Canon R7, Ef 100-400 ii and 1.4 Tc Bif Photos. Are these acceptable?

OlcayK wrote:

Victor Engel wrote:

In my testing with EF 100-400 II lens and a bunch of different teleconverters, including the Mark III Canon ones, there was no improvement with any of them over using the lens by itself and resizing. That was using a Canon 5DS. The pixel pitch on the R7 is smaller than with the 5DS, so I would expect no improvement on the R7 either. The lens simply isn't sharp enough to gain an advantage with the TC. But maybe you have a sharper lens than I have. It doesn't appear so, though, from the photos.

Are there sample variations in this lens? I read the first version really suffers from this.

I think there are variations with any lens. The manufacturers try to reduce variation, but it's inevitable. Subtle variations in refraction from the mixing process of the glass, for example, or wear on the machines that grind the lenses, or small changes in assembly done by people using their hands.

So no gain with the tc at all? I saw some great images on the net even with the 2.0 tc.

The gain is that you get an enlarged image. But you can also enlarge an image made without a TC in post, and that's what my comparison was. In every case I tested, the upsized image was equal to or better than the equivalent one made with a TC. There may have been a couple of marginal tests, but I figured with the loss of a stop of light, it wasn't worth it to explore any further.
I did a similar test using my 600mm f/4 III lens, and I got different results. What it boils down to is that the 100-400 II lens I have doesn't resolve more detail than the resolution of the 5DS but the 600mm does.