LOG IN    OR   REGISTER TO FORUMS


Which teleconverter(1.4) for Canon 100-400?

FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses
Thread started 29 Jan 2007 (Monday) 17:02   
LIST NEARBY THREADS
 
jr_senator
Goldmember
jr_senator's Avatar
Joined Sep 2006
4,861 posts
[MORE/SHARE]

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

No, why do you ask?

Post #16, Jan 30, 2007 15:42:09



LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as registered member)
S.Horton
dǝǝɥs ɐ ʎq pǝʞuɐds
S.Horton's Avatar
Joined Dec 2006
17,808 posts
Lehigh Valley, PA
[MORE/SHARE]

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.

Post #17, Jan 30, 2007 16:49:29


Sam - TF Says Ishmael
http://midnightblue.sm​ugmug.comexternal link
Want your title changed?Dream On!external link
[SIZE=2]:cool:

LOG IN TO REPLY
blonde
Buck Naked Floozies
blonde's Avatar
Joined Oct 2005
8,405 posts
Boston, MA
[MORE/SHARE]

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.

Post #18, Jan 30, 2007 17:08:41




LOG IN TO REPLY
jr_senator
Goldmember
jr_senator's Avatar
Joined Sep 2006
4,861 posts
[MORE/SHARE]

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.

Post #19, Jan 30, 2007 17:23:08



LOG IN TO REPLY
LightRules
"flat out embarrassing"
LightRules's Avatar
Joined Jun 2005
9,908 posts
[MORE/SHARE]

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:

Post #20, Jan 30, 2007 18:26:46




LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as registered member)
blonde
Buck Naked Floozies
blonde's Avatar
Joined Oct 2005
8,405 posts
Boston, MA
[MORE/SHARE]

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.

Post #21, Jan 30, 2007 18:40:48




LOG IN TO REPLY
SamAlfano
Senior Member
Joined Jul 2005
717 posts
Covington, Louisiana
[MORE/SHARE]

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

Post #22, Jan 30, 2007 18:50:43




LOG IN TO REPLY
Mr. ­ Clean
Cream of the Crop
Mr. Clean's Avatar
Joined Jul 2005
5,996 posts
Olympia, Washington
[MORE/SHARE]

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.

Post #23, Jan 30, 2007 18:55:53


Mike
some shots @ Zenfolioexternal link
Gear List

LOG IN TO REPLY
jr_senator
Goldmember
jr_senator's Avatar
Joined Sep 2006
4,861 posts
[MORE/SHARE]

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".

Post #24, Jan 31, 2007 05:56:48 as a reply to Mr. Clean's post 11 hours earlier.



LOG IN TO REPLY
Woolburr
Mr. PMS Himself
Woolburr's Avatar
Joined Sep 2005
66,288 posts
The Tupperware capitol of eastern Oregon...Leicester, NC!
[MORE/SHARE]

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.

Post #25, Jan 31, 2007 06:53:40


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)
CyberDyneSystems's Avatar
Joined Apr 2003
40,788 posts
Providence RI
[MORE/SHARE]

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.

Post #26, Jan 31, 2007 07:31:17


GEAR LIST
CDS' HOT LINKS
My POTN Share Threads
Jake Hegnauer Photographyexternal link

LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as registered member)
CyberDyneSystems
Admin (type T-2000)
CyberDyneSystems's Avatar
Joined Apr 2003
40,788 posts
Providence RI
[MORE/SHARE]

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.

Post #27, Jan 31, 2007 07:33:59


GEAR LIST
CDS' HOT LINKS
My POTN Share Threads
Jake Hegnauer Photographyexternal link

LOG IN TO REPLY
blonde
Buck Naked Floozies
blonde's Avatar
Joined Oct 2005
8,405 posts
Boston, MA
[MORE/SHARE]

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.

Post #28, Jan 31, 2007 07:42:50




LOG IN TO REPLY
jr_senator
Goldmember
jr_senator's Avatar
Joined Sep 2006
4,861 posts
[MORE/SHARE]

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!

Post #29, Jan 31, 2007 12:46:43



LOG IN TO REPLY
Permagrin
High Priestess of all I survey
Permagrin's Avatar
Joined Aug 2006
77,877 posts
day dreamin'
[MORE/SHARE]

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....

Post #30, Jan 31, 2007 12:56:11 as a reply to jr_senator's post 9 minutes earlier.


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

LOG IN TO REPLY


LIST NEARBY THREADS
4,090 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 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 0.00104 for 4 database queries.
PAGE COMPLETED IN 0.02s
1125 guests, 836 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 3341, that happened on Dec 11, 2014
Latest registered member is davemcg

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.