Tele converters

[artyman]

Shot with a 2X TC on a Sigma 120-300 f2.8, I can live with this sort of quality

[Ontario55]

Hand held or tri-pod ?
Awesome shot

Originally Posted by artyman

Shot with a 2X TC on a Sigma 120-300 f2.8, I can live with this sort of quality

[sloanbj]

This is handheld with a 100-400mm and the Kenko 1.4. I have no particular qualms. The TC seems to focus just fine for me and BIF are possible.

[Shar824]

Here's a shot I took using the Kenko MC4 AF 2.0X DGX on the 100-400L, handheld. I've gotten some pretty decent shots with it, the only draw back is having to manually focus. Haven't even tried any BIF shots because having to manually focus....the bird would more than likely be long gone.

[afh1989]

Hi,
Sorry, I'm new to this forum and haven't worked out how to post a new thread.

I've been reading through this thread and also looking been looking about for a 1.4x converter to use with my 100-400 canon lens. I know its probably not the best idea and will only use it in good light, but it seems that people are getting some good results with them from the pictures posted.

My question is, which converter would give best results? Would it be best to get a canon, as I have a canon lens? The images produced from other converters look good, but I am wanting to know which would produce the best quality.

Have people gone for a converter that has not been made by canon because of the cheaper price, or because they are better?

[tonylong]

Originally Posted by afh1989

Hi,
Sorry, I'm new to this forum and haven't worked out how to post a new thread.

I've been reading through this thread and also looking been looking about for a 1.4x converter to use with my 100-400 canon lens. I know its probably not the best idea and will only use it in good light, but it seems that people are getting some good results with them from the pictures posted.

My question is, which converter would give best results? Would it be best to get a canon, as I have a canon lens? The images produced from other converters look good, but I am wanting to know which would produce the best quality.

Have people gone for a converter that has not been made by canon because of the cheaper price, or because they are better?

I haven't tried the new "generation" of Canon TCs, so can't comment on them.

I did test the older MkII version of the 1.4x Canon TC along with the Kenko Pro 1.4x TC and the Kenko held up well enough to convince me to buy it.

The same was not true though comparing the Kenko 2x TC with the Canon 2x TC. I bought the Canon. IQ performance matters!

[Duane N]

Are you aware that Canon TC's won't allow the camera to AF using the 100-400mm lens..or any f/5.6 lens for that matter. I think the newer Kenko's report they're on now so they won't allow AF.

[Larry Weinman]

Originally Posted by photocopy

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

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/FrameWor...xExtender.html

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

Compatible means the 2X will fit in the lens, it does not mean it will work well. I own the 100-400 and also the new series III 1.4 and 2X Teleconverters. I tried both of these on my 100-400 as a curiosity and focused manually while on a heavy tripod. The results were substandard. Unless you have or plan to have one of the primes listed as compatible you will save yourself allot of anguish and money by sending the TC back

[afh1989]

Originally Posted by tonylong

I haven't tried the new "generation" of Canon TCs, so can't comment on them.

I did test the older MkII version of the 1.4x Canon TC along with the Kenko Pro 1.4x TC and the Kenko held up well enough to convince me to buy it.

The same was not true though comparing the Kenko 2x TC with the Canon 2x TC. I bought the Canon. IQ performance matters!

Thanks, I think I will go for the kenko, Ive read that other people have been very happy with it also.

[afh1989]

Originally Posted by Duane N

Are you aware that Canon TC's won't allow the camera to AF using the 100-400mm lens..or any f/5.6 lens for that matter. I think the newer Kenko's report they're on now so they won't allow AF.

I was aware of this, I have heard that you can tape some of the pins to regain AF, but I cant imagine this being very effective. Do you know if this is a good idea, or if it works well?

I would be happy to use MF, and would use the converter on few occasions, but I think it will be nice to have just in case I need it, as in the past Ive needed just that little bit longer.

[Duane N]

On the 1.4II extender I did tape the three pins using my 400mm f/5.6 and it worked fine...not sure if that works on the 1.4III version though.

[Muteki]

Besides the 400/5.6L, my on-the-road setup is 300/2.8L IS MK1 + stacking of Canon 1.4x II and Kenko 1.4x to get myself ~600mm (588mm to be exact), and the focus is just as fast as using only Canon 1.4x II. The photo still ends up fairly sharp with minimal degradation in crappy lighting/weather. The only penalty is my Canon 7D is about +1 EV off, so you have to compensate by -1 EV if you're shooting in the auto modes. For manual mode it's irrelevant.

Here's an okay flight shot of a Pileated Woodpecker, and I'm sure I will still get similar results with my 400/5.6L as these woodpeckers are not easy to photograph:


Here's a Common Merganser male I shot recently with lighting behind my back:


On the other hand, if you have a slow prime, i.e., 400/5.6L, either tape the pins of the Canon TC, or you can try use the Kenko 1.4x, and the focus will work at f/8, but slow and hard to detect contrast! Here's an example of a Snowy Owl I shot in early spring:


Moral of the story, use teleconverters on fast primes!

[bowser_23]

Lots of talk and theory - always good to add real life experience - here's a good thread to look at

http://photography-on-the.net/forum/...d.php?t=983021