EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS II USM Review WOW!

Great...so not only will I be adding the 7d mkii to the mix, but now i must have this extender...it never ends! Lol!

Lol well no lol, it is not mandatory to use the extender it multiple's the 400mm by 1.4 = 560mm. But I forgot I had it on and shot the Pine Marten at a some what close distance and didn't need it but it didn't heart me in IQ.

Nope! I don't want to hear that! It's a "must have"! Actually, when I knew i would be adding the 7dii in the near future, the extender would also be part of the "deal",lol! Probably not till late summer/early fall...the new lens put a dent in my bank account,but sooo worth it!

I'm getting greeat results with my much more affordable 1.4X version 2.0

Since I bought the 100-400 II and the 1.4X extender, I find that the extender pretty much lives on the lens when I'm shooting in my area. I find I just need the extra reach here. And I still crop! It could be different in other areas, though. It depends on how approachable the wildlife is where you are.

CyberDyneSystems wrote in post #17536621
I'm getting greeat results with my much more affordable 1.4X version 2.0

I understand there's not a massive difference in image quality between the v2 and v3 of the 1.4x (though I don't know how much better the v3 may work in terms of AF). There's more of a difference with the v3 for 2x apparently.

LisaBlue85 wrote in post #17536531
Great...so not only will I be adding the 7d mkii to the mix, but now i must have this extender...it never ends! Lol!

Yup, I'm in the same boat. I've got two out of the three and the third one is the cheapest so hopefully by early summer I'll have all three.

CyberDyneSystems wrote in post #17536621
I'm getting greeat results with my much more affordable 1.4X version 2.0

I am getting the same using my existing Kenko 1.4x TC. I am quite pleased with the results - - it's much better than I expected, after having been disappointed with that TC on the original 100-400L.

I like affordable!!! How much affordable?

Does anybody know what the differences are between the 1.4 versions II & III , besides price?

Optics, coatings and CA reduction for starters.

when I first got the 100-400L II I thought I had to have it, its kind of a gummy more kinda thing , reach is addictive thats for sure but I find I don't have it on much right now and Im not cropping a ton really so the 1.4III never gets its use right now. don't forget if you like to use anything more than spot with the four points expansion you will be out of luck. Of course Im not shooting small birds right now. Lisa I found a year old 1.4III for $300 it looks like it never left the box.

LisaBlue85 wrote in post #17536943
I like affordable!!! How much affordable?

The Canon 1.4x TC II can no longer be purchased new. The 1.4x TC III is $429 new.

When I purchased my Kenko Teleplus Pro 300DG 1.4x TC many years ago, most tests showed that it was almost identical to the Canon 1.4x TC II, and it was about $100 less expensive at that time and also worked with more Canon lenses. They have a new version labelled Kenko Teleplus Pro 300DGX 1.4x TC, which currently sells new for about $135.

The Kenko has worked very well for me over the years with my Canon 70-200 f/4 IS and 135L lenses, but I was very disappointed in the results with the original 100-400L during my initial tests, so I did not use the TC with that lens. As I mentioned a few posts back, I have been pleasantly surprised by the results with this TC on the new 100-400L II in combination with my 5D3. The performance has me once again considering upgrading my 7D to a 7D2 before our summer Yellowstone trip. The thought of having almost 900mm of "reach" for Yellowstone is very enticing, as you can never have too much reach in that park for the wildlife.

I just sold a Kenko Pro 300 for $100

I have the latest Kenko 1.4x..... I should sell it, as I have the Canon 1.4X III. I thought I'd use it more than I have but other than a few times, I've been able to get close enough so 400mm works well.

I continue to be impressed with the 100-400 ii. Others are able to get good action shots with the 400 f/5.6 but I could never get that lens to shine. I did much better with my 70-300L. I expected the 100-400ii to be better but am seeing results that make the 70-300L hmmmmm let me put it this way: I haven't had it mounted on my camera since I got the 100-400ii.