When I get the 2x I'll have both to choose from.
chuckmiller Goldmember  More info | Feb 16, 2018 09:51 | #7591 When I get the 2x I'll have both to choose from. .
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Pondrader "now I'm no rocket scientist but I do get a shot or two"  16,028 posts Gallery: 2548 photos Best ofs: 5 Likes: 57041 Joined Aug 2012 Location: Minden, Ontario, Canada More info Post edited over 3 years ago by Pondrader. (2 edits in all) | Feb 16, 2018 09:56 | #7592 docg wrote in post #18565087  Thanks for the reply Jeff. Kind of what I expected, some will say yes and others not so much. I guess some of it may depend on the copy of camera/lens combination and as well as the skills and technique of the user. Great moon shot btw. I have absolutely have no doubt you can do the same as me if not better. Just sayin  HOSTED PHOTO please log in to view hosted photos in full size.  HOSTED PHOTO please log in to view hosted photos in full size. Jeff ........, 7D, 70-300L, 100-400LII
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Pondrader "now I'm no rocket scientist but I do get a shot or two" 16,028 posts Gallery: 2548 photos Best ofs: 5 Likes: 57041 Joined Aug 2012 Location: Minden, Ontario, Canada More info | Feb 16, 2018 10:00 | #7593 Even close range with the 1.4III on is good. Marten EXIF  HOSTED PHOTO please log in to view hosted photos in full size. Jeff ........, 7D, 70-300L, 100-400LII
LOG IN TO REPLY |
nero_design Senior Member  More info | Feb 16, 2018 10:54 | #7594 chuckmiller wrote in post #18564838 I cannot look through 505 pages of posts. Is anyone using this lens with a Canon teleconverter 1.4x iii or a 2x iii? If you are how is the image quality?
 HOSTED PHOTO please log in to view hosted photos in full size. Using the 2x III Extender was no real problem for the recent Canon EOS M6 mirrorless camera with the DPAF sensor. I found that the magnification captures greater detail over distances compared to just enlarging the unaided image.  HOSTED PHOTO please log in to view hosted photos in full size. Possibly not the best example... but the eye of the bird was the target. I couldn't get close to him and wanted a closer, uncropped picture of him (I virtually never crop images but it was an excuse to use the Extender). I didn't really need the monopod but I find the lens is heavy. This bird was an an odd position. Canon EOS M6 + Canon EF 100-400mm F4.5-5.6L IS II USM + EF 2x III + EF 12 + EF 1.4x III. Despite what the extracted EXIF information reads, this was a shot of the moon taken in JPEG using the Auto Focus with the "Frankenstein" setup (details above). With BOTH extenders the focal length was 1803.2mm (equiv) on this lens and camera. The image has been further edited to enhance the contrast and to bring Jupiter a little closer to the moon (Jupiter was shot and exposed separately but the moon was used to lock the AF). At least two bands of cloud are visible on Jupiter, along with three of its moons... which are just tiny dots. Canon EOS 6D (Full Frame) + Canon EF 100-400mm F4.5-5.6L IS II USM + EF 2x III Extender - Color has not been enhanced although I think I had a CPL filter on the lens at the time. Taken in JPEG with a monopod... with Live View (which was quite slow on the 6D Mk 1 ...but accurate).
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Feb 16, 2018 11:10 | #7595 keeperseeker wrote in post #18565076 Own all of them,,,much prefer using the 1.4x . seem to get better results with F9-F10,,and 1200+ shutter speed. and of course you need good light and a steadier hand. Don,t get as many keepers at all with the 2X,,,find a tripod increaser rate with 2x but i seldom use a tripod. Thanks Keeperseeker. I’ll keep those suggestions in mind next time I try the 1.4. II. Doc
LOG IN TO REPLY |
nero_design Senior Member More info | Feb 16, 2018 11:14 | #7596 Some shots from the Canon EF 100-400mm F4.5-5.6L IS II USM without any Extenders used. Almost 2 years after I bought this lens I'm still astounded by the image quality that it produces. These were snapshots taken as I paused momentarily to capture what I was seeing. These JPEGS were all taken with the original Canon EOS 6D camera.  HOSTED PHOTO please log in to view hosted photos in full size. This wild lizard now comes to pose when I visit his park... although he was trying to scare me off when I took this picture. My wife feeds him (she's the blurry 'blob' on the right).  HOSTED PHOTO please log in to view hosted photos in full size. My friends dog. They were throwing a stick for her.. which is why she wasn't looking at me. This was my first day with this lens and I wanted to take a picture of a critter... but the dog filled in just fine.
