Tele Converters

[Papou]

About to bight the bullet and purchase a tele converter in the hope of more reach for my Birding and looking at a 2x converter butbefore i do i wanted to ask what the other than Canon Brands of converters are like?? from any here that may have tried or own one??...
Looking at the Canon 2x111 at present...
Cheers and all advice kindly appreciated.

[Film Street]

Tele converters can be very picky about which lenses they want to work with.
If you own a Canon lens get a Canon TC, the II or III whatever is relevant to the age of your lens.
Same goes for Sigma.
TC's are designed with the 2.8 zoom lenses in mind.
Always best to test if possible or be certain of a return policy.

[roastman]

I am happy with the Kenko 1.4 x (no lens compatibility issues), but you would be best to research how they work with your particular lens combination. Just Google your lens and the brand of tele convertor and you should find feedback on the combination. Hope you enjoy the new kit once you decide!

[Cris]

Hi
Unfortunately your wanting to place a converter onto a 100-400 will most likely end in disappointment, you will lose AF and you will find the images are soft as opposed to not using the converter. The converters are really designed to be used with big fast glass, i.e 400 2.8, 500 f4, 600 f4. 300 2.8, anything else in my experience will be a waste of time, as an example they are designed to take a 400 2.8 to 560 f4(1.4x) or 800 f8 (2x), this is where they shine, big glass with big apertures that can let the light in, try it on a 400 5.6 and with the 2x you will notice how dark the viewfinder becomes and not only losing AF, I can hardly focus as it is so dark. I tried both the canon converters and sold the 2x and kept the 1.4x for the day I finally get that big lens. I have also purchased a 7d which gives a little more reach and that so far has been a good investment. Just don't expect the same noise performance at higher iso that you get from the 5d 2. I think that there are some excellent older posts done by Richard Hall that are great reading and explain this in far more detail and also give an in depth insight into bird photography. Hope this helps.

[Xenedis]

I own both of the Canon TCs, as well as a 300/2.8L IS.

I generally only use my 2x TC on the 300/2.8. I have run it on my 180/3.5L Macro, but as a general rule, I'd only run a 2x TC on fast super-teles.

The 1.4x TC works well on many compatible Canon L lenses, but I tend to only use it on the above-mentioned lenses, mostly as I don't need it on the other compatible lenses I have. I have used a 1.4x TC on the 70-200/2.8L IS, and from memory it works well. I don't use that lens often, though.

[Bennymiata]

I have the 100-400L, and I use a Kenko 2X converter on it.
It will focus in good light, although it is slower than without it and the IQ is pretty good and far better than I thought it would be.

I have read some stuff that says the Kenko will focus with more lenses than the Canon TC's, and so far it focuses with virtually every lens I've tried it with (and I have 7 lenses) and it's far cheaper and I doubt there is much difference in the optical quality of either.

Save yourself some big bucks and go with the Kenko.

[Papou]

Appreciate the replies and kind thanks. Benny apart from focuasing do you have any issues with the Kenko regarding trying to attain below f8 without frigging the contacts???...Also have you at all campared it with the canon Converters??.
It is with the 100-400L that ui had in mibnd to use it with till i attain more Lens's.

[CAP]

I am currently looking into this same option..............

Canon literature specifically lists that the 2X-iii works with the 100-400 f4.0-5.6 as well as all the "big guns"
Haven't considered anything but the Canon 2x extender.
Interested to hear if anyone is currently or has used the 2x with the 100-400 and if they have issues as described above.

[Xenedis]

Canon literature specifically lists that the 2X-iii works with the 100-400 f4.0-5.6 as well as all the "big guns"

It does, but unless you have an EOS 1-series DSLR, you will not have autofocus, as the lens's maximum aperture when paired with the 2x TC is f/8 at the shorter focal length, which is too slow (AF is only preserved if the maximum aperture is f/5.6 or wider).

[CAP]

It actually says the 2x works with this lens in the 5D mkiii manual as well, maybe not the case with other bodies.
I expect this setup to have limitations and will/might not work in all conditions but would expect it to work in good light etc
I am also expecting the have to manual focus on those many occasions when the AF won't work.
Am I wasting time thinking that the 2x iii on the 100-400mm is an option?

[Xenedis]

It actually says the 2x works with this lens in the 5D mkiii manual as well

Interesting to hear that. I'm not familiar with the EOS 5D Mark III, but perhaps Canon is no longer limiting tele-converter/lens compatibility to 1-series cameras.

Traditionally, only 1-series cameras would allow the preservation of autofocus with f/4 (or slower) lenses with the 2x TC.

I expect this setup to have limitations and will/might not work in all conditions but would expect it to work in good light etc
I am also expecting the have to manual focus on those many occasions when the AF won't work.
Am I wasting time thinking that the 2x iii on the 100-400mm is an option?

I've not actually tried that combination (I don't own the 100-400 and don't know anyone who does), but personally I wouldn't.

It's a slow, variable-aperture zoom (containing 17 elements in 14 groups) paired with a TC (containing seven elements in five groups) which is known to be of lesser optical quality than the 1.4x.

The reason I bought the the 2x TC (to use with my 300/2.8 and nothing else) is because I saw some high-res images posted on dpreview.com some years ago, with that exact combination. The image quality was excellent, and those images sold me on the 2x TC.

Having said that, I wouldn't recommend using it on anything other than a fast super-tele prime.

I have used it with my macro lens (180/3.5L) once or twice, but the image quality diminishes.

