Canon 100mm 2.8L not compatible with teleconverter, would this idea work

Messages
440
Name
John
Edit My Images
Yes
Hi all,

I found out earlier to day that while my 100mm 2.8L works with my 2x Kenko TC, it isn’t unfortunately compatible with the Canon 1.4x II due to the element sticking out. Now while the Kenko is mainly used on my 7D with 70-200 2.8L II, I have thought of a couple ways to have the best of both worlds, both are reasonably priced.

Option 1, which is the main idea in theory. Buy the EF12 Extension Tube and connect that to separate the lens & TC.
Option 2 - buy a Kenko 1.4x converter and stack it with the Canon 1.4x to the 70-200. I know stacking is a possibility as I have already done it with the Kenko 2x & Canon 1.4x.

I can get a used Kenko 1.4x 300 Pro DGX for under £70 used or can get the EF12 for about £60.

The idea is so I can go to nature reserves with the lenses & teleconverters already attached to both bodies, one for birds & the other for macro.

Can anyone here advise ?

Many thanks
 
Messages
2,007
Name
Chris
Edit My Images
Yes
I do a similar tthing with my fuji set ip.
My 60mm macro will not accept the 1.4 tc ,it sticks out too far.
I use a 16+11mm tube so the set up is tc+16 +11+lens works fine ,it even retains af but it hunts a bit
 
Messages
814
Name
Phil
Edit My Images
No
The Canon tube although well made is very expensive, if you but a set of Kenko auto tubes you will save a lot of money and add a bit more versatility...
Or even something like this...
Extension Tubes
 
Last edited:
Messages
1,300
Name
Jason
Edit My Images
No
Get the Kenko 1.4. If you keep your eyes open you will find an EF12 for a lot less than £80 in due course (unless of course you're in a tearing rush - I picked up an EF12 & 25 pair for under £40 less than 6 months ago)
 
OP
Jwar1976
Messages
440
Name
John
Edit My Images
Yes
If you add an extension tube in the stack you are likely to loose infinity focus
Thank you for that had completely forgotten about infinity focus even with just a Teleconverter and tube

The Canon tube although well made is very expensive, if you but a set of Kenko auto tubes you will save a lot of money and add a bit more versatility...
Or even something like this...
Extension Tubes
Thank you for the lino I did buy some third party tubes years ago but they were junk due to them being a cheap unknown brand

Get the Kenko 1.4. If you keep your eyes open you will find an EF12 for a lot less than £80 in due course (unless of course you're in a tearing rush - I picked up an EF12 & 25 pair for under £40 less than 6 months ago)
Oddly enough WEX are doing the EF12 II for £60, but must admit I am tempted to see what using two 1.4x on the 70-200 is like.
 
Messages
814
Name
Phil
Edit My Images
No
Thank you for the lino I did buy some third party tubes years ago but they were junk due to them being a cheap unknown brand
Thats fair enough, I have both the EF12 and the Kenko set, the Kenko set is good quality but I have to admit the Canon tube has a slight edge.
but must admit I am tempted to see what using two 1.4x on the 70-200 is like.
I would question if it would be worth it, 2 x 1.4x would give you multiplier of just under 2x and you still lose 2 stops of light, so may be better to just stick with the 2x, just my thoughts.
 
OP
Jwar1976
Messages
440
Name
John
Edit My Images
Yes
The combinarion will max out at around 1200mm
Thank you Canon Bob, that Is some zoom in.

Thats fair enough, I have both the EF12 and the Kenko set, the Kenko set is good quality but I have to admit the Canon tube has a slight edge.

I would question if it would be worth it, 2 x 1.4x would give you multiplier of just under 2x and you still lose 2 stops of light, so may be better to just stick with the 2x, just my thoughts.
Thank you PhilH04, you make a good point there, will grab the tube. So then I am all set to go for both Macro & Wildlife
 
Messages
145
Name
Karl
Edit My Images
Yes
The combination will max out at around 1200mm
You are mixing up extension tubes and what canon call extenders but everybody else calls converters.

Converter increases the focal length by a factor but corrects the focus with internal lenses. The extension tubes increase the flange distance, shifting the focus range at the expense of distant focus
 

Canon Bob

Loves the Enemy
Messages
10,616
Name
Bob
Edit My Images
Yes
You are mixing up extension tubes and what canon call extenders but everybody else calls converters.

