Teleconverters 1.4x advice for new Canon cameras: 6D

Discussion in 'Canon EOS' started by h_._jm, Dec 13, 2012.

  1. Hello people;
    SO I took the plunge and ordered the Canon 6D and I am glad I did; even though haven't come yet!
    Now I want to get into some bird photography; nothing serious, just with my 70-200 F4 IS. I was planning initially to get the Kenko 1.4x as it had the best reviews out of any 3rd party TC
    the problem is; some 5d iii users have put many posts about that TC not working on their camera, though it works on older cameras just perfect. I suspect it might be the case with 6D
    the canon TC 1.4x iii is ridiculously pricey and i will NEVER buy it :)
    Any advice; used canon tc 1.4x ii is like 250-300 which is still pricey but manageable if it's my best bet; anyone tried a TC with 6D? please advice me. If I pay 300 or so I can always buy the 70-300 IS; and some third party TC will trick the camera and make it autofocus at aperture F8 so that would be a thought.
    I know dedicated high grade or high zoom prime is a thought; but I don't want to spend like on the 300 prime or 400 or 100-400 at this stage.
    happy shooting
     
  2. But I prefer NOT to buy another lens; just a TC. Canon or 3rd party? any thoughts esp on a new untested body 6D
     
  3. The Canon Extender 1.4× II has worked very well with the 70~200/4L IS on every EOS body on which I have used it, including FF bodies (but I have not actually used the 6D, although there is no reason to doubt compatibility). If you want to keep costs down, look for the original version, which is optically identical, and can be found s/h. You might still find a new II on the shelf somewhere, and it can certainly be found s/h.
     
  4. I have no idea with the 6D, but with the 7D and the 5D MkIII, the Canon 1.4X TC will slow down the AF, but not as bad as some (most?) third-party TCs. Your 70-200mm is not a Series II, which are optimized to work best with the Series III TCs. I use a Series II TC with my 70-200mm f/4L IS with only minimal slowing, so I'd advise finding a used EF 1.4X TC-II, unless you can try the Kenko with your camera and lens, or find a review from someone that's already taken the plunge. Lots of Kenko TCs work with lots of Canon bodies and lenses, but it's not universal and you can lose some functionality and speed of AF.
     
  5. Personally, I would think putting anything other than the Canon 1.4x between that camera and that lens would be doing severe injustice to both the camera and the lens.
    The Canon 1.4xIII extender can be had for under $400, if you a) shop around a bit and b) don't mind buying used or refurbished.
    For wildlife, 400mm is about the entry level focal length. Serious wildlife photographers go for the "big whites": 400 f/2.8, 500 f/4, 600 f/4 and 800 f/5.6.The 300 f/2.8 is also a credible option with the Canon extenders.
    If wildlife photography is what you really want to get into, I'd suggest forgetting about the extender, and getting the 100-400 to start off with, or - if you don't mind losing IS - the 400 f/5.6. If wildlife is just a casual or occasional subject, then the extender is a good start.
     
  6. I've used an older Sigma 1.4x converter on my 5D3 and it worked fine. I use it with a Sigma 150/2.8 macro, sometimes with a Kenko extension tube in the middle. The image quality is fine and everything functioned, even with the extension tube autofocus worked pretty well. That might be an option if the Kenko 1.4x has compatibility problems.
     
  7. Yeh thanks guys for suggestions; so far ex ii wins; I will look at the sigma too
     
  8. The Sigma 1.4x works with my 70-200 f/4 on my 7D (although I don't normally use it with this lens). I don't know why it wouldn't work on a 6D as well. I only have Kenko extension tubes for macro work, and they also work fine.
     
  9. I believe the older Canon 1.4x mark I is optically identical to the mark II. The difference is weather sealing. So you may go for the older 1.4x if you see it at a good price.
     
  10. Why not get yourself one of the 1.6x extenders instead? Like the 60D for example. Can't see the point in FF users buying the Mk3 1.4x extenders when a decent 1.6x DSLR costs little more.
     
  11. Personally, I would think putting anything other than the Canon 1.4x between that camera and that lens would be doing severe injustice to both the camera and the lens.​
    There's no basis for that, Larry - I own Canon Mk II, Sigma and (two) Kenko 1.4x TCs (actually, one of the Kenkos is 1.5x) and in IQ and AF terms there's literally nothing to choose between any of them.
     
