400 2.8 shooters--Step Inside

For those of you sports shooters who use the Canon EF 400mm f/2.8 lens, three questions:

1. Do you ever use the 1.4 TC (or the 2.0) with the 400?

2. When do you use it [THE 400 PLUS THE TC] (football, soccer, baseball from the bleachers, other) ?

3. What do you think of the results when you use the TC?

Feel free to post some 400 + TC images if you have them handy.

Since you edited your post that changes the answers some.

1. Yes, the 400 takes the 1.4 TC very well.
2. I mainly use the 400 and 1.4 for shooting baseball and football. For baseball, it's outfield action. For football I like to shoot from the end zones with the action coming towards me, when the play is at the other end of the field I put the 1.4 on.
3. Results with 1.4 are very good if you have enough light to lose the stop.

I'll have to dig up some shots with the 1.4.

Zivnuska wrote in post #8989328
For those of you sports shooters who use the Canon EF 400mm f/2.8 lens, three questions:

1. Do you ever use the 1.4 TC (or the 2.0) with the 400?

Yes, the 1.4x though not the 2.0 as I sold it to help acquire said 400.

I use it for motorsports or cricket, or occasionally (very) if i'm at a rugby or football ground where we're all sat a long way back from the touchline and there's good light.

I like the results, i've always been happy using the TC and the results have sold well too...for me thats what matters. Less cropping etc.

1 - 400+1.4 gets used a lot, 400+2 gets used twice a year as it is soft but we need the reach.
2 - 400+1.4 has been used for hockey, rowing, baseball, football (eup + usa), motorsports
3 - The 1.4 is much better and have no issues using it, the 2 is soft though

1 - Yes with 1.4 no with 2. I don't own the 2, read way too many negatives about it to ever buy one.
2 - Maybe 1% of the sports photos are with it. Most of my use with it is nature stuff - deer, birds, etc. For sports I have found that by using it I loose as many shots as I gain because the closer action shots become too close.
3 - It works very well. I think it does impact the image quality but only very slightly. I have no problem using it when needed.

Thanks guys. Sledhed, I apologize for not being clear initially and appreciate the information. I hope we can see some shots with the TC.

(somebody lost control of his checkbook after the latest volleyball pics and Santa came early)

IMHO - Using the current IS version if you micro adjust the extenders - IMHO the results will be very similar to just the lens.

1. I sometimes use the 1.4
2. Football
3. Images are very good, the only possible downside is that I get more DOF than I want at times.

Examples from last weekend.

An extra point from the far endzone.

Here's one with the 1.4 on the 400.

1. Do you ever use the 1.4 TC (or the 2.0) with the 400?
Yes, 1.4

2. When do you use it [THE 400 PLUS THE TC] (football, soccer, baseball from the bleachers, other) ?

Football mostly, some soccer, and tried it a lot with baseball this past season trying different and longer angles from the bleachers or trying to get tight. Most of the time it's not needed but comes in handy for any extra reach.

3. What do you think of the results when you use the TC?

1.4 is really good though heard, not actually shot with, the 2.0 can get a bit soft.

1. Do you ever use the 1.4 TC with the 400?
Used to, dont anymore, just bought the 600 so i dont need to use it.

2. When do you use it [THE 400 PLUS THE TC] (football, soccer, baseball from the bleachers, other) ?
AFL, Cricket, Motorsport (track only)

3. What do you think of the results when you use the TC?
I found it only worked great when it was a non contrasty sunny day early spring to middle of winter, come summer when the sun is higher i hated the results and therefore recently purchased the 600