Kenko or Canon 1.4TC?

swag72

swag72

Messages
7,969
Name
Sara
Edit My Images
Yes
Looking at getting a 1.4 TC. The Kenko Pro 300 DG is going for just under £100 on the bay and the Canon 1.4 TC is more than double that price. Granted the Canon in white, will look nicer on a nice white L than the Kenko, but ........... Damn ........ That's a lot of extra quids for looking better.

My question is whether double the price of the Canon is worth it? I do stick with Canon, but in this case need to be hugely convinced of the extra quality as the Kenko always gets such good reviews.
 
Having had both I would say not, better yes slightly, but more than twice as good? not a chance!

Main issue is that the Pro300 DG will fit all EF lenses, the Canon will not.
 
I've got the Kenko. Bought it after comparing against a Canon 1.4x. I only did some very quick tests on a 100-400L zoom, but on that basis it seemed as good, and better than the Sigma - also well regarded - that I tried at the same time.

It also fitted my Canon 100 macro which finally clinched it (it won't fit EF-S lenses though).
 
The Canon will maintain weatherproofing, which the Kenko won't. I have the Kenko and I'm quite happy. I prefer to save money and have compatibility with a wider selection of lenses. I wouldn't choose to go shooting in pouring rain and I have a rainsleeve if the weather starts to get a bit too dribbly.

If you're bothered about weatherproofing maybe Kerso can source the Canon for a better price. Of course, if your body or lens is not sealed then the Canon converter's advantage is lost.

Here's an example from my 50D + 100-400 + Kenko 1.4X. The pins were taped so the EXIF does not show the presence of the teleconverter. True EXIF is 560mm, 1/400, f/10, 400 ISO.

20081122_112845_1795_LR.jpg



100% crop....

20081122_112845_1795_LR-2.jpg



Here's another image and 100% crop, also from the same camera and lens. This time the teleconverter was untaped so the true EXIF is shown. The lens was wide open...

20090823_110912_2481_DPP.JPG
20090823_110912_2481_DPP_100.JPG
 
Despite what I said above, and others that appear to agree that the Kenko is equal to the Canon, I can't help thinking that this perhaps isn't the whole story.

Quality of optics aside, the Canon extenders are a completely different design - much bigger, longer, more glass in them. Canon must have done this for a reason, especially as it prevents their extenders from being used on quite a few lenses it might be useful for.

Nikon adopt a similar design for their TCs. Maybe these converters are better with some lenses, or better over a wider focal length range, even if it makes no odds most of the time :thinking:
 
Based on the copies I've got (2 Canon and 1 Kenko), the Canons are better in centre frame whilst the Kenko takes over at the periphery. I use the Canons for birding when centred cropping is likely and the Kenko for macro when the subject is more likely to be a frame filler.
At the time I did the tests, I also had a Sigma....excellent resolution but gave a very different colourcast to the other two.

Bob
 
I am using Canon 1.4x mk1. It is perfectly sharp, it only magnifies known lens defects (such as CA at 70-200mm@200mm). I does change bokeh quality a little bit, but normally this is non-issue. I've never used Kenko.
 
Mmm, mind changing time or extra spending money ... :thinking: Damn you TP :D

I want to use the TC on the 300 f4 I've just bought as I think I'm going to be moving on my 100-400, but I've also got a hankering for using it for macro on my 100mm.

Oh ............. What to do?!!
 
Haha! I know you like good kit :) Frustrating isn't it LOL

Canon extender fits both your 70-200 and 100-400 and 300 4. Will the Kenko really be as good on all those lenses? What does Kenko know that Canon doesn't? :thinking: (And I would hold on to that 100-400 for a while until you find you really don't use it - such a versatile lens.)

FWIW, I sold my 100 macro and use 70-200 with Kenko tubes for close-up. I didn't really use it very close that much and find the zoom plenty good enough and more flexible on working distance with the zoom and IS helps too. Have you tried and compared that combo?

If you want to try the Kenko, and it surely is pretty good, then you're welcome to borrow mine for a couple of weeks. Easy enough to pop in a jiffy bag - PM your addy if that will help :)

I so wish Canon would make a 500L 5.6 IS. It could be really quite light, sharp and maybe under £2k. Birder's dream on a 7D I'd say :love: I'd even buy a Sigma with that spec :eek:
 
Thanks very much for that offer Rich - I may take it up! I'll go away and have a think and keep my eyes on the classifieds. That may make the decision for me!!
 
If I am right in thinking the canon 1.4 will only fit the L series lenses but the Kenco will fit all the canon series lenses,this I was told in the locla camera shop,this is due to the fact that the canon extender extends out at the lens attatchemnet surface so the normal ef and efs lenses dont have a recess for this section to go inot but the L lenses do have

Confused if so ask in your local shop to have a look at both


Dave
 
i had a 300 f4.0L and used it with both 1.4x and the 2x canon models and was sharp as a pin, not tried the kenko but I don't think I would either.

I used the canon ones on my 35-350 too now and get the same results

I would always opt for Canon quality every time with very FEW exceptions
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top