  12. I used to own the Canon EF 70-200mm f/4L IS USM + Canon Extender EF 1.4X II. The minor image degradation is most noticeable at f/4 and the IQ improves at smaller apertures. You can read about the differences betweeen version I and II here:
    http://www.canon.com/camera-museum/tech/report/200109/report.html#t8
    You can get a used 1.4X II in excellent condition with the box and manual for $250 CAN. I would recommend that you consider the 1.4X II.
     
  13. I would not choose a 6D for BIF. If this is your primary use, I expect you'll be more satisfied w/ a 7D overall (better AF, plus a built in 1.6x TC - w/ zero optical degradation, and no AF handicap... ;-) ). I must assume you do much more than that if you found yourself desiring the FF 6D in the first place.
     
  14. I'm with Mr Robertson on this one. When I had a 5D I used a 40D essentially to shoot anything that did not have the good grace to either stay still or move slowly. The 40D focussed way better than the 5D plus it gave me extra 'reach' if needed from my 70-200 F4, the 'kit' 24-105 complimenting it nicely on the 5D. With the cost to performance ratio of modern entry level Canon SLRS being so good, I think an entry level crop plus FF body combo is a really excellent solution. As an aside, I went from the above bodies to just a 7D for reasons unrelated to this thread. I have used it with the 1:4 TC II on the 70-200 and this compact combo delivers results way beyond what I would have thought achievable for what was a relatively modest outlay; the TC II was new old stock and was priced pretty much as a used item thanks to the arrival of the TC III.
    00b7x0-508207584.jpg
     
  15. Picture caption should be without the TC 1:4 on the 40D. This is just to show 70-200 plus crop camera's ability to capture an image with a less than skilled operator - my son was 9 when he took the shot. I took a similar image with the same 70-200 plus 1:4 on the 5D. Similar framing but OOF and so deleted. Wish I kept it now. Sorry for mislabelling and over large image.
     
  16. The plane shot is with your 7D, James.
     
  17. Keith you are right. Sorry as now only a third of my caption was right. But the captured image does at least show how you can capture a
    moving target some way off using a crop body that could cost less than a good long lens. Oh my son would have been 10 too. So caption
    is quarter right.
     
  18. Heh!
    Not to worry, James - it still makes your point.
     
  19. Guys; I really appreciate the idea of 1.6x TC's by getting APS-c; first I had T3i and sold it for incovenience and lack of use; and bulk and also ISO wasn't happy with it.
    The thing is if Nikon's ff cameras switch to aps-c with a simple button; why would I buy a second camera for a feature that should have been in Canon's cameras and will realitstically probably be there in the next coming models...
    Better buy a 1.4x now and when that feature comes use it as further bonus, you know what I mean :)
     
  20. Nikon's ff cameras switch to aps-c with a simple button​
    They think of everything!
     
  21. The thing is if Nikon's ff cameras switch to aps-c with a simple button; why would I buy a second camera for a feature that should have been in Canon's cameras and will realitstically probably be there in the next coming models...​
    Nikon has had this in the last few generations of FF units it's released, and Canon has not seen fit to enable it's cameras with such a feature despite having launched three, four, five(?) full frame models in the interim.... Given that, I'd not expect to see an 'APS-C mode' in Canon's FF cameras in the short or even medium term.
    While having such a mode certainly has valid reasoning, especially as (I'd think) it could be implemented simply with modified FW, I have to wonder what the advantage would be. Increased FPS surely, but little else would be improved. You still couldn't mount EF-S lenses, and then you'd have to deal with reassigning AF points (of which there aren't an abundance in some units such as the 6D)... Even though it may be easier than cropping in post, the results would be, for all intents and purposes, identical.
     
  22. The thing is if Nikon's ff cameras switch to aps-c with a simple button; why would I buy a second camera for a feature that should have been in Canon's cameras and will realitstically probably be there in the next coming models...
    Better buy a 1.4x now and when that feature comes use it as further bonus, you know what I mean :)
    All the Nikon feature does is crop the images, you can do that yourself with your 6D images. Using a 1.6x extender like a 650D puts more pixels on your target compared to cropping your 6D images. It should be a no-brainer solution. Using a smaller crop camera instead of a 1.4x extender has quite a few advantages:
    • The AF speed is not affected by an extender
    • The image quality is not affected by the additional optics of an extender
    • You essentially end up with a FREE backup DSLR!
    • 1.6x is longer than 1.4x
    • You can keep the 6D next to you with a shorter lens for close-up opportunities
    Even the poorer high ISO performance of the crop bodies should not deter you because you will not be losing a stop of light with an extender so you can shoot at a lower ISO.
     
  23. I never knew the Nikon's just crop it! that's useless! thanks for ur points man
     

Share This Page