I haven't tried it with my 135/2L (an optically stunning lens), as I have no need; but for my money, the 2x TC is best confined to fast super-tele primes.

[Bennymiata]

I haven't done anything with the pins on the Kenko converter.
It just works as it is.

Canon seem to disable certain lenses and functions with their teleconverters for some reason, but Kenko don't.
Considering that e-global has the Canon 2X for $394 and the Kenko for only $141, I reckon the Kenko is worth a try.
For that price, you could afford to buy 2 of them!

[tropix55]

Yes, I also was excited at the prospect of coupling a 100-400 L lens to a 1.4 iii extender, believing that this version fixed the auto- focus issues & was disappointed to find ( after a try-out with this combo) that you would need to also tape the three pins on this model to get auto focus (albiet slow ) to work also, and at around $600 a dear way to find out ...

I am still happy with the 100-400L & will live without a 1.4 extender for the time being ..

Cheers Tropix55

[GoldZilla]

I'm thinking of getting the Kenko extension tubes - is it really worth it (as a hobby camera user) to spend the extra and get the Canon versions (either the TCs or extension tubes) if I'm going to be primarily using the tubes with my 60D and Canon 100mm f/2.8IS macro (non-L)?

[Speedway]

Wet and very windy here yesterday so I decided to clean my gear as I was reassembling the 7D 150-500 Sigma I decided to put the Canon 2Xiii extender on and try a couple of shots. went out the back door and lined up the TV antenna in the next street about 200-250 metres away hand held steadying against the veranda post, manual focus only 1600mm equivalent iso800 cropped with minimal pp. Not too shabby I thought, will try with tripod and remote on the nesting Little Eagle when the sun returns.
Cheers
Keith.
Ps OS not used as it is not working. will be putting the lens in for repairs over Christmas.

IMG_8936aSz2.jpg

[Speedway]

The sun came out but by the time I got to this spot and set it up on the tripod it had gone again , so with more rain threatening I grabbed a couple of shots of the nest to check it out. This is the better of the 2, uncropped, lightened and brightened a little, resized for the site and sharpened a little.
Cheers
Keith.

7D, 150-500 Sigma, Canon 2Xiii Extender, 1000mm/35mm eq 1600mm, F13, ISO800, 1/8000 sec (it was brighter than I thought), Manual focus only and no is/os used.
IMG_8943aSz2w.jpg

[Xenedis]

My personal view is that a 2x tele-converter should only be used on a super-tele prime.

I would not be happy with the image quality as seen in the above two examples.

[Mark L]

I'm thinking of getting the Kenko extension tubes - is it really worth it (as a hobby camera user) to spend the extra and get the Canon versions (either the TCs or extension tubes) if I'm going to be primarily using the tubes with my 60D and Canon 100mm f/2.8IS macro (non-L)?

I'm in the market for these and research so far is saying, save the money and go Kenko (though I've not checked about macro).

- - - Updated - - -

Reread Benny's posts, #6 and 12.

[Roosta]

I have the Kenko 1.4 and use it quite often with my 70-200mm F2.8 L, it gives me that extra reach and it cost just under OZ $150.00. I would love the 300mm F4 and have been stewing over it for ages, but being a prime it limits me somewhat, where as I can get 280mm out of the lens (Give or Take) coupled with my 1D, the EFOV differs for me due to the two bodies I have, have APS-H and or APS-C size sensors.
Can you go to a camera shop with your lens and body and try the TC's, most will let you walk out the front and take a couple of snaps to trial. I feel the 1.4 will be the better of the two TC's as the 2 x will obviously blow out your F Stop at the full zoom of the lens. Depending on what camera you have, the ISO will be an issue, higher speeds, usually bring noise and or loss of IQ. You'll need to raise the ISO to cope with the intended shutter speeds and focal lengths.
Good luck.

[William W]

I would not use the x2.0MkIII (or MkII) with the 100 to 400L, as I do not believe I would be happy with the results.

***

The Canon Tele Extenders are actually designed for use with the fast Telephoto & Super Telephoto PRIME lenses in mind: NOT the F/2.8 Zoom Lenses.

***

But (varyingly) good results are possible with the three 70 to 200F/2.8 Zooms (and also the x1.4 with the two 70 to 200/4 zooms).


Although not as good as the 400mm Prime – the EF70 to 200F/2.8L USM and the x2.0MkII is a light weight combination that can produce more than acceptable images:

The above is the 70 to 200F/2.8L USM + 2.0MkII used at 400mm @ F6.3 @ 1/1600s @ ISO250 Head-On Motion - Hand Held (EOS 5D) Bottom is an enlargement.
Note: that’s the lens stopped down only ⅔Stop.
IMO the x2.0MkII is a pretty handy device to have in the kit - the 400F/2.8L is heavy.

But the EF70 to 200F/2.8L IS USM and the x2.0MkIII is now the BEST combination of the three 70 to200/2.8’s and any of the x2.0 tele-extenders.

***

In answer to the query about the x2.0 with the EF135/2L – it works well: and for interest’s sake the x1.4(MkII) and x2.0(MkII) stacked on this lens is a very ‘usable’ combination, if one is really stuck and in need of extra FL in an hurry.

***

Regarding the Extension Tubes – I also suggest the Kenko, but for use with a 60D (or any camera capable of EF-S mount) I suggest buying the set of three KENKO tubes and ensure they are the SECOND Series ‘DG’.

This is so EF-S lenses can be mounted should you so wish.

These three tubes are identified with the WHITE EF-S alignment mark on the FEMALE end of each tube – seen here on the right hand side of this image:


WW