Canon 100-400L with 1.4 telextender

I have the Canon DRebel and considering purchase of Canon 100-400L plus the 1.4 II telextender. After looking over some reviews, I have questions about whether autofocus will work with the above combination and what other areas may be limited when used with the DRebel.

If someone has experience with the above setup, would appreciate hearing their comments !

Thanks
--
**** H

I do not have the 100-400 but I do have the 1.4TC and the 70-2004L. Autofocus should work fine with the 1.4TC. If you go with the 2.0TC that is where you would have issues.

Sticking with the Canon TC is a good choice as well.

DickH said:

I have the Canon DRebel and considering purchase of Canon 100-400L
plus the 1.4 II telextender. After looking over some reviews, I
have questions about whether autofocus will work with the above
combination and what other areas may be limited when used with the
DRebel.

If someone has experience with the above setup, would appreciate
hearing their comments !

Thanks
--
**** H

Click to expand...

--
Visit my gallery at http://www.pbase.com/dstearn/300d_gallery

Dave S said:

I do not have the 100-400 but I do have the 1.4TC and the 70-2004L.
Autofocus should work fine with the 1.4TC. If you go with the 2.0TC
that is where you would have issues.

Click to expand...

I don't think that's right. The Digital Rebel disables autofocus for any lens that reports a maximum aperture smaller than f/5.6. A 1.4TC on an f/4 lens gives you f/5.6, but on the f/4.5-5.6 100-400L it gives you f/6.3-8. The Digital Rebel will refuse to attempt autofocus.

Some of the cheaper third-party TC's do not report their aperture multiplier to the camera. With one of these, your 100-400 would be giving you f/6.3-8, but the camera would still be seeing it as f/4.5-5.6. I've done this with my 100-400, and autofocus is pretty reliable for subjects with reasonable contrast.

Dave S124201 said:

Sticking with the Canon TC is a good choice as well.

Click to expand...

See above. The Canon TC is good if you have a fast Canon telephoto -- the 1.4x maintains autofocus with the f/4 lenses, and the 2x with f/2.8 -- but for the 100-400, you want a TC that doesn't report its presence to the camera.

Just to second this, I'll tell you for a fact that the Kenko Pro 1.4x that reports info will not autofocus in combination with my 400 5.6. I've never played with taping the pins on my lenses, but you may want to look up the possibilities there. Also, I think you'll find yourself unhappy with the results from that zoom and the 1.4x. They would probably be acceptable, but not great.

-jeffB said:

Dave S said:

I do not have the 100-400 but I do have the 1.4TC and the 70-2004L.
Autofocus should work fine with the 1.4TC. If you go with the 2.0TC
that is where you would have issues.

Click to expand...

I don't think that's right. The Digital Rebel disables autofocus
for any lens that reports a maximum aperture smaller than f/5.6. A
1.4TC on an f/4 lens gives you f/5.6, but on the f/4.5-5.6 100-400L
it gives you f/6.3-8. The Digital Rebel will refuse to attempt
autofocus.

Some of the cheaper third-party TC's do not report their aperture
multiplier to the camera. With one of these, your 100-400 would be
giving you f/6.3-8, but the camera would still be seeing it as
f/4.5-5.6. I've done this with my 100-400, and autofocus is pretty
reliable for subjects with reasonable contrast.

-jeffB said:

Sticking with the Canon TC is a good choice as well.

Click to expand...

See above. The Canon TC is good if you have a fast Canon telephoto
-- the 1.4x maintains autofocus with the f/4 lenses, and the 2x
with f/2.8 -- but for the 100-400, you want a TC that doesn't
report its presence to the camera.

Click to expand...

--
Aaron - Let there be light.... so I can get out and shoot!
See profile for equipment

Hi,

As long as the aperture stays at or below F/5.6 you will be able to autofocus.

With the 100-400 F/4.0... the lens will become an F/5.6 so you will be fine.

The 2x will function however; you will most likely have to manual focus.

Just a side note, I tried the 1.4x & the 2x Sigma EX APO converters with my Sigma 70-200mm F/2.8 lens. Both took wonderful shots, both autofocused without any noticable lag at all. The 2x produced better photos optically at 400mm then did the lens alone, when I compared a cropped (blown up to match) shot taken without the converter at 200mm.

The 1.4 images looked pretty much exactly as did the lens alone shots. The only draw back was, the lens was only a 280mm lens optically. An increase yes but, not that much of an increase.

With the 2x, the lens beccame a 400mm F/5.6, which was radically cool. The images didn't look as nice if I pulled back with the 2x (when compared to the without shots of equal focal length) however; shots taken at the 300 to 400mm were awesome. When hand shake wasn't a factor the shots were keepers.

