LOG IN    OR   REGISTER TO FORUMS


Tele converters

FORUMS Photography Talk by Genre Bird Talk
Thread started 03 Feb 2012 (Friday) 09:18   
LIST NEARBY THREADS
 
Ontario55
Member
Joined Dec 2005
52 posts
[MORE/SHARE]

I'm using a T2i with a Canon 100>400 lense
When taking some pics of birds perched in a tree I can't get close enough to get a good pic before they scatter
Considering a Canon 1.4 tele converter
While this may be good for stills , what about the inflight pics ?
Your thoughts and commenst are welcome
Mach

Post #1, Feb 03, 2012 09:18:07




LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as registered member)
advaitin
Goldmember
advaitin's Avatar
Joined Jun 2003
3,697 posts
The Fun Coast of Florida
[MORE/SHARE]

There is a "sticky" on teleconverters, just do a forum search and you'll find lots of information and experience. The primary thing to know is that when you add a TC to a 100-400, planning to use it mainly at f 7.8 and 560mm, you lose autofocus and, because of the long length, you need to use a tripod for the sharpest pictures. Even with IS, you must shoot with an adequate speed to overcome vibrations due to many factors including all that glass hanging out there. OH, and IS is supposed to be shut off on a tripod with that lens, if I remember correctly. In terms of 35mm field of view, your lens at 400mm with 1.4 X TC would result in the equivalent of 896mm, which requires you to shoot at 1/1000 or thereabout to cut down vibration effects.

Post #2, Feb 03, 2012 09:25:17


Canons to the left, Canons to the right,
We hold our L glass toward the light,
Digitizing in a snap reflective glory
That will forever tell our imaged story.

LOG IN TO REPLY
cfcRebel
Cream of the Crop
cfcRebel's Avatar
Joined Feb 2005
10,252 posts
Austin, TX
[MORE/SHARE]

100-400 on T2i with TC, you will lose autofocus. Even taping the pin, the AF still has hard time locking on the subject. Hence, it's not suitable for BIF in my opinion. It could be more feasible with a 1D series camera but i don't have 1st hand experience with it though.
Perhaps try other methods such as using blind, practicing on stealth technique, observe where your subject like to hangout and be there ahead of them. Do whatever it takes to break down human shape/form, you'll have better success at getting closer to them. ;)

Post #3, Feb 03, 2012 10:55:34


Fee

Canon | SIGMA | TAMRON | Kenko | Amvona

LOG IN TO REPLY
Tom ­ Reichner
Cream of the Crop
Tom Reichner's Avatar
Joined Dec 2008
5,617 posts
Washington state, USA
[MORE/SHARE]

I have tried to use both the Canon 1.4 and Cann 2x teleconverters with my 100-400mm zoom. In my opinion, the results were disastrous. I use these same teleconverters on fast prime lenses, and the 1.4 works marvelously while the 2x works acceptably.
I would not recommend using these teleconverters on the 100-400mm zoom.

Post #4, Feb 03, 2012 20:31:40


Wildlife Photographed in the Wild: http://www.tomreichner​.com/Wildlifeexternal link
Flickr: http://www.flickr.com/​photos/9036119@N02/external link
Please do not send me a PM! Email me instead at tomreichner@yahoo.com My PM inbox is full, and I don't want to delete what's there. Email never gets full; please use that instead - I'd love to hear from you!

LOG IN TO REPLY
hollis_f
Cream of the Crop
hollis_f's Avatar
Joined Jul 2007
10,420 posts
Sussex, UK
[MORE/SHARE]

Tom Reichner wrote in post #13821880external link
I have tried to use both the Canon 1.4 and Cann 2x teleconverters with my 100-400mm zoom. In my opinion, the results were disastrous. I use these same teleconverters on fast prime lenses, and the 1.4 works marvelously while the 2x works acceptably.
I would not recommend using these teleconverters on the 100-400mm zoom.

My experiences and my recommendation also.