Converter increases the focal length by a factor but corrects the focus with internal lenses. The extension tubes increase the flange distance, shifting the focus range at the expense of distant focus
I'm not mixing anything up, Karl. Putting a 12mm extension tube between the 1.4x teleconveter and the 100 macro will reduce the maximum focus distamce to 1200mm
 

mij

Messages
580
Edit My Images
Yes
Sorry if I am missing something, but what effect are you trying to achieve? Stacking teleconverters gives a very different effect to combining a teleconverter with an extension tube. In general a teleconvertor is normally used to shoot a subject from farther away and an extension tube from closer up.
 

Canon Bob

Loves the Enemy
Messages
10,616
Name
Bob
Edit My Images
Yes
Sorry if I am missing something, but what effect are you trying to achieve? Stacking teleconverters gives a very different effect to combining a teleconverter with an extension tube. In general a teleconvertor is normally used to shoot a subject from farther away and an extension tube from closer up.
The 100L macro won't mount onto a Canon 1.4x (the front protudes too far) without putting a 12mm tube between them. The result is increased magnification without compromising the working distance as would be the case with simply using an extension tube. Keep up
 
Last edited:
Messages
6,908
Name
Robin
Edit My Images
Yes
@RedRobin uses a Kenko converter on his 100mm macro. I can't remember if it's 1.4x He might be able to chime in as he gets some superb shots.
.... Indeed I do and because, as already reported in this thread, the Canon 1.4x Extender (not Extension Tube!!) will not physically mount onto the Canon EF 100mm F/2.8L Macro.

Personally I always want plenty of reach when photographing minibeasts so not to spook them and I bought my Kenko 1.4x very soon after buying my Canon 100mm Macro several years ago and I don't think I have ever unmounted it!

I now shoot Olympus E-M1X and mount my Canon EF 100mm Macro + Kenko 1.4x (140mm) via a Metabones Adapter. Consequently my equivalent reach with this hybrid macro rig is 280mm. Here are a couple of examples shot with this hybrid rig :

ACTION STATIONS!! by Robin Procter, on Flickr

GREEN-EYED HAWKER by Robin Procter, on Flickr

And these are shot with the EF 100mm Macro + Kenko 1.4x on several of my different Canon bodies :

BEAUTIFUL DEMOISELLE by Robin Procter, on Flickr

UP CLOSE AND PERSONAL AND NOT SHY by Robin Procter, on Flickr

Thanks for the compliment @Bebop
 
Last edited:
OP
Jwar1976
Messages
440
Name
John
Edit My Images
Yes
Sorry if I am missing something, but what effect are you trying to achieve? Stacking teleconverters gives a very different effect to combining a teleconverter with an extension tube. In general a teleconvertor is normally used to shoot a subject from farther away and an extension tube from closer up.
If I am at a nature reserve and wish to reach further without startling in the subject, I thought of combining the Canon 1.4x via the extension tube, not actually stackimg the teleconverters on the macro. As I already have the Canon 1.4x, it would be nice to give it some use.

.... Indeed I do and because, as already reported in this thread, the Canon 1.4x Extender (not Extension Tube!!) will not physically mount onto the Canon EF 100mm F/2.8L Macro.

Personally I always want plenty of reach when photographing minibeasts so not to spook them and I bought my Kenko 1.4x very soon after buying my Canon 100mm Macro several years ago and I don't think I have ever unmounted it!

I now shoot Olympus E-M1X and mount my Canon EF 100mm Macro + Kenko 1.4x (140mm) via a Metabones Adapter. Consequently my equivalent reach with this hybrid macro rig is 280mm. Here are a couple of examples shot with this hybrid rig :

ACTION STATIONS!! by Robin Procter, on Flickr

GREEN-EYED HAWKER by Robin Procter, on Flickr

And these are shot with the EF 100mm Macro + Kenko 1.4x on several of my different Canon bodies :

BEAUTIFUL DEMOISELLE by Robin Procter, on Flickr

UP CLOSE AND PERSONAL AND NOT SHY by Robin Procter, on Flickr

Thanks for the compliment @Bebop
Your work is fantastic and inspirational to newbies to macro like mysel.
 

mij

Messages
580
Edit My Images
Yes
The 100L macro won't mount onto a Canon 1.4x (the front protudes too far) without putting a 12mm tube between them. The result is increased magnification without compromising the working distance as would be the case with simply using an extension tube. Keep up
It was never said why the Canon Extender must be used. Nor that increase magnification was the desired result, and it seems it is not. Two solutions were presented but not the specific problem they were being considered to solve. The better solution may be a third option, but we need to know the problem to properly help.

