Canon Digital Photography Forums  

Go Back   Canon Digital Photography Forums > 'Equipment Talk' section > Canon EF and EF-S Lenses
Register Rules FAQ Members List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read



Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 9th of July 2012 (Mon)   #46
chrisd999
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Toronto
Posts: 81
Default Re: Is it pointless to buy a 1.4x teleconverter for 400mm f/5.6 lens?

Quote:
Originally Posted by SVTmaniac View Post
Most birders shoot with a 1.6 crop body anyway.
This might be true, but I wonder why. I was contemplating picking up a used crop body to use with my new-to-me 400 5.6. Then I borrowed a 60D from a friend, and did some comparison shots with his 60D and my 5D2, and after cropping in on both (much more heavily on the 5D2 obviously) at the same subject framing, there was no apparent difference in IQ right up to nearly 100% magnification on the 5D2 shots. The only difference was there was about 50% more pixels on the 60D shot than the 5D2 at the same subject framing. Here are my findings on crop body versus full frame with the 400 5.6

Based on IQ: tie
Based on Resolution: crop body wins
Based on minimum shutter speed: full frame wins
Therefore, IMO, no need to downgrade from the 5D2 to crop body based on picture quality for same subject framing.

Now here is my question no-one answered with a lot of detail in this thread:
Assuming accurate focus could be had (either manual or auto), is the picture quality better for the 400 5.6 with 1.4x better than 400 5.6 with no 1.4x cropped (assume same framing)?
__________________
Sony A7R | 17mm TS-E f4L | 24mm TS-E II f3.5L | 16-35mm f4L IS | FE 28-70 f3.5-5.6| Samyang 85mm f1.4 | Minolta 70-210 Beercan | Metabones IV | LA-EA4

flickr.com/photos/chrisd666
chrisd999 is offline   Reply With Quote
This ad block will go away when you log in as member
Old 10th of July 2012 (Tue)   #47
ScubaDude
User is banned from forums
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Waveland, MS
Posts: 1,104
Default Re: Is it pointless to buy a 1.4x teleconverter for 400mm f/5.6 lens?

I have the Canon 1.4x III and the 400mm f/5.6. Tried the tape-the-pins method once, but autofocus was way too slow (like 15-20 seconds, if it would lock focus at all). I can't change the focus screen in my T1i for one made for manual focus, but I get by. Here's a few shots with the 400-1.4x combo.


Black-bellied Plover by ScubaDude1960, on Flickr


Female House Sparrows by ScubaDude1960, on Flickr


Red-Headed Woodpecker in flight by ScubaDude1960, on Flickr


Red-Headed Woodpecker in flight by ScubaDude1960, on Flickr
ScubaDude is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10th of July 2012 (Tue)   #48
sloanbj
Member
 
sloanbj's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Rio de Janeiro, Brasil
Posts: 296
Default Re: Is it pointless to buy a 1.4x teleconverter for 400mm f/5.6 lens?


Falcon with Mouse.

Another recent example with the Kenko 1.4 and 100-400.
__________________
Flickr 5Dii * Canon 50 * 85 * 17-40L * 24-105L * 180L * 100-400L * 580ex ii

Film: Contax | Rolleiflex | Pentax

Last edited by sloanbj : 10th of July 2012 (Tue) at 07:01.
sloanbj is offline   Reply With Quote
This ad block will go away when you log in as member
Old 10th of July 2012 (Tue)   #49
wayne.robbins
Goldmember
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 2,062
Default Re: Is it pointless to buy a 1.4x teleconverter for 400mm f/5.6 lens?

^^^ It's not a falcon with a mouse; it's a mouse catching a ride on Falcon Airways.
__________________
EOS 5D III, EOS 7D,EOS Rebel T4i, Canon 70-200 f/2.8 IS II, Canon 24-105L, Canon 18-135 IS STM, 1.4x TC III, 2.0x TC III, Σ 50mm f/1.4, Σ 17-50 OS, Σ 70-200 OS, Σ 50-500 OS, Σ 1.4x TC, Σ 2.0x TC, 580EXII(3), Canon SX-40, Canon S100
Fond memories: Rebel T1i, Canon 18-55 IS, Canon 55-250 IS, 18-135 IS (Given to a good home)...
wayne.robbins is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10th of July 2012 (Tue)   #50
watt100
Cream of the Crop
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 13,301
Default Re: Is it pointless to buy a 1.4x teleconverter for 400mm f/5.6 lens?

Quote:
Originally Posted by pyro1 View Post


shot with my 100-400L + 1.4x Kenko Pro3oo @ 560mm
AF seems to working fine with that teleconverter
watt100 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10th of July 2012 (Tue)   #51
John Sheehy
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 1,093
Default Re: Is it pointless to buy a 1.4x teleconverter for 400mm f/5.6 lens?

