Anyone used the 70-200 + 1.4x TC for surfing?

[h_._jm]

<p>Hi peeps;</p>

<p>I was shooting nature photography in the beach and I was intrigued into surfers and decided to shoot them. At the time I had my 70-200 F4 IS on my Canon 5d (mark I). Given it's FF and 12.8 MP the pic I got needs much more ZOOM!</p>

<p>However, I was on one end of the beach shooting natural rocks, and was very far away from the surfers; so at least 2x magnification by just getting closer on my feet.</p>

<p>My question, is I want to get closer without buying a lens. I have a T3i, and I thought I would just buy the kenko 1.4x TC; and use the 70-200 on my T3i (given it's 18mp).</p>

<p>First I will show you the link of the photo here I took:<br>

<a href="

Secondly, if anyone used the 70-200 with 1.4X TC on an aps-c camera let me know please how it is? before I commit and buy the TC. Do you think I will get a lot more zoom in by getting closer to action + APS-C + 1.4X?</p>

<p>Thanks!</p>

[craigd]

<p>If you want a 1.4x TC, I recommend you buy Canon's rather than Kenko's. There is a definite difference in quality.</p>

<p>To estimate the difference in framing of 200mm + 1.4x on a 1.6x crop camera compared to the 200mm alone on a full-frame, let's run through the arithmetic: 200 × 1.4 × 1.6 = 448. So on your T3i you'll get a view comparable to what you'd see on your 5D with a 448mm lens. Plus, since the T3i has somewhat higher resolution, you'll have a bit more room to crop in. On the downside, you may find that there is some loss of detail due to the TC optics -- probably fairly minor, but since you want detail in a distant object, it may be a problem.</p>

<p>But I really think you want 600-800mm (effective) if you want to get fairly close framing around a surfer as far away as that one. Shift your zoom lens between 100mm and 200mm and you'll see what the effect is of doubling the focal length. 400mm would be tighter than 200mm to the same degree that 200mm is tighter than 100mm. It depends, of course, on how tight you want your framing to be, which only you can decide.</p>

[brian_wallace5]

<p>I've used this combination before and have always been quite pleased with the results as long as there is sufficient lighting. I also recommend stopping down to f6.7 or f8 with the TC attached.<br>

As far as Kenko vs. Canon - I own both and the difference is by and large negligible (it is there however). The Canon's have less chromatic aberration and the new Canon 1.4x III is supposed to much improved when it comes to CA (from a sharpness angle, the 1.4 I, 1.4 II, and 1.4 III are all pretty close). </p>

[craig_meddaugh]

<p>Should work well. As for the extender, the Tamron pro model is actually a bit better than the Canon 1.4x II on an APS-C sensor, at least with all of the lens I have. The 1.4x III is generally a bit better than the Tamron, but not on all of my lenses. I prefer the Canon extenders as they play nice with all of my lenses (Tamron has some incompatibility issues with some of my supertelephotos) but the Tamron has a place in my bag as it will mount on all of my lenses. </p>

<p>However, since you have a FF camera, the Canon extender is probably a better bet as the Tamron is a bit soft in the corners and introduces a bit more CA. However, if this is strictly for use on your APS-C body, the Kenko or Tamron pro models are both quite nice. </p>

[nwphotog]

<p><img src="http://www.godsworldphotography.org/images/surf2.JPG" alt="" /><br>

Looks like it works for surfin'!</p>

[derek_hofmann]

<p>Which Kenko 1.4x? There's the "Teleplus 1.4x DGX" which is 4 elements in 4 groups and costs $129, and the "Teleplus PRO 300 DGX AF 1.4x" which is 5 elements in 4 groups and costs $249.<br>

In comparison, the Canon 1.4x II is 5 elements in 4 groups (like the more costly Kenko above) and costs $319.<br>

The newer Canon 1.4x III is 7 elements in 3 groups and costs $469. It's a little <a href="http://www.the-digital-picture.com/reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=404&Camera=453&Sample=0&FLI=5&API=1&LensComp=404&CameraComp=453&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=7&APIComp=0">sharper</a> than the 1.4x II.</p>

[paul_b.1]

<p>To Robert L. : LOL :-)))</p>

[dcstep]

<p>Bonsai Pipeline with 7D, 70-200mm f/4L IS and EF 1.4x TC:</p>

<p><a title="Surfing "The Pipe"_MG_2886_DxO5D_raw by dcstep, on Flickr" href=" src="http://farm3.staticflickr.com/2790/4271171490_d8c44f0032_b.jpg" alt="Surfing "The Pipe"_MG_2886_DxO5D_raw" width="1024" height="683" /></a></p>

[h_._jm]

<p>Ohh that's a very nice image David<br>

Thanks to all and especially David; so it seems that to get close-up without cropping I really need a 400+ lens, and maybe adding a TC then.<br>

But if I can zoom up to David's photo and then crop; it should suffice.</p>

<p>Regards to all </p>

[edchambers]

<p>These were taken with an APS sensor 70-200 2.8 with a 1.7 teleconvertor:<br>

<a href="https://picasaweb.google.com/115485676830085257812/20111014SurfingOceanCityMD">https://picasaweb.google.com/115485676830085257812/20111014SurfingOceanCityMD</a></p>

[h_._jm]

<p>Thanks Ed! Now I've got a very informative idea of the 'reach' of the combo with this awesome set of pics :)</p>

[edchambers]

<p>Sweet !</p>

[William Michael]

<p>I asked <a href="00ZW6M">this specific question</a> a few weeks ago, the answers should be useful to you.<br>

For the extra few dollars, I believe it is worthwhile having the better IQ, across the whole kit, <em>including the 5D you own, and also the EF135F/2L</em>, if you still have that lens. <br>

Therefore I suggest you buy the Canon x1.4 Extender EF MkII (or MkIII) and not either Kenko or Tamron.<br>

<br>

WW</p>