Using a canon 1.4 or 2.0 teleconverter/extender with a 70-200 mm F4 USM L lens..

[dip_gohil]

Hi...looking for anyone who has used a canon x1.4 or 2.0 extender/teleconverter

on the 70-200 F4 USM L series lens...I am looking to couple it with the lens on

a Canon 400d body.

 

I know that attaching the teleconverter would take the fstop down to 5.6, and

using the x2.0 extender would remove auto focus, but what sort of image quality

are you guys getting?

 

is it remarkably different? Also, how does it feel when hand-held? does it add

a lot more weight? are you getting more blurries? Is it practicle when hand

held or do you guys just use a tripod only with your extender?

 

simply, is it worth getting one? I am asking as I am looking for a little more

reach when I go to kenya for safari in october, where the majority of my shots

will be either hand held or the camera is resting on a bean bag. I don't have

the budget to splash out on another lens ( indeed, i picked the 70-200mm F4

lens over the 70-300 mm with IS)

 

Guess i will have to crank up the ISO as I don't have IS on this lens.

 

 

Also, just a couple of quick dumb question about the extender...can

you 'disable' and 'enable' it or is it's magnification 'always on' ?

 

 

 

and...when removing lenses, can you leave it 'attached' to the lens, or do you

have to remove both lens and extender seperatley?

 

Thanks ! :)

[mark_chappell]

In a nutshell: Not too bad with the 1.4X. Not too good with the 2X.

[ken schwarz]

I agree with Mark. I tried both and went with the 1.4. Losing AF was too big a sacrifice, and image quality was not quite what I had hoped for with the 2x. Do you have the option to rent a fast telephoto for your safari?

[will_webster]

If money's tight, consider the Tamron SP TC or the Kenko equivalent. Some tests show that they are at least as good as the Canon units, particularly on a crop camera. I've used my Tamron SP 1.4x with the 70-200/4 and gotten surprisingly good results. To handhold at full zoom you should try to keep the shutter speed above 200 x 1.4 x 1.6 = 448 so you probably won't be doing this at dusk. The TC can't be disabled, but you can leave it on the lens and remove both together if you like (unlike the old Canon FD lenses with mechanical coupling)

[dip_gohil]

Mark..I am overbudget tot he tune of $2,000 already for this trip..Ive spent as much on photo gear as I ahve on the safari.

In the UK, it is actually a LOT cheaper to buy alens than it is to rent one, and I doubt nayone would let me take one to africa with me..so apart form the teleconverto, I won't buy anything else. im trawling forums to see if anyone has posted images of the 70-2000 F4 witht he teleconvertor.

 

Might even look into a non-canon convertor..would they be compaitble with non-L series lenses?

 

thanks :)

[mark_chappell]

<I>Might even look into a non-canon convertor..would they be compaitble with non-L

series lenses?</i><P>

 

Yes, some combinations will work. The non-Canon converters tend to not have front

elements that stick out, so they are more likely to fit a wider range of lenses. But I've little

experience here -- do this with extreme care to make sure there isn't a collision between

the front element of the converter and the rear element of the lens. Keep in mind tha just

because it's an L lens doesn't mean the Canon extender will fit: generally they work only

on telephotos (I believe they were designed for the Big White Lenses, hence their white

color). And, yes, you can remove the lens+converter combination without problems.

[JDMvW]

On the 400D, your lens alone is equivalent to 320mm on a film body. Years ago in East Africa, I had pretty decent luck with a 70-210 zoom on a film body, and rarely used the 2X extender I had brought along.

 

For considerably less than the cost of a Canon extender, you could buy an old manual 400mm lens and an appropriate adapter. It is manual focus, of course. But if you've spent money on an L lens, you're not a cheap b*st*d like some of us ;). Of course, with the overextended budget you might reconsider. I actually quite like Soligor f/6.3 400m on my EOS cameras. It's bright, snaps in and out of focus, and not too heavy.

