Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies. Read More.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses
Thread started 29 Jan 2007 (Monday) 17:02
Prev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as registered member)

Which teleconverter(1.4) for Canon 100-400?

 
jr_senator
Goldmember
jr_senator's Avatar
4,861 posts
Joined Sep 2006
Jan 30, 2007 15:42 |  #16

blonde wrote in post #2627123external link
did you ever use the Kenko Pro?

No, why do you ask?



LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as registered member)
S.Horton
I'm having size issues, does this get worse with age?
S.Horton's Avatar
17,992 posts
Joined Dec 2006
Royersford, PA
Jan 30, 2007 16:49 |  #17

Canon 1.4

You will get conflicting opinions on brand; as with all glass, the best solution for you is what you can afford which produces an acceptable result.


Sam - TF Says Ishmael
http://midnightblue.sm​ugmug.comexternal link 
Want your title changed?Dream On!external link

:cool:

LOG IN TO REPLY
blonde
Buck Naked Floozies
blonde's Avatar
8,405 posts
Joined Oct 2005
Boston, MA
Jan 30, 2007 17:08 |  #18

jr_senator wrote in post #2627173external link
No, why do you ask?

i figured since you are so set on the Canon being superior that you must have used them both and found the Kenko to be lacking.




LOG IN TO REPLY
jr_senator
Goldmember
jr_senator's Avatar
4,861 posts
Joined Sep 2006
Jan 30, 2007 17:23 |  #19

blonde wrote in post #2627589external link
i figured since you are so set on the Canon being superior that you must have used them both and found the Kenko to be lacking.

Well, I wish you would show me where I said Canon was superior and/or Kenko was lacking. I suppose you can read anything you want into what I say but that doesn't make it so.



LOG IN TO REPLY
LightRules
"flat out embarrassing"
LightRules's Avatar
9,908 posts
Joined Jun 2005
Jan 30, 2007 18:26 |  #20

jr_senator wrote in post #2627650external link
Well, I wish you would show me where I said Canon was superior and/or Kenko was lacking. I suppose you can read anything you want into what I say but that doesn't make it so.

You stated, "I'd be damned if I would put anything but a Canon TC between my Canon camera and Canon lens. I can understand if someone is limited budget wise but for many the difference in cost is small."

Seems like Snir's "reading" is fair to me. :rolleyes:




LOG IN TO REPLY
blonde
Buck Naked Floozies
blonde's Avatar
8,405 posts
Joined Oct 2005
Boston, MA
Jan 30, 2007 18:40 |  #21

jr_senator wrote in post #2624983external link
And this could be due to the fact that Canon did not have to sacrifice IQ when designing this lens as much as it would had to if it fit a larger number of lenses.

this line implies that Kenko did sacrifice IQ in order for the TC to fit more lenses.




LOG IN TO REPLY
SamAlfano
Senior Member
719 posts
Joined Jul 2005
Covington, Louisiana
Jan 30, 2007 18:50 |  #22

I used my Canon 1.4x II on the 100-400 with lackluster results. Bleh.




LOG IN TO REPLY
Mr. ­ Clean
Cream of the Crop
Mr. Clean's Avatar
6,002 posts
Joined Jul 2005
Olympia, Washington
Jan 30, 2007 18:55 |  #23

I put a Tamron on my Canon body and then put a Sigma 70-200 or a 24-70 or a 30mm1.4 on it. Sometimes I get all funky and put the 100-400 on the TC!

That sorta stuff is outlawed in 42 states.


Mike
some shots @ Zenfolioexternal link
Gear List

LOG IN TO REPLY
jr_senator
Goldmember
jr_senator's Avatar
4,861 posts
Joined Sep 2006
Jan 31, 2007 05:56 as a reply to Mr. Clean's post |  #24

I have never seen anywhere that someone claimed the Kenko TC is superior to Canon's TC. I have seen where Kenko users have said the Kenko was soft around the edges. It really doesn't matter to me, because there is just not enough difference in cost to even investgate. For what it costs ($280) it's worth, to me, going with a TC made by the camera/lens manufacture that, unlike third party products, is designed from the get go (not reversed engineered) for the camera/lens pairing. If there were $400 difference then I would investagate different products. So, in this case, yes, "I'd be damned if I would put anything but a Canon TC between my Canon camera and Canon lens".



LOG IN TO REPLY
Woolburr
Mr. PMS Himself
Woolburr's Avatar
Joined Sep 2005
The Tupperware capitol of eastern Oregon...Leicester, NC!
Jan 31, 2007 06:53 |  #25

For the OP...I have used the Tamron SP Pro 1.4x TC on my 100-400 with decent results. I would say that they are on par with the results from the Canon TC. I have both...the Tamron because it is smaller and fits more lenses and the Canon for the weather sealing when used on my 1 Series bodies.


