Teleconverter ...expectations too high??

I have a 70-200 2.8 IS II. I use it on a 6D and it is a fantastic lens, very sharp..
I recently bought a 1.4 mk3 teleconverter to give me a bit more reach but I am really disappointed with the results so far.I thought the results would be good with this lens. Took a couple of bird shots today and the results looked soft and out of focus ..shots were in good light with a fast enough shutter speed and IS was on..
I did micro adjustment on the lens with 1.4x fitted and ended up +3.. Would this small adjustment make that much difference ?? Am I expecting too much from a teleconverter by viewing at 100% on my screen??

280mm for birds can leave you pretty far away...unless you're using a blind, or getting close...are your shots of the birds still just tiny parts of the image, and you are viewing them at high magnification expecting them to look great?

seeing an example of what you're getting will always help

The focus mechanism is slower with the converter attached. It wont be real fast compare to the real telephoto lens. The 6D isnt that fast either. I did ok at an airshow with the convert attached.

hdt4916 wrote in post #17660358
The focus mechanism is slower with the converter attached. It wont be real fast compare to the real telephoto lens. The 6D isnt that fast either. I did ok at an airshow with the convert attached.

I guess, like the OP said, it comes down to expectations. I use a 70-200 f/4 IS USM with a Kenko 1.4x DGX on my 6D. I don't notice a degradation in IQ or focus speed. I don't do stuff like BIF, either. But for dogs and grandkids at the park, it does just fine.

DreDaze wrote in post #17660350
280mm for birds can leave you pretty far away...unless you're using a blind, or getting close...are your shots of the birds still just tiny parts of the image, and you are viewing them at high magnification expecting them to look great?

seeing an example of what you're getting will always help

The shots I took yesterday were of a pigeon sat on a electric cable about 10 metres away, I took about 10 shots and not one was sharp...The trouble is there was nothing in the foreground or background to check where the point of focus fell.. I micro sjusted my lens last night and will try it again today and post some samples..

don1163 wrote in post #17660242
Am I expecting too much from a teleconverter by viewing at 100% on my screen??

probably... I frequently use the 1.4x TC II with the 70-200mm IS I, and barely notice any issue with change in IQ, but can see a wee bit slower to focus (shooting boys soccer mostly)
Next step is a 300mm F/2.8 IS II which is a bit more budget...

I've never been impressed with my Canon 1.4X II on either my 40D or my 6D using the Canon 70-200 f/4 L IS USM.
Maybe I was expecting too much but to me, the IQ seems to fall off using the extender. I don't use it any longer.

I set up a proper test today to calibrate my 70-200 and 1.4x combination..
It required +11 adjustment to get it the same as manually focusing using live view.. This seems a lot to me..
Going to test it on some real life shots this afternoon..

Perhaps start in single shot autofocus and single shot drive, just to make sure it's the lense or you. You're shooting at 280mm now, so that means your shooting technique has to be right.

Without seeing the results its impossible for us to know if its your expectations or an equipment or technique failure of some sort.

I used my 1.4 Mark 1 on my 100 to 400 mm dust pump.

Honestly I never want to use it again......... every picture is fuzzy

gonzogolf wrote in post #17660783
Without seeing the results its impossible for us to know if its your expectations or an equipment or technique failure of some sort.

+1. The 70-200 + 1.4iii hardly degrades at all.

Heck, I have plenty of shots with the 2xiii that are usable. That extender takes a significant hit on IQ.

farmer1957 wrote in post #17660803
I used my 1.4 Mark 1 on my 100 to 400 mm dust pump.

Honestly I never want to use it again......... every picture is fuzzy

Is that the fault of the 1.4x Mk 1, or the lens? Your post prompted me to take my new (to me) Kenko 1.4x DGX and 100-400L out in the yard. These are 100% crops: 6D, 100-400L, Kenko 1.4x DGX, f/8, 1/500, ISO 400. They are both hand-held, wide-open, and manually focused. I am happy with this level of performance. Is this good, or are my standards lower than most folks'?

don1163 wrote in post #17660769
I set up a proper test today to calibrate my 70-200 and 1.4x combination..
It required +11 adjustment to get it the same as manually focusing using live view.. This seems a lot to me..
Going to test it on some real life shots this afternoon..

Does the lens need AFMA without the TC?

I thought the lens was fine before I got the teleconverter...I had really sharp detailed shots with it..
I checked it when I adjusted the lens/teleconverter combination today and the lens on its own looked better at +5 ...
My wife is working tomorrow so I will have the house to myself and more time....what I intend to do is print a decent test chart and set everything up level and square and check things again..I didn't have much space to do things today and I was getting moaned at for being in the way !!!