole morning I got crappy "hazy" photos with both cameras, tripod mounted (Gitzo carbon 3 series and wimberley gimbal) with both the 300, 500 with or without extenders. A couple of hours later in that damp morning, after the sun kinda evaporated the grass "humidity" everything back to normal...

So, to me, the cameras are fine, it's largelly due to nature conspiring against high density sensors paired with long lenses and when shooting towards subjects close to the ground.

The rest are the usual suspects: you need very fast shutther speeds with those cameras and the DoF is tricky for them with long lenses so small AFMA diferrences count too.

Invariably as well, shooting very close range (and sufficient speed) or wider angles never shows any problem, regardless of atmospheric conditions.

Fegari, some analogue findings to mine.

1) ye olde rule of thumb for handheld-photography became obsolete. With the new cams a new generation of image stabilisation will be essential (more than 3-4stops). In earlier times of slide-photography I used to handheld 200mm @ 1/90 without seeing any shakes under magnifying glass.
2) some dust in the air often leads to blurry landscapes, also currents of warm air
3) "small AFMA diferrences count" - especially when it´s hard to reproduce
4) "shooting very close range (and sufficient speed) or wider angles never shows any problem"

+1

 

[picturefan]

By the way Alan, the greenfinch looks a lot like a corn bunting. Are you sure its a green finch?

Not sure either, could be a grey-bunting (?) (Emberiza calandra)...
But more of interest (at the moment ) is it sharpened in post or out of cam?

 

[Mikehit]

My 2cents here.

First some background info: Have owned 7D, 5D3 and now own 7DII and 5DSR.

I've also had the issues described. Remember the first time with the 7D2 had this - not sharp at all pics with my long teles, 300 or 500mm- shooting flamingos over the water at long distance. Almost no matter how fast the shutter was could not do sharp frames. Next days problem magically went away and in some other cases back. Also thought I had a problematic unit. Until I realized problem was me and well, planet earth :=)

Here is a blog by Aresh Hazhegi who specialises in raptors in flight and shows how atmospherics can affect image quality.

http://arihazeghiphotography.com/blog/focus-micro-adjustment-is-it-always-needed/

Reading enough forums it is surprising how often people mention shooting form inside a car and the residual heat of the car causing convection currents.

 

[picturefan]

My 2cents here.

First some background info: Have owned 7D, 5D3 and now own 7DII and 5DSR.

I've also had the issues described. Remember the first time with the 7D2 had this - not sharp at all pics with my long teles, 300 or 500mm- shooting flamingos over the water at long distance. Almost no matter how fast the shutter was could not do sharp frames. Next days problem magically went away and in some other cases back. Also thought I had a problematic unit. Until I realized problem was me and well, planet earth :=)

Here is a blog by Aresh Hazhegi who specialises in raptors in flight and shows how atmospherics can affect image quality.

http://arihazeghiphotography.com/blog/focus-micro-adjustment-is-it-always-needed/

Reading enough forums it is surprising how often people mention shooting form inside a car and the residual heat of the car causing convection currents.

Another example is when shooting out of your room in wintertime, in general when temperature between two areas differs strongly or when athmospheric layering is unstable. The latest often comes into play when doing BIF...

 

[AlanF]

By the way Alan, the greenfinch looks a lot like a corn bunting. Are you sure its a green finch?

Not sure either, could be a grey-bunting (?) (Emberiza calandra)...
But more of interest (at the moment ) is it sharpened in post or out of cam?

Probably corn bunting. Thanks.
I thought I wrote you to keep the ISO to 640 or below. You won't get sharp bird photos at ISO 3200 and cropping. I do absolutely minimal sharpening in post processing of RAW. I used USM of 0.9 px at 100%, which is standard for my work flow. More sharpening can look unnatural unless you really know what you are doing.

 

[picturefan]

By the way Alan, the greenfinch looks a lot like a corn bunting. Are you sure its a green finch?

Not sure either, could be a grey-bunting (?) (Emberiza calandra)...
But more of interest (at the moment ) is it sharpened in post or out of cam?

You won't get sharp bird photos at ISO 3200 and cropping. Same for FF?
I do absolutely minimal sharpening in post processing of RAW. I used USM of 0.9 px at 100%, which is standard for my work flow. More sharpening can look unnatural unless you really know what you are doing. That´s for sure...
Sorry for digging deeper: how close were the birds on your examples approx.?