Thinking of a 1.4.x Tele Extender for Sports??...

I had a chance yesterday to use a friends Canon EF 1.4x Tele Extender at a ball game yesterday and thought I'd post some shots just to show what the difference is like for anyone else considering adding one. Note: I am using 40D and the 70-200 f2.8L lens. I was a bit concerned about the loss in stop and the IQ difference but generally these were OK. See what you think.

1. Here is a FULL FRAME image shot WITHOUT the 1.4 x TC from a point down the RF line. I am about 30 feet behind first base and baselines are 80ft (Bantam).

HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'text/html' | Byte size: ZERO

HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'text/html' | Byte size: ZERO

HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'text/html' | Byte size: ZERO

If you have the light its $300 well spent

Chris,

I agree with Matt. The Canon 1.4 rarely impacts AF or IQ negatively, and providing you can live with losing one stop of aperture, it's a great way to extend any top quality lens.

Dennis

I agree - the light is the issue. I'm hoping to test mine more fully with the 120-300 this saturday at a 10 am game all-star game. I have been sort of out of commission due to a video card blowing on my computer - causing the blue screen of death. But now I am back up and raring to go.

Pat

pigtailpat wrote in post #5792606
I agree - the light is the issue. I'm hoping to test mine more fully with the 120-300 this saturday at a 10 am game all-star game. I have been sort of out of commission due to a video card blowing on my computer - causing the blue screen of death. But now I am back up and raring to go.

Pat

Pat, I have shot thousands of frames with a Canon 1.4 MkII and the 120-300 with good results. I'm anxious to hear your experience because although I have been happy with the results, I still think my 70-200 f2.8 produces nicer images than the Sigma with or without the TC. It's nothing I can really nail down but I just like the Canon produces images better. Wish I could have bout Tophers 300.

I use my 1.4X TC a ton with my 300/4L IS and if the lens is losing anything more than the one stop, I haven't noticed. Even the AF is still very quick.

I have not used the TC much with my 70-200/2.8L IS. Generally when I know I'm going to need 300mm, I already have the 300/4 mounted. I may have to give the 1.4X TC some work on the 70-200 just to see how I like it.

namasste wrote in post #5792746
Pat, I have shot thousands of frames with a Canon 1.4 MkII and the 120-300 with good results. I'm anxious to hear your experience because although I have been happy with the results, I still think my 70-200 f2.8 produces nicer images than the Sigma with or without the TC. It's nothing I can really nail down but I just like the Canon produces images better. Wish I could have bout Tophers 300.

I find the TC does soften the image just a wee bit on the 70-200 but using it on the 300, I can't see any drop in IQ. I love it.

I really think it's worth the investment.

As for the 1.4, I find it barely effects IQ, or AF for that matter. The 2.0 is a different story, but the 1.4 is just great if you need a little extra reach and you only have a limited focal range.

Its funny but at the start of game I played around a bit with it on and with it off and could notice a definite decrease in IQ with it on when I looked at the LCD to compare images. However when I compared the same images on computer the IQ difference was negligible. Based on my results last night, I will likely add this to my kit soon! Thanks for the input so far folks!
Chris

You got me in!

When you posted "full frame" captures I was thinking you had a full frame sensor camera! I have the 40d and have been thinking how a 1.4 extender would go on it. thanks for the thread, Now just need to get one nice and cheap.

I recently picked up the kenko 1.4x, and have been using it with my 70-200 f/4 (non IS).

I am very happy with it.

Grabbed the Kenko 1.4 for half the price of the Canon 1.4

Been used for shooting high school/minor league baseball, saw no real impact. Love it!

I have been using a sigma 1.4 and have liked it so far.

I have the 70-200 f/2.8 L and Canon TC 2X used it twice now for rugby and so far pleased with the results, but on both occasions it was a nice sunny day, can't see you having any problems with the TC1.4

namasste wrote in post #5792746
Pat, I have shot thousands of frames with a Canon 1.4 MkII and the 120-300 with good results. I'm anxious to hear your experience because although I have been happy with the results, I still think my 70-200 f2.8 produces nicer images than the Sigma with or without the TC. It's nothing I can really nail down but I just like the Canon produces images better. Wish I could have bout Tophers 300.

Sorry Scott....thats on its way to the East Coast now, Jim