And when someone asks whether to buy a 1.4x teleconverter to stack with another 1.4x teleconverter, my first thought is to always going to be to wonder why anyone would want to do that?

If I am at a nature reserve and wish to reach further without startling in the subject, I thought of combining the Canon 1.4x via the extension tube, not actually stackimg the teleconverters on the macro. As I already have the Canon 1.4x, it would be nice to give it some use.
You considered buying a Keno 1.4x teleconverter to stack with a Canon 1.4x as your option 2, that is why I was confused. I still do not understand what that option would have offered you rather than simply using the "new" Kenko 1.4x with the 100mm lens for greater Macro reach, and keeping the Kenko 2x with the 70-200mm for shooting birds.

But it was also not clear whether you were looking for greater reach or greater magnification. If you had stacked the 1.4x teleconverters on the 70-200mm, what would you have done with the Macro lens? Used the Kenko 2x with it?

Anyhow, given your need I too would go with buying the extension tube, simply because it will be more useful to use in its own right than having a second 1.4x. It is better value and opens up a lot more photographic opportunities. Although whilst I understand not wanting to use cheap tubes, a decent third party set like Kenko ones would be much better value than buying a Canon one. There is no optical difference.
 

Canon Bob

Loves the Enemy
Messages
10,616
Name
Bob
Edit My Images
Yes
It was never said why the Canon Extender must be used.
That's very true but my reponse is based on John's original statement " so I can go to nature reserves with the lenses & teleconverters already attached to both bodies ".

As with skinning cats, there are many different approaches and, like you I suspect, mine would be different. (FWIW, I'd go with a Life-size Converter on the macro lens)
 
OP
Jwar1976
Messages
440
Name
John
Edit My Images
Yes
Thanks for the replies everyone I will be picking up the extension tube tomorrow. I did find my old extension tubes that I purchased years ago when I got given a 450D as a starter body. Unfortunately the tubes are old Jessop’s ones and are not compatible with the 1.4x due to them being too tight. I also have.a Raynox DCR-150 somewhere, so will dig that out as well.
 
Messages
6,908
Name
Robin
Edit My Images
Yes
It's actually very simple :

A) - If you want to increase reach of an existing lens to reduce the risk of spooking a subject, then an Extender/Teleconverter is the best way.

B) - If you want to be able to get closer for macro/micro images, then mount Extension Tubes but recognise their limitations as already described.

You can mount both A and B together.

Personally I would not advise mounting more than one Extender and I would recommend keeping Extenders mounted on different lenses to avoid faffing around in the field opening bodies to the elements and losing shooting opportunities while you do it.

Either buy original brand or Kenko but buy cheap and you could either buy twice or even have expensive to repair damage. That's my advice.
 
OP
Jwar1976
Messages
440
Name
John
Edit My Images
Yes
It's actually very simple :

A) - If you want to increase reach of an existing lens to reduce the risk of spooking a subject, then an Extender/Teleconverter is the best way.

B) - If you want to be able to get closer for macro/micro images, then mount Extension Tubes but recognise their limitations as already described.

You can mount both A and B together.

Personally I would not advise mounting more than one Extender and I would recommend keeping Extenders mounted on different lenses to avoid faffing around in the field opening bodies to the elements and losing shooting opportunities while you do it.

Either buy original brand or Kenko but buy cheap and you could either buy twice or even have expensive to repair damage. That's my advice.
Thank you RedRobin, that is exactly what I am after, I have 2 teleconverters, 1 of them is the Kenko 2x, which is being kept for my 70-200 for birding and other wildlife on my 7D, and the other is the Canon 1.4x II, which is going to be kept for the 100mm 2.8L on my 5D MKIII. I am more interested in having my kit bag packed and ready to go when I arrive at a place to shoot. I have also got a ring flash that needs to be used more, it is only a Marumi DRF14 but will do until I decide to upgrade, if I get heavily into Macro.
 