LOG IN TO REPLY |
nero_design Senior Member More info | Feb 16, 2018 11:28 | #7597 This is an extremely versatile (and somewhat heavy) lens. You're not just stuck shooting birds and critters with it either. I'd like to try my hand with more landscapes. Just have to remember to show a little caution shooting the sun with the higher magnification, even when using the Live View (LCD) on my cameras.  HOSTED PHOTO please log in to view hosted photos in full size.  HOSTED PHOTO please log in to view hosted photos in full size.
LOG IN TO REPLY |
nero_design Senior Member More info | Feb 16, 2018 11:44 | #7598  HOSTED PHOTO please log in to view hosted photos in full size.  HOSTED PHOTO please log in to view hosted photos in full size.
LOG IN TO REPLY |
chuckmiller Goldmember More info | Feb 16, 2018 14:13 | #7599 To Nero - my camera body is a 5D4. .
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Feb 16, 2018 14:19 | #7600 digital paradise wrote in post #18563414 Not sure what these birds are other than they speak Portuguese.  Hosted photo: posted by digital paradise in ./showthread.php?p=18563414&i=i229553294 forum: Canon EF and EF-S Lenses  Hosted photo: posted by digital paradise in ./showthread.php?p=18563414&i=i220505759 forum: Canon EF and EF-S Lenses Terns, perhaps Caspian. Approaching gull size? Then Caspian. About half the size,. more likely common. GEAR LIST
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Feb 16, 2018 14:25 | #7601 nero_design wrote in post #18565143 ... The speed of AF and the ability to use AF with the 2x III Extender will depend greatly on which body of camera you are using... as Canon have crippled some bodies. . More importantly, the older bodies were made before the new AF systems that can take advantage of the new extenders. This age effects even the latest in some series bodies like the 7D2 or 1D4,. they are too old to see any real AF improvement with the MkIII T-con gen II lens combos. GEAR LIST
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Archibald You must be quackers!  More info | Feb 16, 2018 14:35 | #7602 CyberDyneSystems wrote in post #18565325 More importantly, the older bodies were made before the new AF systems that can take advantage of the new extenders. This age effects even the latest in some series bodies like the 7D2 or 1D4,. they are too old to see any real AF improvement with the MkIII T-con gen II lens combos. As far as I know the only bodes that will fully utilize the combined AF advantage of the MkIII + Gen II lenses are 1DxII, 5D4, 80D, and 6D2. Even 1Dx loses some functionality compared to some of these newer bodies. Hmmm ... would this be firmware-related? Canon R5, Canon 90D, assorted Canon lenses, Sony RX10 IV
LOG IN TO REPLY |
CyberDyneSystems THREAD STARTER Admin (type T-2000)  More info Post edited over 3 years ago by CyberDyneSystems. | Feb 16, 2018 16:32 | #7603 Archibald wrote in post #18565336 Hmmm ... would this be firmware-related?
GEAR LIST
LOG IN TO REPLY |
nero_design Senior Member More info | Feb 16, 2018 21:36 | #7604 chuckmiller wrote in post #18565316 To Nero - my camera body is a 5D4.
I really like this lens but it's nice to know that you can add a little to the reach of the lens in the form of an extender. For astro-shots of the moon and very distant subjects I'll use the EF 2x III Extender. For wildlife and closer subjects, the raw lens is best for performance although adding the 1.4x III Extender gives me extra reach without any noticeable loss of detail from image degradation. I think one of the first things people do when they buy a camera lens with a Loooooong zoom is to take pictures of very distant objects to validate their purchase - But shooting subjects over longer distances means more thermal fluctuations and air turbulence. Shooting over dry land with longer distances in warmer weather is the worst... although you can get some great effects playing with the distortions in your shots. But those distortions alone will strip the subject of details (eg hairs on a persons arm at 700m) which would otherwise be visible in better air-conditions or shooting closer to the subject.  HOSTED PHOTO please log in to view hosted photos in full size. I read some accounts (here!) where people were saying that "blowing up your image in Photoshop by 200% was better than using an Extender". Those comments related to using earlier Extenders with the earlier Mk 1 version of this lens. The first thing I did when I bought the Mk III extenders was to compare them with the same subject at 200% crop without the extenders compared to a non-cropped shot with the extenders. I was pleased to see that more detail was captured by the use of the extenders than without. You can see the results of one of those tests above and below. I felt that there was considerable image improvement on the shot captured using the EF 2x III converter compared with the detail captured by the unaided lens at 400mm.  HOSTED PHOTO please log in to view hosted photos in full size.
