1DnMk2 with 100-400mm - Extender?

W

Weggy

Suspended / Banned
Messages
785
Edit My Images
Yes
Bit confused about the above combo... with a 1.4x converter, I believe auto focus works... is this also the case with the 2x converter?
 
Just a warning that combo can be costly, try and hire/borrow a 1.4x before buying.

I used the 1.4x + 100-400 with my 1dmkII and I was very disappointed with the quality... its the main reason I sold the 100-400 and bought a 300f2.8IS and im planning on a 500f4IS
 
Cool, thanks for the info! What was wrong with the quality?

I'd love a 500mm f4 too... which bank did you rob, and do they still have enough cash left for me? :D
 
I found the combo to be soft and dull... I have to say it could easily have been 100-400, but having said that it was perfect when used on its own, also the 1.4x when used with the 300f2.8IS is just awesome, so i dont think there is anything wrong with that either.

Maybe it just highlights any flaws in the 100-400 which on its own arent noticable.
 
Zoom to prime comparison in general shows a very noticeable difference in IQ (aside from the 70-200's when you nail the focus) especially when using teleconvertors.
I'd definitely recommend borrowing one to see what you think of the IQ before buying :thumbs:
 
This also mirrors my experience to a certain degree. The 2x t/c just won't cut it on a zoom. The 1.4x is acceptable on my 70-200's but the 2x only goes with the primes.

Bob
 
I've found the 100--400L to be a cracking lens and it's hard to beat for it's sheer flexibility. If I could only take one lens it's an easy choice as it covers such a range without having to mess around with converters. It's ideal for zoo visits where it covers all the ranges you're likely to meet, and for much the same reasons, it's a very handy walk around wildlife lens.

It's a phenomenal zoom range to begin with though, so I don't think you should really expect too much from it with a converter stuck behind it. I've found it rather soft with the 1.4TC and never tried to use it with the 2XTC.

The 100-400L will AF with the 1.4X TC but not with the 2XTC as the max effective aperture becomes f9 and AF ceases working below an effective f8. (on 1 Series cameras)
 
Canon Bob said:
This also mirrors my experience to a certain degree. The 2x t/c just won't cut it on a zoom. The 1.4x is acceptable on my 70-200's but the 2x only goes with the primes.

Bob
Click to expand...

I have to disagree with you on this the 2xmk2 tc on the 70-200 f2.8 IS L will give images as good if not better than the 100-400, I know I have owned both combinations and the 100-400 went.
 
mho said:
I have to disagree with you on this the 2xmk2 tc on the 70-200 f2.8 IS L will give images as good if not better than the 100-400, I know I have owned both combinations and the 100-400 went.
Click to expand...

That's interesting. I've been contemplating a 100-400 to add to my bag as I am not 100% impressed with the 70-200 with a 2x. Sounds like it may not be worthwhile.

I think I've just been spoiled with the IQ of the 500.

Paul
 
I agree completely with CT, on it's own is superb (100-400) but softish with a 1.4 x. Using it with a 1Ds
 
grumpybadger said:
That's interesting. I've been contemplating a 100-400 to add to my bag as I am not 100% impressed with the 70-200 with a 2x. Sounds like it may not be worthwhile.

I think I've just been spoiled with the IQ of the 500.

Paul
Click to expand...

On my 30d, the 100-400 imho wasnt any better then the 70-200 f2.8 with 2xtc, so i sent the 100-400 back and kept the 70-200, which completely blows the 100-400 out the water upto 280mm, after that its close, but i would buy a 100-400 if you have the 70-200 already. id have either a 300mm IS, or 400mm prime instead.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top