People that know me call me Dan
You'll never be a legitimate photographer until you have an award winning duck in your portfolio!
Crayons,Coloring Book,external link Refrigerator Artexternal link and What I Really Think Aboutexternal link

LOG IN TO REPLY
CyberDyneSystems
Admin (type T-2000), Honorary Member: Kill Team: Alpha
CyberDyneSystems's Avatar
44,787 posts
Gallery: 68 photos
Joined Apr 2003
Rhode Island USA
Jan 31, 2007 07:31 |  #26

westernminnguy wrote in post #2621618external link
I've decided to make the plunge to buy a 1.4 teleconverter to use with my 100-400IS.

I know this isn't optimal but for the few situations I might use it in, I think it will work.

Which one would you recommend: Canon, Tamron, Sigma, Kenco(sp?). I'm not sure who makes one, other than Canon, that will work with this lens.

Tx

What Camera?
Do you want to keep AF?

On a 1Series the sensible choice is the Canon. You will retain full AF and weather sealing with any weather sealed lenses you might use it on later.

On a 30D/20D or other, if you want to try and maintain AF, the Canon won't.
The Kenko might, and often does, but it isn't guaranteed to offer full AF functionality either.


Selling my 200mm f/2L or 1.8L
GEAR LIST
CDS' HOT LINKS
Jake Hegnauer Photography (external link)

LOG IN TO REPLY
CyberDyneSystems
Admin (type T-2000), Honorary Member: Kill Team: Alpha
CyberDyneSystems's Avatar
44,787 posts
Gallery: 68 photos
Joined Apr 2003
Rhode Island USA
Jan 31, 2007 07:33 |  #27

jr_senator wrote in post #2627650external link
Well, I wish you would show me where I said Canon was superior and/or Kenko was lacking. I suppose you can read anything you want into what I say but that doesn't make it so.


I guess we assumed that the statement you made about being damned to use anything but the Canon (twice now) was actually based on some actual experience or knowledge of those options that would in fact cause you to be damned.


Selling my 200mm f/2L or 1.8L
GEAR LIST
CDS' HOT LINKS
Jake Hegnauer Photography (external link)

LOG IN TO REPLY
blonde
Buck Naked Floozies
blonde's Avatar
8,405 posts
Joined Oct 2005
Boston, MA
Jan 31, 2007 07:42 |  #28

CyberDyneSystems wrote in post #2630562external link
What Camera?
Do you want to keep AF?

On a 1Series the sensible choice is the Canon. You will retain full AF and weather sealing with any weather sealed lenses you might use it on later.

On a 30D/20D or other, if you want to try and maintain AF, the Canon won't.
The Kenko might, and often does, but it isn't guaranteed to offer full AF functionality either.

that is pretty much spot on. if you have a lens and body that is weather sealed, the Canon is the obvious choice. however, if you are using a 30D and a non sealed lens, all you are paying for is the name and the white color because the optics are very much the same.




LOG IN TO REPLY
jr_senator
Goldmember
jr_senator's Avatar
4,861 posts
Joined Sep 2006
Jan 31, 2007 12:46 |  #29

CyberDyneSystems wrote in post #2630569external link
I guess we assumed that the statement you made about being damned to use anything but the Canon (twice now) was actually based on some actual experience or knowledge of those options that would in fact cause you to be damned.

cute!



LOG IN TO REPLY
Permagrin
High Priestess of all I survey
Permagrin's Avatar
77,910 posts
Joined Aug 2006
day dreamin'
Jan 31, 2007 12:56 as a reply to jr_senator's post |  #30

I have the canon 1.4xII and the kenko pro 300 2x. I love my kenko pro...mainly because of the unlimited use I have with it. And it is extremely fast w/AF on my 200 f2.8 so I'd say that the AF's are comparable on both units. The optics are comparable as well, (though the 2x is obviously a bit softer but NOT much). If I could do it all over again, I would have bought the kenko pro 300 1.4x because I hate not being able to use my tc on all my lenses....


.. It's Permie's world, we just live in it! ~CDS

LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as registered member)

5,913 views & 0 likes for this thread
Which teleconverter(1.4) for Canon 100-400?
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses


Not a member yet? Click here to register to the forums.
Registered members get all the features: search, following threads, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, settings, view hosted photos, own reviews and more...


AAA

Send feedback to staff    •   Jump to forum...    •   Rules    •   Index    •   New posts    •   RTAT    •   'Best of'    •   Gallery    •   Gear    •   Reviews    •   Polls

COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies. Privacy policy and cookie usage info.

POWERED BY AMASS 1.4version 1.4
made in Finland
by Pekka Saarinen
for photography-on-the.net
Spent 0.00127 for 4 database queries.
PAGE COMPLETED IN 0.04s
Latest registered member is Roy.Allman
887 guests, 543 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 6106, that happened on Jun 09, 2016