5D Mark III + 100-400L + Kenko 1.4X DGX Autofocus?

Hi, I have recently become interested in photographing raptors in flight. I upgraded to a 5D III from the 5D II and love the autofocus. I have found a place with a lot of raptor action but just don't have sufficient reach. I shoot with a 100-400L @400mm.

Has anyone tried the Kenko 1.4x 300 DGX extender with the 5D III + 100-400L? Can it be used for birds in flight? I keep reading in forums that the extender can focus with this lens and body combination, but I am unable to tell if it is responsive enough to be used for BIF.

danwanfur wrote in post #15090716
Has anyone tried the Kenko 1.4x 300 DGX extender with the 5D III + 100-400L? Can it be used for birds in flight? I keep reading in forums that the extender can focus with this lens and body combination, but I am unable to tell if it is responsive enough to be used for BIF.

Well, there are a lot of people who say that this combination works perfectly. However, they disappear when asked to post BiF images.

I've tried the 100-400 with Sigma, Canon and Kenko (not 300 DGX) TCs (with taped pins where needed). I've used various of those combinations on a 20D, 40D, 50D and 7D. Not one of them has AF that would be usable for BiFs. Most of them had AF that just plain didn't work much of the time.

If a 100-400 with a 1.4x TC was a combination that gave good results then I reckon you'd read about a lot more people using that combination.

Artie Morris of "Birds As Art" claims that the Kenko 1.4 TC will work with the Canon EF 800mm f.5.6 lens but I have not heard of or seen any photos from the 5D III and 100-400 combo. I have tried getting decent AF from the 100-400 with various bodies and various TC combos without anything that resembles decent AF or image quality. The AF would hunt constantly and when it didi lock on to a subject it was usually not in good focus.

Larry Weinman wrote in post #15093927
Artie Morris of "Birds As Art" claims that the Kenko 1.4 TC will work with the Canon EF 800mm f.5.6 lens but I have not heard of or seen any photos from the 5D III and 100-400 combo. I have tried getting decent AF from the 100-400 with various bodies and various TC combos without anything that resembles decent AF or image quality. The AF would hunt constantly and when it didi lock on to a subject it was usually not in good focus.

hollis_f wrote in post #15093324
Well, there are a lot of people who say that this combination works perfectly. However, they disappear when asked to post BiF images posted.

I've tried the 100-400 with Sigma, Canon and Kenko (not 300 DGX) TCs (with taped pins where needed). I've used various of those combinations on a 20D, 40D, 50D and 7D. Not one of them has AF that would be usable for BiFs. Most of them had AF that just plain didn't work much of the time.

If a 100-400 with a 1.4x TC was a combination that gave good results then I reckon you'd read about a lot more people using that combination.

Thanks for the comments. I asked the same question on FM and some reported success with this combination for fast-moving subjects, though there were no BIF images posted. I think I'm going to buy a non-reporting teleconverter and try my luck:
http://www.fredmiranda​.com/forum/topic/11553​83
I actually never thought I'd consider using a teleconverter again with the 100-400mm after my failed attempts to get a 1.4x ii (with taped pins) to work with this lens on a 5D II. It autofocused in good light but very slowly - for my purpose it was useless. But reading Art Morris's successful attempts at using the Kenko teleconverter with the supertelephoto lenses at f/8 on the 1DX has prompted me to reconsider this option.

I have an older Kenko 1.5 non-reporting extender and have tried it on my 400mm f/5.6L lens with a 7D...no way this combo could be used on bif's....the lens hunts too much even in good light. I can try it using my 1D4 but I'm guessing I'll get the same results.

I have to agree with what Frank has posted here and what Tony (Imagemaster on FM) have said...you won't be happy with any TC on the 100-400mm or even a 400mm prime.

If you do try your combo out it would be interesting to hear (and see) the results.

My Kenko works on my 400 for several situations well. Not saying I keep it on there all the time but there is definitely no issue using it for static subjects, and on a sunny day I feel pretty confident for BIF as well. To each their own.

To you Frank....I don't need to post images for your pleasure. No one is "disappearing" when asked for images, I just don't have anything to prove to you. If you want to continue bashing people who may think of trying this combo and tell them it won't work...that's up to you. What's funny is before you have posted in several threads that it "wasn't possible" for the combo to AF. Now it seems you've changed your stance to "it does but doesn't work". Which is it? And what I would really like to know is....have you used the combo which I refer to? Canon T3i, 400 5.6L, and Kenko 300 DGX 1.4. If not, then I don't see why you continue to tell everyone it won't work if you don't know.

The results that are obtained with this lens in combination with a 1.4TC seem to be variable to say the least.All I can do is add my experience with various bodies.
All with a Kenko Pro 1.4 DGX and the pins taped.
Canon 40d -would AF but hunted badly
Canon 5D-AF quite happily in reasonable light
Canon 7D-no AF
Canon 5Dmk2-No AF
Result-sold the TC.
All you can do is try it and see,it seems to work in some cases and not others.

mileslong24 wrote in post #15098721
What's funny is before you have posted in several threads that it "wasn't possible" for the combo to AF. Now it seems you've changed your stance to "it does but doesn't work". Which is it? .