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Archibald You must be quackers! More info | Feb 16, 2018 22:17 | #7605 nero_design wrote in post #18565603 I'm fairly certain that the EOS 5D IV has the new DPAF sensor... so presumably you'll have the ability to use the EF 1.4x III with both the OVF and the LCD display (Live View). I'm sorely tempted to buy a 6D II just to be able to use this Extender on the camera all the time since I tend to shoot at higher magnifications with this lens. You can certainly use extenders with any camera, it's just that most cameras were not designed to allow Autofocus when the aperture is at a certain size. Adding an Extender drops the aperture below that threshold - although some cameras now allow for AF with the EF 1.4x III. I believe that the DPAF sensor made it possible by allowing the sensor to determine more about the focus of the subject through the lens, speeding up the focus acquisition and target lock. One thing I'll say though, that isn't really covered by the images available or the reviews, is that even if you're using a non-DPAF camera, the results from a Full Frame cameras seem more impressive looking. The difference is subtle, but I feel that there's something richer from the cameras using this lens on a Full Frame rather than an APS-C (cropped image-circle) sensor. For ease of use and speed, I'm now carrying the EF 100-400mmL II lens + EF 1.4x III extender on my crop sensor EOSM6. But on my EOS 6D DSLR, I prefer the results produced without the Extenders where necessary. I just think that this lens captures really nice images unaided on a FF DSLR. If you really want to increase the Bokeh, then you have to look at a larger, heavier and more expensive lens. But I've been quite happy with what I can get from this one. The bokeh is very defined and in some cases incredibly smooth. For it's price, I feel the EF 100-400mmL II lens is extremely good value. EOS 6D - Uncropped at 400mm + EF 2x III Extender via Live View (which is slow on this older model camera). I really like this lens but it's nice to know that you can add a little to the reach of the lens in the form of an extender. For astro-shots of the moon and very distant subjects I'll use the EF 2x III Extender. For wildlife and closer subjects, the raw lens is best for performance although adding the 1.4x III Extender gives me extra reach without any noticeable loss of detail from image degradation. I think one of the first things people do when they buy a camera lens with a Loooooong zoom is to take pictures of very distant objects to validate their purchase - But shooting subjects over longer distances means more thermal fluctuations and air turbulence. Shooting over dry land with longer distances in warmer weather is the worst... although you can get some great effects playing with the distortions in your shots. But those distortions alone will strip the subject of details (eg hairs on a persons arm at 700m) which would otherwise be visible in better air-conditions or shooting closer to the subject. Hosted photo: posted by nero_design in ./showthread.php?p=18565603&i=i256258363 forum: Canon EF and EF-S Lenses I read some accounts (here!) where people were saying that "blowing up your image in Photoshop by 200% was better than using an Extender". Those comments related to using earlier Extenders with the earlier Mk 1 version of this lens. The first thing I did when I bought the Mk III extenders was to compare them with the same subject at 200% crop without the extenders compared to a non-cropped shot with the extenders. I was pleased to see that more detail was captured by the use of the extenders than without. You can see the results of one of those tests above and below. I felt that there was considerable image improvement on the shot captured using the EF 2x III converter compared with the detail captured by the unaided lens at 400mm. Hosted photo: posted by nero_design in ./showthread.php?p=18565603&i=i59475200 forum: Canon EF and EF-S Lenses Cool! What apertures did you use in the 2X III comparisons? Canon R5, Canon 90D, assorted Canon lenses, Sony RX10 IV
LOG IN TO REPLY |
 | x 1600 |
| y 1600 |
| Log in Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting! |
| ||
| Latest registered member is Albertm1010 540 guests, 193 members online Simultaneous users record so far is 15144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018 | |||
