i'm a little curious about the choice of the 1D -- i don't think there are many situatios that the difference between 5 and 8 fps is a make or break,
You mean the 1DmkII, I assume. The 1D is a lot slower, I thought.
for calibration, my standard is the ability to make excellent 13x19s from full frame images - the 300 +1.4 and the 100-400 will both do this (but any larger is problematic) -- John probably disagrees, but i have not been abel do this with the 300+2 or 100-400+1.4 (at least not at apertures useable in a safari situation.
As I've said before, I don't necessarily put on a TC to get "a frame"; I put on a TC to get the SUBJECT
. The TC goes on when the subject would otherwise be lost in a large frame of worthless material, without it. The equivalent is not printing the full frame at the same size; the equivalent is printing the SUBJECT
at the same size. Cropping deeply into a TC-less image enlarges demosaicing artifacts, banding articfacts, has lower-frequency noise visible from further away, etc. The quality of the SUBJECT
can improve with over-sampling the optics by a small degree.
If the lighting is sufficient, I can clearly see whether it is a bird's crown or eyes that are in sharpest focus with the TCs on the camera. I can't see that level of detail without them, and focus is more likely to be a bit off and not visible until I look at the images at home on the computer.