Quote:
Originally Posted by chrisr09 View Post
Since I will lose an f stop and autofocus, I'm wondering if I'm wasting my money in buying the Kenko Teleplus PRO 300 DGX 1.4x AF Teleconverter for my 400mm f/5.6 lens? I can shoot in bright light if that makes a difference. I would like the added reach but not at the cost of IQ. Talk me into it our out of it! Thanks.
What do you mean by IQ?

Certainly, a TC will give lower IQ if you stand 1.4x times as far from the subject with it, but if the alternative is shooting at the same distance with and without it, then you are comparing the full image with the TC to a crop, and the full image with the TC is potentially better.

Of course, you will not have the swift, accurate AF of the bare lens if you trick it into AF on a camera that does not AF at f/8, so manual focus will be required or contrast-detect AF in Live-view mode, on a tripod.

If you use a tripod and need more magnification, go for it. If you hand-hold, realize that this will be a labor of love (I manually focus a 100-400 at 800mm; it can give much better results but it is no picnic!).
John Sheehy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10th of July 2012 (Tue)   #52
Billginthekeys
Billy the kid
 
Billginthekeys's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Islamorada, FL
Posts: 7,351
Default Re: Is it pointless to buy a 1.4x teleconverter for 400mm f/5.6 lens?

Quote:
Originally Posted by chrisd999 View Post
This might be true, but I wonder why. I was contemplating picking up a used crop body to use with my new-to-me 400 5.6.
Lets see:
  • So you don't have to crop every shot
  • More pixels on target
  • More FPS, and generally larger buffers for those FPS
  • Better AF systems (at least when the 7D/1D3/4 had better AF than the 5D2 for instance. That has of course changed with the 5D3)
  • Less money spent on body, more to spend on a good tele lens and/or support system (7D quite a bit less than 5D2, WAY less than 5D3)
Probably something else I am missing.
__________________
Mr. the Kid.
Go Canes!
My Gallery My Gear
what the L. just go for it.

Billginthekeys is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18th of July 2012 (Wed)   #53
gocolts
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 1,127
Default Re: Is it pointless to buy a 1.4x teleconverter for 400mm f/5.6 lens?

These shots at 560mm are reminding me why I'm still wondering if I made the right decision selling my 400mm f/5.6L to pick up a Sigma 120-300 OS to use with my 7D....
gocolts is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18th of July 2012 (Wed)   #54
KenjiS
Cream of the Crop
 
KenjiS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Buffalo, NY
Posts: 19,995
Default Re: Is it pointless to buy a 1.4x teleconverter for 400mm f/5.6 lens?

Quote:
Originally Posted by 1Tanker View Post
I would definitely go for it. As ejenner noted, any other option for more reach will cost you over a $1000(Sigma 150-500OS) or the next-cheapest route being a 300L f/2.8 with 2x TC. You can also use the TC on your macro lens, if you want.. i often use the 1.4x on mine. Gives you 1.4:1 mag.
And the 150-500 is not as good optically as the 400 prime to begin with...

your next "real" option is the Sigma 120-300 OS + 2x TC....

As for crop VS full frame, For wildlife where reach is important i'd take having the crop camera over the full frame, Puts more pixels on target, Once you start talking adding teleconverters to the FF body to get the same equivalent reach you start eroding the advantages of a full frame body (Because you'll be slowing the lens down, thus having to increase your ISO anyways) Keep in mind that using the same area of the sensor on a 5D II as a 7D you have 8mp versus 18mp... thus you can crop a lot harder on the 7D, and you wont lose as much detail and the noise will be less apparent, The only time full frame is "superior" is if you manage the same framing as the cropper by either getting closer or using a longer lens (Lets keep this simple folks..) so that you are using the full sensor in the 5DII...

Full frame =/= always superior to APS-C....
__________________
Gear, New and Old! RAW Club Member
Wanted: 5D Mark III, Sigma 35mm f/1.4, Sigma 120-300 f/2.8 OS
Deviantart
Flickr (This is where my good stuff is!)

Last edited by KenjiS : 18th of July 2012 (Wed) at 10:17.
KenjiS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18th of July 2012 (Wed)   #55
Silverfox1
Goldmember
 
Silverfox1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: South Texas
Posts: 3,180
Default Re: Is it pointless to buy a 1.4x teleconverter for 400mm f/5.6 lens?

Quote:
Originally Posted by KenjiS View Post
And the 150-500 is not as good optically as the 400 prime to begin with...

your next "real" option is the Sigma 120-300 OS + 2x TC....

