1.4x or 2.0x TC ... with ... ???

[johneo]

Making up my wish list for 2004 and I'm putting the 100-400L IS at the very top of the list. (for use with my 10D)

Second on the list I'm thinking of a teleconverter but not sure which is the better choice (not zoom wise but photo quality and use wise)

Do both allow AF and IS with the 100-400? I've read conflicting reports and it seems most recommend the 1.4X over the 2.0X. Do these TC's only work with the white "L" lenses or all canon lenses (with or without IS & AF)?

Appreciate any advice on the pros and cons of each, if you've used either. Any links to examples much appreciated also.

I'll be using this set up mostly for landscape (lighthouses across the bay, sailboats off shore and so on)

Thanks!

[Jim Larson]

Making up my wish list for 2004 and I'm putting the 100-400L IS at the very top of the list. (for use with my 10D)

Second on the list I'm thinking of a teleconverter but not sure which is the better choice (not zoom wise but photo quality and use wise)

Do both allow AF and IS with the 100-400? I've read conflicting reports and it seems most recommend the 1.4X over the 2.0X. Do these TC's only work with the white "L" lenses or all canon lenses (with or without IS & AF)?

Appreciate any advice on the pros and cons of each, if you've used either. Any links to examples much appreciated also.

I'll be using this set up mostly for landscape (lighthouses across the bay, sailboats off shore and so on)

Thanks!

The 10D can only AF with an effective F5.6 or better. The 1D and 1Ds can AF with F8 or better.

A 1.4 TC costs one stop: 400mm F5.6 with TC becomes F8
A 2.0 TC costs two stops: 400mm F5.6 with TC becomse F11 or so.

Therefore: TC with 100-400/IS is a bad combo.
I would suggest (and I am considering as well) a 300/4L-IS with the 1.4 tc for this sort of work.

Canon Teleconverters only work with certain telephotos, ones that have a recessed rear element. Most of the "white" lenses fall into this category. I think there is a prime or two in the 100-200 range that do as well.

IS is independent of the autofocus system and camera body, so it will work fine.

[CyberDyneSystems]

What Jim says above is true,. technically nether T-con will allow auto focus with the 100-400mm IS on a 10D...

BUT!

You actually CAN use the 1.4X T-con with thw 100-400 and get autofocus by using the tried and true "Tape Trick"

This is simply a matter of putting a small piece of scotch tape on the last three electrical contacts of the lens.. this prohibits the lens from telling the camera the real aperture,. and thus fools the camera into continuing to at least try and autofocus.

Mind you,. if the camera still can't AF it won't,. BUT there are certain combos that work fine and the 100-400mm IS with the "taped" 1.4X seems to be a real winner.

Lastly,. just because I lens won't AF does not mean that you should disregard T-cons entirely...

For the 100-400mm IS I WOULD recomend a 1.4X t-con... the combo gives very acceptable results.

[defordphoto]

Here's a photo with the 100-400 and the 1.4TC using the tape trick. The lens acts weird with the tape on. But it did work. Three weeks later my lens was at CFS-Irvine for AF repair. I do not recommend using the tape trick. Use manual focus.

Also note there was NO post-processing done on this shot. Original was shot LARGE/FINE JPEG and then resized for the web.

http://racefamily.racinglines.com/MiscPhotos/img_7603_std.jpg

[CyberDyneSystems]

Wow, Jim,. I did not realize that you had attributed the damage to the "tape trick"... :(

I will keep that in mind!

I know that my 500mm f/4.5 behaves oddly with the tape trick as well, (you'd think that at only .5 away from f/4 that this lens if any would work well,. ) it seems that SOME times it works flawlessly with the taped 1.4X t-con,. other times it hunts a lot,. in and out and back in focus... regardless of available light.

Perhaps the tape trick is not such a good idea,.. but this is the first time I have heard that it did damage! :( :(

[hhorwitz]

You don't mention whether the 100 - 400 L IS lens you desire is the f/2.8 or the f/4.0. I can only speak to the former. I just returned from a two-week safari, where I used it in combination with both extenders on my 300D. Both extenders worked quite well and, in fact, seemed necessary given the diverse distances from which I needed to photograph the wildlife. I got consistently great photos using manual focus only; I really don't like auto focus at all. The loss of two f-stops associated with the 2.0X extender did not present any kind of a problem, although certainly the use of a fast lens largely in bright light conditions alone made that a non-issue for me. In other circumstances I probably would just have sprung for the 1.4x extender, but for this purpose having both was fantastic and made a huge difference.

[hhorwitz]

I must be brain dead. My L lens is the 70 - 200 mm, not the 100- 400 mm. Obviously there is a much different need for extenders on the 70 -200 mm lens. So, never mind...

[defordphoto]

Wow, Jim,. I did not realize that you had attributed the damage to the "tape trick"... :(


Still don't know for sure, but I'm not taking that chance again.

[defordphoto]

Therefore: TC with 100-400/IS is a bad combo.


For auto focus. If you manual focus it's actually quite a decent combo, except in very low-light, of course, but will still produce some stunning photos.