![\"\"](\"https:\/\/featheredphotography.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/10\/virginia-rail-4607-ron-dudley.jpg\")
<\/p>\nAnd this photo illustrates why (plus a fun fact for photo gearheads).<\/p>\n
For the last couple of weeks I’ve been noticing that my photos aren’t as sharp as they should be and the problem is becoming increasingly apparent. My photos vary from being slightly soft to very soft, with none of them being truly sharp like most of them used to be.<\/p>\n
As you can imagine it’s been driving me bonkers.<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
1\/2000, f\/6.3, ISO 500, Canon 7D Mark II, Canon EF 500mm f\/4L IS II USM + EF 1.4 III Extender, not baited, set up or called in<\/em><\/p>\n Here’s one example of many from the last few weeks. Eight days ago I took 283 photos of this Virginia Rail at Farmington Bay WMA and not a single one of them was truly sharp. A couple were sharp enough to look fairly good at the small size I post to my blog but many looked like this one and most were even worse.<\/p>\n To some viewers this photo, at this small size, may look acceptably sharp but believe me, it isn’t. About the only thing it’s good for is documenting a soft photo.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n So yesterday I shipped my primary birding lens, my beloved Canon EF 500mm f\/4L IS II USM, off to Canon’s facility in Costa Mesa, CA for adjustment\/repair. I belong to Canon Professional Services (CPS, Gold Level) which theoretically at least gives me “expedited service” among other benefits but it’s still going to be a while before I get my lens back. My (wild) guess is roughly ten days but who knows.<\/p>\n In the meantime Feathered Photography will be taking a break, at least on most days. Occasionally I may post an older photo and it’s possible that I’ll even get lucky with some new photos I like taken with my much smaller “baby lens”. But mostly my blog will likely be down and out for the duration.<\/p>\n Not posting to my blog every day is going to make me feel like the proverbial duck out of water, especially in the early mornings when I usually compose the text of my posts and then later interact with my viewers in the comments.<\/p>\n I’ll get through it but it’s going to seem very, very strange.<\/p>\n Ron<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Fun fact for photo gearheads:<\/em><\/p>\n Most photographers know that digital cameras keep track of shutter counts. But did you know that Canon lenses (I don’t know about other brands) also keep track of the number of times the diaphragm in the lens has been activated? In other words it keeps track of the number of times the lens has been focused on something, whether a photo was taken or not. <\/em><\/p>\n I didn’t know it, not until yesterday when I talked to the CPS representative on the phone. I’d sent this same lens to Canon for repair only six months ago so the Canon rep perused the old records of that service. She told me that when the technician first examined my lens he recorded in his preliminary exam notes that the diaphragm count on my lens was 3,990,000.\u00a0<\/em><\/p>\n In other words in the eight years I’d had that lens I’d focused on something nearly 4 million times. In the six months since then I’m sure I’ve gone over 4 million. Makes my shutter finger sore just to think about it.<\/em><\/p>\n <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" And this photo illustrates why (plus a fun fact for photo gearheads).<\/p>\n