Messages
6,908
Name
Robin
Edit My Images
Yes
Thank you RedRobin, that is exactly what I am after, I have 2 teleconverters, 1 of them is the Kenko 2x, which is being kept for my 70-200 for birding and other wildlife on my 7D, and the other is the Canon 1.4x II, which is going to be kept for the 100mm 2.8L on my 5D MKIII. I am more interested in having my kit bag packed and ready to go when I arrive at a place to shoot. I have also got a ring flash that needs to be used more, it is only a Marumi DRF14 but will do until I decide to upgrade, if I get heavily into Macro.
.... Glad to help you John but I think you made a written error in that the only Extender which will physically fit your Canon 100mm F/2.8L Macro is the Kenko. All as previously discussed above.
 
OP
Jwar1976
Messages
440
Name
John
Edit My Images
Yes
.... Glad to help you John but I think you made a written error in that the only Extender which will physically fit your Canon 100mm F/2.8L Macro is the Kenko. All as previously discussed above.
This is the thing that is confusing, a few sites have stated that if you place a 12mm tube on the Canon 1.4 extender, then it will fit the Canon 100mm 2.8L
 
Messages
814
Name
Phil
Edit My Images
No
This is the thing that is confusing, a few sites have stated that if you place a 12mm tube on the Canon 1.4 extender, then it will fit the Canon 100mm 2.8L
It will :) I do this a lot as it gives a little more reach with the added bonus of small increase in magnification and is lighter and smaller than my 150 or 180mm lenses.
 
Messages
6,908
Name
Robin
Edit My Images
Yes
This is the thing that is confusing, a few sites have stated that if you place a 12mm tube on the Canon 1.4 extender, then it will fit the Canon 100mm 2.8L
.... Yes, but I have also read that some people are willing to physically modify (fools in my honest opinion!). It's the cheaper tubes which fit (my Kenko tubes do not fit).

It will :) I do this a lot as it gives a little more reach with the added bonus of small increase in magnification and is lighter and smaller than my 150 or 180mm lenses.
.... Personally I would not do this unless with a tube which is a good fit (and without DIY modification) and which has full electronic communications. Also which has proper internal linings - Again, the cheapo ones have neither.

This is my advice - It's up to you and others if it's taken notice of, I can only offer it but it's a subject I have researched because I was once upon a time interested in doing the same.
 
Messages
814
Name
Phil
Edit My Images
No
Personally I would not do this unless with a tube which is a good fit (and without DIY modification) and which has full electronic communications. Also which has proper internal linings - Again, the cheapo ones have neither.
Hi Robin, we are talking about the Canon EF12 II tube, not cheap ones, I also have a set of Kenko tubes which again are a good build quality and have full communication, but the Canon tube just has that little bit of an edge in the quality stakes, also it is good to note that the longer the focal length of the lens the less of an effect the tube will have on the actual magnification.

But yes I agree with, I have seen some of these cheap tubes and frankly would not touch them with a barge pole.
 
Messages
6,908
Name
Robin
Edit My Images
Yes
Hi Robin, we are talking about the Canon EF12 II tube, not cheap ones, I also have a set of Kenko tubes which again are a good build quality and have full communication, but the Canon tube just has that little bit of an edge in the quality stakes, also it is good to note that the longer the focal length of the lens the less of an effect the tube will have on the actual magnification.

But yes I agree with, I have seen some of these cheap tubes and frankly would not touch them with a barge pole.
.... Hi Phil, sorry I slightly misunderstood your post.
 
OP
Jwar1976
Messages
440
Name
John
Edit My Images
Yes
Thanks for the advice everyone, the problem has been resolved, I gave WEX a call this morning and they had no problem in me returning the Canon 1.4x II in exchange for a refund or credit note. So I took a walk down there as they are only a couple miles from me & returned it no problem at all. As an added bonus I walked out with a Kenko DGX 1.4x Pro 300 & the Kenko tube set. In total I only had to pay a difference of £37 which I am really happy about.

Now despite it being extremely windy here in Norwich and the deadly factor of me being a eager beaver, here is a test shot with the 100mm 2.8L with the 1.4x TC & 20mm tube on my 5D MKIII no flash.

BB1F995A-100C-4939-B86E-98EA0521B2F1.jpeg D91B43E6-586E-4EC4-B634-A7BA18B66FC6.jpeg
 
Last edited:
Top