Have I? Perhaps you can link to these threads where I've said AF was not possible under any circumstances. What I've always said is that it doesn't work, unless your definition of work is "tries to do what it's supposed to do, sometimes succeeding, albeit painfully slowly, but often just giving up totally." And I've normally only posted that in response to those who say it works perfectly.

This is no way related to the OP question but I said I have never tried my 400mm f/5.6L + a Canon 1.4III extender on my Mark IV and just "assumed" I would get the same results as I did with my 40D and 7D using the lens/extender combo....I was wrong.

The focus was quite fast and I think it would be fast enough for bif's in truth. I just did a test in my backyard using the 1D4 + 400mm + 1.4III extender and focused on some bushes in the back of my property then readjusted the focus on a dead tree closer to me and took 2 photo's....it focused fast.

hollis_f wrote in post #15098852
Have I? Perhaps you can link to these threads where I've said AF was not possible under any circumstances. What I've always said is that it doesn't work, unless your definition of work is "tries to do what it's supposed to do, sometimes succeeding, albeit painfully slowly, but often just giving up totally." And I've normally only posted that in response to those who say it works perfectly.

https://photography-on-the.net …/showthread.php​?t=1213132

When I search your username it only goes back 10 pages so I can't show you the numerous other threads. Notice 2 posts after you said it doesn't "work" for BIF someone posts a decent example. I won't argue any further. Bottom line is there is no point in debating someone who is telling you something doesn't work that you have used and know for certain does. It's obvious that you will never admit that it's usable.

mileslong24 wrote in post #15100507
https://photography-on-the.net …/showthread.php​?t=1213132

When I search your username it only goes back 10 pages so I can't show you the numerous other threads. Notice 2 posts after you said it doesn't "work" for BIF someone posts a decent example. I won't argue any further. Bottom line is there is no point in debating someone who is telling you something doesn't work that you have used and know for certain does. It's obvious that you will never admit that it's usable.

If this combination really worked there would be many examples on various forums not an occasional fluke. When someone asks if a combination works I think it only reasonable that the person means works reliably not occasionally.

Duane N wrote in post #15097739
I have an older Kenko 1.5 non-reporting extender and have tried it on my 400mm f/5.6L lens with a 7D...no way this combo could be used on bif's....the lens hunts too much even in good light. I can try it using my 1D4 but I'm guessing I'll get the same results.

I have to agree with what Frank has posted here and what Tony (Imagemaster on FM) have said...you won't be happy with any TC on the 100-400mm or even a 400mm prime.

If you do try your combo out it would be interesting to hear (and see) the results.

I get good results with the 1D4, 400 f/5.6L and the Canon 1.4 II converter.

The Fishing Osprey photos I recently posted were taken with that combo and I never lost focus. Focus was very fast and there wasn't any hunting issues at all. I was very pleased with it, even against backgrounds it did very well. The only drawback is you only have center point focus. So composing by choosing outer points isn't an option.

I'd highly recommend this combo to anyone who wants reach, fast focus and doesn't have it in their budget quite yet to get the 500 f/4L or longer lenses

There's the Osprey diving shots if you want to see how the combo performs with birds in flight and action shots.
https://photography-on-the.net …/showthread.php​?t=1235752

I'll post a few samples in here to show a variety using this lens, camera and extender combo. All of these shots were taken at the same shutter speed (1/1250), varied distance to target.

Here's one of several shots in that thread:

I just saw this thread. Obviously, at f/8 one needs a bit of light, but I have taken a number of pretty good in-flight shots with the 400 f/5.6 + 1.4x Kenko TC. Now there will always be some loss of IQ I think when using an extender, so I prefer to use both my 300 and 400 without one, but when I use one on the 400mm I find AF is quick and accurate. I even managed a few half decent shots of Barn Swallows and that is saying something.

Anyway, as somebody complained that nobody ever posts in-flight shots made with that combination, I thought I would post a few.

Northern Lapwing

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/gif' | Redirected to error image by FLICKR

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/gif' | Redirected to error image by FLICKR

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/gif' | Redirected to error image by FLICKR

Thanks a lot!
As an update, I ended up buying the Kenko 1.4X Pro 300 extender. It works very well with my 100-400mm to give me a 560mm f/8 lens. I plan to go out in a week or two to take BIF photos (busy now). But I've tried out the autofocus and it should be responsive enough for the task. Also all 41 cross-type autofocus points work!

Levina de Ruijter wrote in post #15143006
I just saw this thread. Obviously, at f/8 one needs a bit of light, but I have taken a number of pretty good in-flight shots with the 400 f/5.6 + 1.4x Kenko TC. Now there will always be some loss of IQ I think when using an extender, so I prefer to use both my 300 and 400 without one, but when I use one on the 400mm I find AF is quick and accurate. I even managed a few half decent shots of Barn Swallows and that is saying something.

Anyway, as somebody complained that nobody ever posts in-flight shots made with that combination, I thought I would post a few.