tom3 From Luxembourg, joined Apr 2004, 236 posts, RR: 2 Reply 4, posted (11 months 2 days 18 hours ago) and read 5357 times:
I have not used filters and there is no dirt , I have only tried with the 100-400. But also for me it looks quite strange since I had never such problems till now!
clickhappy From United States of America, joined Sep 2001, 9444 posts, RR: 72 Reply 5, posted (11 months 2 days 16 hours ago) and read 5336 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW PHOTO SCREENER
The Cargolux shot is pretty blurry, but most likely due to it being 400mil at 1/400. But is that really ISO100? That grain is quite noticeable. That shot was also at f/7.1, have you tried stopping it down to f/8 or f/11?
The (I think?) Hawker is also long (370mm) and relatively slow (1/500). Again at f/7.1
NZ107 From New Zealand, joined Jul 2005, 5672 posts, RR: 40 Reply 7, posted (11 months 2 days 13 hours ago) and read 5304 times:
Quoting clickhappy (Reply 5): The Cargolux shot is pretty blurry, but most likely due to it being 400mil at 1/400.
It shouldn't be that bad though.. Surely. Seems like a routine shooting session to me, something you expect to nail day in day out with similar settings.
Silver1SWA From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 4535 posts, RR: 26 Reply 8, posted (11 months 2 days 9 hours ago) and read 5273 times:
Something definitely isn't right with the Cargolux shot. It almost looks like a severe vibration effect. Did you have IS on or off? If on, try turning it off and see what happens.
ALL views, opinions expressed are mine ONLY and are NOT representative of those shared by Southwest Airlines Co.
jpmagero From United States of America, joined Apr 2012, 149 posts, RR: 0 Reply 9, posted (11 months 2 days 9 hours ago) and read 5269 times:
I shoot with the same combination (7D + 100-400) and haven't had the focus issues you mention, but I do see that all my shots are very grainy, even at ISO100. Except in extremely bright light on a very bright surface, I *always* have grain in my images. It's not so much of an issue for printing through 13x19, but is noticeable on screen and for sites like this can cause issues (not that this is my only problem getting HQ photos on here). I've always attributed this to the 7D sensor, not the lens. Other IQ issues are my technique, I'm sure.
This sample 100% crop is not a HQ shot, but I don't have many samples on my work PC. Either way, you can see the extreme (IMO) grain present in the shadow and sky.
The noise/grain at ISO 100-200 is a characteristic of the 7D. It's usually not a big issue and is easily managed with slight noise reduction in ACR or LR, but I will say I'm getting tired of the 7D image quality. Fantastic camera, but it suffers in the IQ department.
Back to the OP, I'm wondering if you have hada flawed lens this whole time but couldn't see the problem at the relatively small resolution of your 30D. At 18mp, the 7D shows any weakness in a lens.
ALL views, opinions expressed are mine ONLY and are NOT representative of those shared by Southwest Airlines Co.
JakTrax From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2005, 4732 posts, RR: 8 Reply 11, posted (11 months 2 days 6 hours ago) and read 5224 times:
Quoting Silver1SWA (Reply 10): Back to the OP, I'm wondering if you have hada flawed lens this whole time but couldn't see the problem at the relatively small resolution of your 30D. At 18mp, the 7D shows any weakness in a lens.
Exactly what I was about to say. I had a 28-105mm lens on my old 30D and it was fantastic, but once I put it on the 50D the softness at the frame edges was noticeable. My first 100-400 was terrible one side (I forget which - seem to recall the left), so I swapped it for another and that one was (and still is) fine. Had I coupled it with my 30D the issue may have been less obvious.
I have to be honest and say that, in addition, it appears that you are using the 100-400 in conditions that any lens would falter in. This time of year I keep mine in its box as atmospheric conditions are just too unreliable to guarantee great pictures. Both your example images seem to be at very long focal lengths, with mediocre/poor light, and insufficient shutters. The thing with this theory, of course, is that such limitations would have presented themselves way before now, with the old 30D.
I personally reckon it's a case of the first theory - the resolving power of the 7D revealing softness in the lens.
jpmagero From United States of America, joined Apr 2012, 149 posts, RR: 0 Reply 13, posted (11 months 2 days 2 hours ago) and read 5165 times:
Quoting clickhappy (Reply 12): John, not sure why you have shot that Falcon at f/2.8 and 1/3200!
I know...this was just a test shot to see how the shutter speed would affect heat haze and happened to be one of the only shots on my work laptop at ISO100 for the purposes of showing the noise I see.
KelvinCJ From United Kingdom, joined Mar 2012, 34 posts, RR: 0 Reply 15, posted (11 months 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 5070 times:
Just a thought here - but you mention you bought it recently. Any chance this could be a firmware issue?
I have read lots of online reports about similar issues and most were resolved by updating the firmware.
I know it is probably unlikely but just an idea. Having said that though I can only imagine said issue if you have an older stock version of the 7D as the update has been around for over a year now?
I think the edited image is better - as it should be! Unfortunately I cannot say anything specific as I am viewing on a smartphone but the general quality appears better than the others to my eyes.
Granted such an issue should affect the whole image but if you have older firmware it is worth a try.
Sponsor Message: 
From Luxembourg, joined Apr 2004, 236 posts, 
From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 4535 posts, 
From New Zealand, joined Jul 2005, 5672 posts, 
From Malta, joined Dec 2004, 1122 posts, 
From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2005, 4732 posts, 
Printer friendly format 