As for crop VS full frame, For wildlife where reach is important i'd take having the crop camera over the full frame, Puts more pixels on target, Once you start talking adding teleconverters to the FF body to get the same equivalent reach you start eroding the advantages of a full frame body (Because you'll be slowing the lens down, thus having to increase your ISO anyways) Keep in mind that using the same area of the sensor on a 5D II as a 7D you have 8mp versus 18mp... thus you can crop a lot harder on the 7D, and you wont lose as much detail and the noise will be less apparent, The only time full frame is "superior" is if you manage the same framing as the cropper by either getting closer or using a longer lens (Lets keep this simple folks..) so that you are using the full sensor in the 5DII...

Full frame =/= always superior to APS-C....
Below is an example of using the 5D MKII + 400/f5.6 + Kenko 2X MC4 + Monopod @ 800mm :

http://photography-on-the.net/forum/...postcount=1850

Not very good but a whole lot cheaper then a 500/f4 IS + 1.4TC

Regards, Ron
__________________
Silverfox1 POTN Feedback / TC Extender Tests / Gear List
Silverfox1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18th of July 2012 (Wed)   #56
modchild
Senior Member
 
modchild's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Lincoln, Uk
Posts: 1,468
Default Re: Is it pointless to buy a 1.4x teleconverter for 400mm f/5.6 lens?

I've got a Pro 300 DGX 1.4x and I used it extensively with a Canon 100-400 f4-5.6 and it AF'd on all the bodies I tried it on which were a 550D, 60D, 7D, 5D2 and a 5D3 (none of which claim to AF beyond f5.6) and it worked really well. It only started to struggle for AF in very low light, it was fine in normal daylight and I didn't tape any pins on the TC at all. I can't see why it wouldn't work on a 400 f5.6 as well.
__________________
EOS 5D MkIII, EOS 70D, EOS 650D, EOS M, Canon 24-70 f2.8L MkII, Canon 70-200 f2.8L IS MkII, Canon 100 f2.8L Macro, Canon 17-40 f4L IS, Canon 24-105 f4L IS, Canon 300 f4L IS, Canon 85 f1.8, Canon 50 f1.4, Canon 40 f2.8 STM, Canon 35 f2, Sigma 150-500 OS, Tamron 18-270 PZD, Tamron 28-300 VC, 580EX II Flash, Nissin Di866 MkII Flash, Sigma EM 140 Macro Flash and other bits.
modchild is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18th of July 2012 (Wed)   #57
Billginthekeys
Billy the kid
 
Billginthekeys's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Islamorada, FL
Posts: 7,351
Default Re: Is it pointless to buy a 1.4x teleconverter for 400mm f/5.6 lens?

Quote:
Originally Posted by KenjiS View Post
Full frame =/= always superior to APS-C....
I should have that statement in my signature .
__________________
Mr. the Kid.
Go Canes!
My Gallery My Gear
what the L. just go for it.

Billginthekeys is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18th of July 2012 (Wed)   #58
mileslong24
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 438
Default Re: Is it pointless to buy a 1.4x teleconverter for 400mm f/5.6 lens?

Quote:
Originally Posted by modchild View Post
I've got a Pro 300 DGX 1.4x and I used it extensively with a Canon 100-400 f4-5.6 and it AF'd on all the bodies I tried it on which were a 550D, 60D, 7D, 5D2 and a 5D3 (none of which claim to AF beyond f5.6) and it worked really well. It only started to struggle for AF in very low light, it was fine in normal daylight and I didn't tape any pins on the TC at all. I can't see why it wouldn't work on a 400 f5.6 as well.

This is my experience as well. I use the Kenko on my 400 5.6 and it works really well, actually much better than I expected it would. You will struggle when light starts to go away and sometimes with fast flying subjects, but in the end it was well worth it. Only time is has struggled to the point of being unusable was with an egret aganist an overcast sky one time.
mileslong24 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18th of July 2012 (Wed)   #59
hollis_f
Cream of the Crop
 
hollis_f's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Sussex, UK
Posts: 9,997
Default Re: Is it pointless to buy a 1.4x teleconverter for 400mm f/5.6 lens?

Quote:
Originally Posted by modchild View Post
I've got a Pro 300 DGX 1.4x and I used it extensively with a Canon 100-400 f4-5.6 and it AF'd on all the bodies I tried it on which were a 550D, 60D, 7D, 5D2 and a 5D3 (none of which claim to AF beyond f5.6) and it worked really well.
Any example shots of birds in flight, or other fast-moving subjects. Or does it just work 'really well' for well-lit static subjects?
__________________
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 Website
hollis_f is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18th of July 2012 (Wed)   #60
wayne.robbins
Goldmember
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 2,062
Default Re: Is it pointless to buy a 1.4x teleconverter for 400mm f/5.6 lens?