 

Given the dim viewfinder problem,however, if money were only a modest concern (you don't go to Africa every day, eh?), I'd choose the Canon (so you don't do too much harm to that L quality you paid for) 1.4X, keep my autofocus, etc. Then do a lot of straight, un-extended shooting with that sharp L lens. Shoot raw, of course; and keep the ISO moderate. You can always crop later. When you need it, pop on the extender out of the pocket of the safari jacket you will buy in Nairobi.<div></div>

[JDMvW]

If you haven't noticed it already, you might be interested in another topic on this very forum:

http://www.photo.net/bboard/forum?topic_id=1545

[robin_sibson1]

I did some tests of my new 70~200/4L IS (note: this all refers to the IS version; results with the non-IS version that you have may be different) on the Extender 1.4x II and Extender 2x II. I was interested in performance at the centre of the image, so I used my 20D rather than my 5D to provide as close a pixel spacing as possible. My conclusion was that with the lens set at 200mm and maximum aperture, the 1.4x revealed useful additional detail compared to the lens on its own, but the 2x revealed little if any additional detail beyond that revealed by the 1.4x. I am aware that I may be doing the 2x a slight injustice because it is difficult to focus manually, but of course that is not just a limitation under test conditions unless a 1-series camera is used instead.

 

I have subsequently used the 1.4x with the 70~200 on my 5D in normal use, and it works extremely well, with no problem over sharpness and no issues with general image quality that a small tweak in post-processing can't handle. Physically, handling is fine.

 

No teleconverter that I am aware of allows you to change magnification in the way that you are thinking of (as can be done, for example, with viewfinder magnification through the Angle Finder C). You just have to choose whether or not to have the TC in place.

 

The mechanical linkages on FD lenses required you to build outwards from the camera, otherwise there could be problems. With EOS/EF equipment the advice is to build backwards from the lens. I have never heard of anyone actually coming to grief from doing it the other way round, and the reason for the advice probably is that if you have an Extender but no lens on the camera, and release the shutter, then lock-up or an error condition will result, and you have to switch the camera off and on again, or possibly even remove the main battery, to clear the error condition.

[yakim_peled1]

For the trip my suggestion is to rent the 100-400 IS. Adding a 1.4X TC to it might also be a good idea.

 

Happy shooting,

Yakim.

[mark from thailand]

Here are 2 test photos I took. One at 200mm @ f/5.6 & one at 200x1.4 @f/5.6.

 

As this is a safari I am assuming you'll be at 200mm most of the time!

 

The one with the 1.4 is clearly softer at the edges but has worked well for me on safaris.

Actually, I usually use it on the 300 f/4 IS & have never really noticed the 1.4x making it

significantly softer in 'real' use (ie not pixel peeping.<div></div>

[jon_austin]

I used this combination for a couple of years before upgrading to the 70-200/2.8 IS. I could never tell the difference between the images taken with the 70-200/4, with the Canon 1.4x extender and without, unless I peeped into the corners at 100%, which I was never wont to do. I'm just as happy with it on the new zoom, as well.

[paul_rawlins]

Dip

 

Don't under rate the 400D with the excellent 70-200 f4 lens. This combination with the 1.6x factor gives you a pretty good reach without having to use an extender and it is light and robust enough to carry around with you all day. I use the same set up and the ability to crop well framed photos gives you additional reach without spending more money. Its easy to buy kit thinking it will solve all your problems when often you have just what you need already. I'd be surprised if the 1.4TC got you more than a handful of shots you otherwise couldn't have achieved with what you have. Is it worth adding to the debt for just a couple of photos?

[keith_lubow]

I used the 70-200 f/4 and 1.4x TC combo pretty frequently earlier this year when I was borrowing my friend's lens. I used it for baseball and soccer.

 

It is still acceptable image quality, but you can definitely notice a loss of sharpness. Ideally I would have been using the 300mm f/4, but the zoom and TC did the job nonetheless.

 

So, in short, its not ideal, but will work just fine.

 

Not sure about the 2x. I imagine it is noticeably worse than the 1.4x.

 

Keith

[keith_lubow]

Mark, to be able to compare the two, they would need to be framed the same way.

 

Keith