1DnMk2 with 100-400mm - Extender?

W

Weggy

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 (y)
 
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