Quote:
Originally Posted by chrisd999 View Post
This might be true, but I wonder why. I was contemplating picking up a used crop body to use with my new-to-me 400 5.6. Then I borrowed a 60D from a friend, and did some comparison shots with his 60D and my 5D2, and after cropping in on both (much more heavily on the 5D2 obviously) at the same subject framing, there was no apparent difference in IQ right up to nearly 100% magnification on the 5D2 shots. The only difference was there was about 50% more pixels on the 60D shot than the 5D2 at the same subject framing. Here are my findings on crop body versus full frame with the 400 5.6

Based on IQ: tie
Based on Resolution: crop body wins
Based on minimum shutter speed: full frame wins
Therefore, IMO, no need to downgrade from the 5D2 to crop body based on picture quality for same subject framing.

Now here is my question no-one answered with a lot of detail in this thread:
Assuming accurate focus could be had (either manual or auto), is the picture quality better for the 400 5.6 with 1.4x better than 400 5.6 with no 1.4x cropped (assume same framing)?
Unless you are shooting and saving as something other than Large- there is a lot of things that don't seem right in this post. And perhaps it's my understanding of terminology..
For one thing- the difference between a 7D/60D and a 5D2 - is about 2.2 times as many pixels- on target- when focal length limited/constrained. If your subject- as an image on the sensor is occupying 5mm by 5mm on a 5D2 sensor, it also will occupy 5mm by 5mm on a 60D's sensor as well, for instance. Because of the pixel density- the image will be comprised of about 2.2 times as many pixels on the 60D. My understanding looking at a crop at 100% view- is one pixel in the picture is one pixel on the monitor. So a 100% crop of a 60D - using large- will have 2.2 times as many pixels as the same image shot with the same lens on a 5D2- thus features/patterns, etc at 100% should be larger- and not the same- noticeably larger. that's my understanding of a 100% crop- so you should actually be seeing about 120% more pixels ( 2.2 x as much ) . If you reduce the magnification on the 60D image, to that of the 5D2, ie zoom out- it will look similar. However, if you take a 100% crop of the 60D, and then zoom your 5D2 so that features are similar size- you will see the 5D2 image starting to fall apart. IF you needed to crop both pictures. ONLY if you can fill the frame with the full frame- does full frame have more resolving power- i.e. if you gotta crop a lot- you'd be better off with a crop. Sorry.. I've taken pictures of the moon with a 7D followed by a 5D3- using the same lens and results are similar- much more detail - pixels on target - with the 7D.

Another thing- with such a long lens, without moving- you cannot get the same framing on a 5D2 and a 60D - using the same lens. While you can crop to similar framing- the picture from the crop camera will have more pixels supporting the picture. Don't believe it- borrow that 60D again- with the 400mm, and the 5D2, and shoot a full moon- and then crop each so that the picture is just the moon- and look at the two.. And then do a 100% view of each. There's no way the 5D2 will pull ahead.. Another thing you can do is to note the final sizes of each crop- the dimensions- and see how much more you have with the crop.

As far as your question about using a TC with your 400 f/5.6- mostly- you will have to try to see if the IQ is good enough or not. Mostly- how good the TC works is a matter of which TC, and how sharp your lens is in the first place - and how good the combo is together.. Only you really can decide if it is acceptable. I certainly would give it a try though. Heck, I'd even try a 2x TC with it as well.
__________________
EOS 5D III, EOS 7D,EOS Rebel T4i, Canon 70-200 f/2.8 IS II, Canon 24-105L, Canon 18-135 IS STM, 1.4x TC III, 2.0x TC III, Σ 50mm f/1.4, Σ 17-50 OS, Σ 70-200 OS, Σ 50-500 OS, Σ 1.4x TC, Σ 2.0x TC, 580EXII(3), Canon SX-40, Canon S100
Fond memories: Rebel T1i, Canon 18-55 IS, Canon 55-250 IS, 18-135 IS (Given to a good home)...
wayne.robbins is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
100-400mm + 2x and 1.4x teleconverter shots drumsfield Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 5 5th of February 2011 (Sat) 01:10
EF 400mm f/5.6L USM with Teleconverter? dyasinski Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 16 26th of January 2009 (Mon) 12:26
Pointless lens vs body poll :-) The_Camera_Poser Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 15 20th of June 2008 (Fri) 23:09
Some pointless (inaccurate) lens tests shutterfiend Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 0 25th of May 2008 (Sun) 11:00
Super wide lens hood pointless? embdude Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 45 20th of February 2008 (Wed) 17:12


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:22.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.12
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
This forum is not affiliated with Canon in any way and is run as a free user helpsite by Pekka Saarinen, Helsinki Finland. You will need to register in order to be able to post messages. Cookies are required for registering and posting. HTML in messages is not allowed, plain website addresses are automatically made active by the board.