Sponsor Message:
Aviation Photography Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Canon Converter 1,4x With 100-400 L Is F/5,6  
User currently offlineConinpa From Luxembourg, joined May 2005, 245 posts, RR: 6
Posted (8 years 3 months 2 weeks 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 6664 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
HEAD SCREENER

Hi all,

I have the Canon 100-400 f/5,6 L IS lense.
Can you comment on your experience with the combination of this lense with a Canon converter 1,4x II, regarding the quality of the image, autofocus, etc ?
Any other suggestion welcome.

Thanks in advance
Patrick


Patrick De Coninck
11 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineSmAlbany From United States of America, joined Aug 2004, 285 posts, RR: 0
Reply 1, posted (8 years 3 months 2 weeks 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 6652 times:

I have the 1.4TC and use it with the 70-200 F4. It works well on the 300D.

With the 100-400 I believe that AF will only work on a 1 series body. Since the 100-400 is known to be a little soft at the 400 end, I would imagine that the TC would make that worse.

I have not heard of any aviation photographers that have used the combo with success (at least anet standards).


User currently offlineAero145 From Iceland, joined Jan 2005, 3071 posts, RR: 19
Reply 2, posted (8 years 3 months 2 weeks 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 6629 times:

 redflag  no 


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Javier Guerrero - AirTeamImages



Javier Guerrero has done it!

I think you can get some auto-focus by taping some contacts on the Extender... I don't know which contacts, you can find that out on the net.

But AFAIK it isn't an extremely successful thing.


User currently offlineNSMike From Canada, joined Mar 2005, 256 posts, RR: 2
Reply 3, posted (8 years 3 months 2 weeks 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 6616 times:

I've tried the tape thing, but the AF hunts a lot and the image quality isn't there in my opinion.


Pearl Snares, Taye Drums, Sabian Cymbals, Remo Heads, Los Cabos Sticks
User currently offlineTin67 From United Kingdom, joined May 2004, 268 posts, RR: 3
Reply 4, posted (8 years 3 months 2 weeks 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 6610 times:

I was at Farnborough and chatting to a guy who was using a 1Ds with a 100-400 and 1.4 extender. As mentioned above the EOS 1 range will autofocus with this combo and he claimed he was getting good results.

I wouldn't want to use manual focus though!

Martin


User currently offlineConinpa From Luxembourg, joined May 2005, 245 posts, RR: 6
Reply 5, posted (8 years 3 months 2 weeks 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 6586 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
HEAD SCREENER

Quoting Tin67 (Reply 4):
As mentioned above the EOS 1 range will autofocus with this combo and he claimed he was getting good results

Do you know if anyone has used the EOS 5D (my body) with that combination ?
Patrick



Patrick De Coninck
User currently offlineJavibi From Spain, joined Oct 2004, 1371 posts, RR: 41
Reply 6, posted (8 years 3 months 2 weeks 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 6548 times:

Quoting Coninpa (Thread starter):
Can you comment on your experience with the combination of this lense with a Canon converter 1,4x II, regarding the quality of the image, autofocus, etc ?

AF: you may try the tape trick, but I think you'd better learn to use MF, as AF will work poorly. The trick is described here:
www.fredmiranda.com/TipsPage/

As for quality, it does suffer, but if you are not only shooting for A.net, you'll find the increase in range (for a relatively low price) is worth it:
www.airteamimages.com/33659.html
www.airteamimages.com/33634.html

My 2 cents

j



"Be prepared to engage in constructive debate". Are YOU prepared?
User currently offlineBirdlike From Denmark, joined Feb 2003, 8 posts, RR: 0
Reply 7, posted (8 years 3 months 2 weeks 12 hours ago) and read 6454 times:

My experiences with the 100-400 + 1.4 Canon converter (on a 5D) are not satifying for A-net use. MF is not fast enough for flying aircraft, unless you are very trained. So I think it would bring you more quality to crop than to make your lens more "powerful" by help of a converter.


We fly to find out that the birds are more elegant than us ...
User currently offlineConinpa From Luxembourg, joined May 2005, 245 posts, RR: 6
Reply 8, posted (8 years 3 months 2 weeks 9 hours ago) and read 6427 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
HEAD SCREENER

Thank you all for your advices and opinions.

Cheers
Patrick



Patrick De Coninck
User currently offlinePlanedoctor From United States of America, joined Mar 2001, 286 posts, RR: 1
Reply 9, posted (8 years 3 months 1 week 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 6373 times:

I've used the 1.4x on the 100-400 IS and I was not satisfied with the results overall. The shot shown above by Javier Guerrero is fantastic, but for a long exposure he may very well have stopped it down on a tripod for the 6 second exposure, in which case the image quality would be much improved over the wide-open shooting you'd typically be doing while hand-holding the lens.

Ken


User currently offlineTimdeGroot From Netherlands, joined Apr 2002, 3674 posts, RR: 64
Reply 10, posted (8 years 3 months 1 week 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 6371 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

I've used it and when you focus correctly it isn't all that bad. You also need stop it down quite a bit to eliminate at least some vignetting.


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Tim de Groot - AirTeamImages



It's ok to try it sometimes, but I would never ever count on it as something I'd shoot with all day. You just lose to many shots using MF, which is a pain on the 100-400 especially when extended at 400mm.

Like Javier said, it's ok to try different things which will most likely not make in onto a.net.

Tim



Alderman Exit
User currently offlineConinpa From Luxembourg, joined May 2005, 245 posts, RR: 6
Reply 11, posted (8 years 3 months 1 week 5 days 20 hours ago) and read 6317 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
HEAD SCREENER

Nice shot though Tim ! I definitely have to go to Schiphol...

Thanks again all. I'll not buy it... Other forums have basically the same opinion and a friend pro photographer has got too many problems with it and stopped using it.

I'll spare money to buy another longer lense... Sad

Cheers
Patrick



Patrick De Coninck
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Canon 100-400 Is And The Sigma 50-500mm posted Thu Oct 20 2005 05:07:51 by LOT767-300ER
Canon 28-300 Is USM Vs. 100-400 Is USM posted Wed Sep 28 2005 19:16:27 by Stefan
Canon 100-400 L Is On A Tripod? posted Sat Nov 6 2004 19:41:27 by Mfz
Canon 100-400 Is Vs. 70-200 Is + 2x Conv. posted Wed Aug 11 2004 18:52:38 by Canberra
Canon 100-400 L IS, Advice Required :-) posted Wed May 26 2004 09:31:47 by Jkw777
My First Canon 100-400 Is Photos posted Fri Apr 2 2004 00:43:54 by Woody001
My 100-400 Is Totally Screwed Again! posted Mon Aug 29 2005 10:01:29 by Jkw777
300mm 2.8 Is Vs 100-400 Is posted Sun Mar 14 2004 23:05:29 by Planedoctor
D60 + 100-400 L IS: Overexposure? posted Thu Aug 21 2003 12:56:52 by Wietse
Canon 70-200 Vs 100-400 L Lens posted Sun Oct 13 2002 23:35:28 by Fly-K