There is a Canon 1.4 Teleconverter for L lenses only!!?

I searched and found no info on this site.

http://www.cameraworld​.com/product/541163036​.htm

I wasn't aware until today that there was an "L" only teleconverter. Price is nearly double. You lose one stop, but that is the same as the standard unit. What gives? I've done Google searches and all and can't find what makes this better, or worth the extra $$. Even searching the Canon site has resulted in nothing, as I couldn't find it there. Anyone have info on these? I can't find a 2.0, as I was hoping if this is so much better, maybe the 2.0 would actually be usable. Since I am in the market for a teleconverter, this is important info for me. Thanks in advance.

hahaha, what a rip off this is the same as the one and only 1.4tc canon makes. charging $400+ for it, they should be shot for even posting that on line...

Eh?

They're "L" but not marked as such. The lenses they work with are mostly L anyway (if not all - too lazy to look). The lens has to be 135mm in focal length or longer, with noted exceptions like the 70-200mm zooms. The newer versions of the TC (e.g. EF Extender 1.4x II) maintains weathersealing and has improved optics over the original version.

That price is insane. It's just a plain ol' 1.4x.

blonde wrote in post #2179878
hahaha, what a rip off this is the same as the one and only 1.4tc canon makes. charging $400+ for it, they should be shot for even posting that on line...

Thanks, I've seen it on a couple of sites, including Ritz Camera. I have also seen on signature here with the "Canon Teleconverter II L" The picture in the ad looks like it is larger and heavier. I think it says seven ounces, I will search and compare to see if they list both at the same weight.

Same manufacturer number (6845A004) as this one http://www.bhphotovide​o.com …+1.4x&image.x=4​&image.y=4

One more reason to stick with reputable retailers like B&H...

runninmann wrote in post #2179893
Same manufacturer number (6845A004) as this one http://www.bhphotovide​o.com …+1.4x&image.x=4​&image.y=4

Sure looks like it. I was just researching there while you were posting! It sames .48 pounds, about the same as the seven ounces, and 7.8 ounces I have seen at the other sites. The other sites actually say they ONLY work with "L" lenses. This is really a ripoff! I bet it is even higher than the MSRP. Can you imagine the anger someone would have if they bought this? You guys and gals are wonderful here with all your help and assistance.

imageswest wrote in post #2179922
One more reason to stick with reputable retailers like B&H...

There were several sites, not fly by night operations that had this listed, such as Ritz. Ritz is reputable, but EXPENSIVE. I have a Ritz three miles away, and when I bought my 30D and lenses THIS week, they all came from BHphoto. Ritz is kind of a joke when they have "price guarantee' written all over, but it is misleading and there is no price matching at all there. Heck, maybe I will just go out and buy (order) a 400mm. Damn, if I do that, I would bet anything I would still want the 1.4 extender to get just a tad more! If my knowledge base equaled by checking account base, I would be a pro!

Ritz is not reputable or knowledgeable by any means, they are just big. EVERY single time i have been to Ritz, i am just shocked at their lack of knowledge..

blonde wrote in post #2179955
Ritz is not reputable or knowledgeable by any means, they are just big. EVERY single time i have been to Ritz, i am just shocked at their lack of knowledge..

...and they stock a lot of crap.

Just out of interest, what happens if you use this on say, a nifty 50. Will it simply not communicate with the body - so no AF and no control over aperture - so you wouldn't be able to take pictures?

red hot sheep wrote in post #2181278
Just out of interest, what happens if you use this on say, a nifty 50. Will it simply not communicate with the body - so no AF and no control over aperture - so you wouldn't be able to take pictures?

You wouldn't be able to attach it in the first place. While there's no Canon "L" teleconverter per se, the 1.4X TC only fits certain Canon lenses which have recessed rear elements. These tend to be the L supertele's. So they are right that the TC is for L lenses only.

My Kenko 1.5X generic TC without a protruding front element like the Canon TC fits perfectly on the 50 f/1.8. It behaves exactly as you'd expect - normally, with the 1.5X FL multiplier (75mm), one stop loss (f/2.5).

red hot sheep wrote in post #2181278
Just out of interest, what happens if you use this on say, a nifty 50. Will it simply not communicate with the body - so no AF and no control over aperture - so you wouldn't be able to take pictures?

It just wouldn't fit. The reason they specify longer focal length lenses is because the extenders protrude into the lens! If the rear element isn't as equally recessed, you'll have problems. Notice the black tube sticking out of the top:

HTTP response: 403 | MIME changed to 'text/html'

Thanks for the replies! Makes sense.

Third-party TCs may or may not have a similar configuration, allowing their use on any lens. I have no experience with these, however.

Quite honestly, I don't see the draw in putting a TC on a 16mm anyway...