Some people say that you can get AF to work by taping the pins of the TC. These people have a different definition of the word 'work' from most of the world. Their definition seems to be 'will attempt to do what it's supposed to do and will, in optimum conditions, sometimes succeed - however, most of the time it'll give up after several seconds of to-and-fro hunting"

Post #5, Feb 04, 2012 06:33:16


Frank Hollis - Retired mass spectroscopist
Give a man a fish and he'll eat for a day. Teach a man to fish and he'll complain about the withdrawal of his free fish entitlement.
Gear Websiteexternal link

LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as registered member)
Grizz
Goldmember
Grizz's Avatar
Joined Mar 2006
4,394 posts
Waldwick, NJ USA
[MORE/SHARE]

For BIF's they are not acceptable, well not on the 100-400 anyway. Hunts too much and is too slow. But...there is always a but! lol They do work well for static subjects if you don't mind slow focus or better yet manual focus. They will give you the added reach you may want. So depending on what you want to do, they may "work" they may not.

Post #6, Feb 04, 2012 08:44:47 as a reply to hollis_f's post 2 hours earlier.


Craig * Canon 60D 10D*Tamron SP 150-600 f/5-6.3 Di VC USD*EF 400 5.6L USM*EF 17-40 4.0L USM*EF 70-210 4.0*EF 28 2.8*EF 50 1.8 MK1*Flickrexternal link

LOG IN TO REPLY
photocopy
Goldmember
photocopy's Avatar
Joined Nov 2011
1,538 posts
PNW
[MORE/SHARE]

heres what lens are compatable with the 2x teleconverters..

http://www.bhphotovide​o.com ...arts/canon2xExtende​r.htmlexternal link

I just ordered the 2xii... should be here by next week...

Post #7, Feb 04, 2012 09:04:20 as a reply to Grizz's post 19 minutes earlier.




LOG IN TO REPLY
MakeMeShutter
Goldmember
MakeMeShutter's Avatar
Joined Jan 2009
1,271 posts
Upstate New York
[MORE/SHARE]

Mach wrote in post #13818372external link
I'm using a T2i with a Canon 100>400 lense
When taking some pics of birds perched in a tree I can't get close enough to get a good pic before they scatter
Considering a Canon 1.4 tele converter
While this may be good for stills , what about the inflight pics ?
Your thoughts and commenst are welcome
Mach

I notice the OP does not mention auto focus.

Post #8, Feb 04, 2012 09:17:32


Shawn Kraus Photoexternal link

LOG IN TO REPLY
tonylong
do I really have to respond?
tonylong's Avatar
Joined Sep 2007
53,001 posts
Vancouver, WA USA
[MORE/SHARE]

I do use the "old" 1.4x TC with my 100-400 and don't get "terrible" results, although I use it with my 1D3 and so get decent AF (center point only). I'd compare the results to what I got when I used the 2x TC with the 300 f/2.8 IS...

Here's an example:

IMAGE: http://www.pbase.com/tonylong/image/134663723/original.jpg

The dang thing was still too far away for decent framing, but at least I could get a small print from a close crop:

IMAGE NOT FOUND IMAGE IS A REDIRECT OR MISSING!
http://www.pbase.com ...ge/134664681/origin​al.jpgexternal link
HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/gif'


IMAGE: http://www.pbase.com/tonylong/image/134664684/original.jpg

Another one at a similar distance:

IMAGE: http://www.pbase.com/tonylong/image/134665668/original.jpg

Of course, I'd rather be shooting with a 600mm and use the TC so I could get a close enough frame to be able to print these large, but you make do with what you have:)!

Post #9, Feb 04, 2012 13:21:00


Tony
Two Canon cameras (5DC, 30D), three Canon lenses (24-105, 100-400, 100mm macro)
Tony Long Photos on PBaseexternal link
Wildlife project pics hereexternal link, Biking Photog shoots hereexternal link, "Suburbia" project hereexternal link! Mount St. Helens, Mount Hood pics hereexternal link

LOG IN TO REPLY
jhayesvw
Cream of the Crop
Joined Jan 2011
6,392 posts
Tucson AZ
[MORE/SHARE]

ive gotten some decent shots with my Kenko 1.4 TC on my 100-400L.
It works best in manual on a still subject.
Im not exactly sure if its any better than shooting at 400mm and then cropping though.

Post #10, Feb 07, 2012 23:16:58 as a reply to tonylong's post 3 days earlier.


Jeremy
7d, 50mm 1.8, 17-55 2.8 IS, 18-55 IS, 100-400L,430 exII
My Flickrexternal link

LOG IN TO REPLY
badams
Senior Member
badams's Avatar
Joined Nov 2006
667 posts
Southern Oklahoma
[MORE/SHARE]

I would say to get the Kenko 1.5 TC (about $90). Try it to see if you like TCs then you could always get a Canon later or just keep using it. I've had mine for 4 or 5 years now and couldn't be happier. I always have it on.

