Do these look OK for 100% crops?

[coastalconn]

These are only about sharpness. I struggled a bit on morning 2 with the AF system. I think I figured it out, but having a tough time with fine tune. Anyways How do these look for 100% crops in terms of sharpness?

This is with the 1.4x TC. I figured out I need to stop down to F5.6 at 420mm.
Original picture

100%


with the 2x.. F8
Original

100%


On a normal size crop, it seems like I can pick up a little extra detail. Again nothing special, just a gull..

Seagull Test 2x TC by krisinct, on Flickr

 

[cbarnard7]

I think they look pretty good (was the little extra grain from sharpening?). The last one is tack sharp- really good detail.

 

[Derrel]

I think only the last one is REALLY in proper focus. The first and second do not look truly sharp-sharp to me. Like under the cardinal, the limb and the feet of the bird...those areas have a weird look to them. The top gull looks like it might be out of focus by a little bit, or maybe it's actually amplified motion blur, but it's not as I said earlier, sharp-sharp. Yes, usable images I'd say, but not anywhere near as sharp as I would truly want each and every image to be, if that makes any sense. Maybe it's the converter, causing this look. It might be very small amounts of several factors, like focus and exact speed, and so on.

 

[JTPhotography]

I think the third is perfect, the cardinal is slightly OOF, and the first gull is pretty sharp but suffering from a little bit of motion blur, what was your shutter speed there?

 

[coastalconn]

I'm trying to figure it out as I didn't seem to have this problem with the D300. I think I'm paying a penalty for either the pixel increase, just not being able to get the fine tune just right, or something else that just dawned on me... Is it the stabilization system? On slower shutter speeds I get much sharper images. The first one my shutter speed was actually 1/3200th and the cardinal was 1/1000th and the last seagull is 1/250th. In real life I would never actually crop this much, but I'm just trying to get it sorted out...

 

[JTPhotography]

Wow, with those shutter speeds you would almost expect the opposite results. It does get confusing at times. I have found that with my longer lenses I have always had to fill the frame as much as possible to really maximize the sharpness. The farther the object, the less sharp the lens is, at least that is what I have found with the 100-400 canon I had, and the 200-400 nikon I have now. I too have wondered if the stabilization systems sometimes just sputter and actually make it worse if you happen to snap at the same time. I have seen your work and it is definitely not a problem with your technique.

 

[coastalconn]

The OS thing just came to me this morning. I'm heading out now with it turned off to see. I wouldn't expect fine feather detail at this distance but it seemed slightly off. These are the better ones believe it or not. The AF system is supposed to be as good as the D300 but I'm a touch suspicious. This will be my first full day so hopefully I will get it sorted out

 

[Derrel]

You might have hit upon something with the OS system being used at faster speeds!--I do think that could cause problems. I've experienced the same thing when using Nikon VR at fast speeds.