I initially got it with the 100-400, but in 2008 got the 500 and still use the Kenko TC.

Here's a few I took with the 100-400, Kenko 1.5x TC on a Rebel XT body:
http://www.southernokp​hotography.com/p621564​330/h80c98b2#h80c98b2external link

http://www.southernokp​hotography.com ...64330/h31c2a330#h31​c2a330external link

http://www.southernokp​hotography.com/p621564​330/h88e92b8#h88e92b8external link


edit: With this one you don't have to tape pins.

Post #11, Feb 09, 2012 18:36:32


Everyday use: 7D2, 2x Canon TC or 1.5x Kenko TC, Canon 500mm f4 L IS USM; 6D, 24-105L
http://www.southernokp​hotography.comexternal link

LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as registered member)
Sloany
Member
Sloany's Avatar
Joined Nov 2006
65 posts
[MORE/SHARE]

Don`t waste your money.

Post #12, Feb 09, 2012 18:42:14




LOG IN TO REPLY
Duane ­ N
Cream of the Crop
Duane N's Avatar
Joined Nov 2007
8,514 posts
Chesapeake, VA USA
[MORE/SHARE]

If you're trying for bif's using an 1.4 extender I would stick with using one on an f/4 lens. I used a Canon 1.4 on my 400mm f/5.6L and the focus was too slow to be worth it.....

I use one on my 500mm f/4L and it works just fine......

Post #13, Feb 09, 2012 18:52:29 as a reply to Sloany's post 10 minutes earlier.


www.3rdicreations.comexternal link

LOG IN TO REPLY
Snydremark
Cream of the Crop
Joined Mar 2009
15,636 posts
Issaquah, WA USA
[MORE/SHARE]

TCs tend to work best on the telephoto primes; there's just too much variation between focal lengths in the zooms to account for with the extra glass in the TCs. You'll either have to break out the checkbook for longer glass (instead of that new car you've been saving for ;) ) or work hard and stalk closer.

That being said, if you're up for a fair amount of trial and error, they CAN work ok...I just don't feel that having to tape pins or losing AF is worth the thrash.

Post #14, Feb 09, 2012 19:01:49


- Eric S.: My Birds/Wildlifeexternal link (7D MkII, 7D, 40D, Canon 10-22 f/3.5-4.5, Canon 24-105L f/4 IS, Canon 70-200L f/2.8 IS MkII, Canon 100-400L f/4.5-5.6 IS, Canon 100mm f/2.8 Macro, Tamron 18-270 DiII PZD, 580EX II)
"The easiest way to improve your photos is to adjust the loose nut between the shutter release and the ground."

LOG IN TO REPLY
cmh512
Senior Member
Joined Dec 2011
198 posts
Oregon
[MORE/SHARE]

I tried a kenko 1.4 TC for use with my 70-300 f5.6 lens and T3i. Autofocus worked quite well on the bright day that I tried it, but the image quality was terrible. I did some tests comparing the lens alone to the lens with TC and the difference was quite noticeable. I sent it back.

Post #15, Feb 10, 2012 09:28:51


T3i, 18-55, EFS 10-22, 70-300mm f4-5.6 IS.

LOG IN TO REPLY


LIST NEARBY THREADS
2,597 views & 0 likes for this thread
Tele converters
FORUMS Photography Talk by Genre Bird Talk



NOT A MEMBER YET? CLICK HERE TO REGISTER TO FORUMS

CHANGE BODY TEXT SIZE FOR ALL THREAD PAGES
POWERED BY AMASS 1.0version 1.0
made in Finland
by Pekka Saarinen
for photography-on-the.net


SEND FEEDBACK TO STAFF  |  JUMP TO FORUM...  |  FORUM RULES


Spent 0.00136 for 7 database queries.
PAGE COMPLETED IN 0.04s
1029 guests, 854 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 3341, that happened on Dec 11, 2014
Latest registered member is Billzo

COOKIES DISCLAIMER: By using this site you agree that some cookies will be stored on your browser. For unlogged users we store one session id cookie. For registered members we store (in addition to login session cookie) only cookies that are essential for required functionality, we do not store any personal tracking data in cookies or other browser's data storage methods.