Anthony
http://www.congiano.com

See this link

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/FrameWork/charts/canon1_4xExtender.html

-jeffB said:

Dave S said:

I do not have the 100-400 but I do have the 1.4TC and the 70-2004L.
Autofocus should work fine with the 1.4TC. If you go with the 2.0TC
that is where you would have issues.

Click to expand...

I don't think that's right. The Digital Rebel disables autofocus
for any lens that reports a maximum aperture smaller than f/5.6. A
1.4TC on an f/4 lens gives you f/5.6, but on the f/4.5-5.6 100-400L
it gives you f/6.3-8. The Digital Rebel will refuse to attempt
autofocus.

Some of the cheaper third-party TC's do not report their aperture
multiplier to the camera. With one of these, your 100-400 would be
giving you f/6.3-8, but the camera would still be seeing it as
f/4.5-5.6. I've done this with my 100-400, and autofocus is pretty
reliable for subjects with reasonable contrast.

-jeffB said:

Sticking with the Canon TC is a good choice as well.

Click to expand...

See above. The Canon TC is good if you have a fast Canon telephoto
-- the 1.4x maintains autofocus with the f/4 lenses, and the 2x
with f/2.8 -- but for the 100-400, you want a TC that doesn't
report its presence to the camera.

Click to expand...

the camera will autofocus OK. But I have the Kenko brand extender (the $75 one). It works terrific. There is no need to get the $279 canon one. This is for three reasons:

1) with the 100-400, you will not notice any picture quality difference between the canon and the Kenko. I believe anyone who tells you differently hasn't tried both on this lens or is justifying for themselves spending the extra money. Maybe on an ultra-sharp prime like the 300 f2.8L you would see the difference....

2) the Kenko reports the lens F-setting and doesn't add a stop like the Canon (or Kenko Pro)
3) why spend the extra money when you won't be using it all the time.

Item 1 means you save money.

Item 2 means your camera will focus OK.

Item 3 means you wont be using it all the time because your shutter speeds are cut in half. That is a bummer. Plus you need very good light.

I say it will focus OK, but not great. The reduced light coming in to the camera causes the focus to hunt sometimes. But on a very bright day, you shouldn't notice too much of a difference.

See my test page below for shots with and without the TC, and compairing this lens to my other lenses at various F-stops. I will also add that the TC reduces constrast a bit - but that is easily adjusted in post processing.

Be sure to view "original size". Tests on the right taken from teddy bear on the left.
http://www.pbase.com/ericsorensen/carmera_and_lens_tests
--
Eric Sorensen
Bossier City, Louisiana
http://www.pbase.com/ericsorensen

Anthony Congiano said:

Hi,

As long as the aperture stays at or below F/5.6 you will be able to
autofocus.

With the 100-400 F/4.0... the lens will become an F/5.6 so you will
be fine.

Click to expand...

Unfortunately, it's not f/4.0, it's f/4.5-5.6. No autofocus if the TC adds a stop to the aperture.

(I say "unfortunately", but if it were f/4.0 constant aperture, there'd be no hope that I could ever afford it. )

Thanks to all for the comments -

Is it correct to assume that the (100-400L) Image Stabilizer, without 1.4x TC, will function OK with the DRebel ?

The B & H chart on the 1.4x converter suggests that it is possible as indicated by several responses to my original question that AF may work under some conditions. I assume that infers very good lighting high contrast conditions.

I have the 75-300mm Canon lens and want to improve on my bird photography - the jump to the 100-400L lens should improve my chances for getting sharper photos but had hoped with the use of the 1.4X TC to improve my chances for better luck for small bird photos.

Eric - would like to know model or part number of your Kenko TC - if I decide to purchase the 100-400L. it might be more practical to start with the cheaper TC and gain some first hand experience on the limitations of using a TC. I assume that the IS will not work with the Kenko and that tripod use becomes necessary.

**** H

DickH said:

Thanks to all for the comments -

Is it correct to assume that the (100-400L) Image Stabilizer,
without 1.4x TC, will function OK with the DRebel ?

Click to expand...

Oh, it works. It works very, VERY well. You won't believe the difference between it and consumer lenses. (Just don't compare it to the 70-200mm f/2.8L IS, possibly the best tele-zoom in existence.)

I'll try to remember to check the brand and model of the TC I've been using.

I was reading this post a few minutes ago and put my Tamron 1.4 converter on under my 100-400L, walked upstairs and to my surprise this hawk landed on my fence! I shot quickly and only got two before he tore after a bird. This is out of the camera and levels only adjusted. Auto foucus worked fine here's the details:

Photograph Details
Date Taken: 2004-12-16 12:56:12
Date Digitized: 2004-12-16 12:56:12
Date Modified: 2004-12-16 13:17:04
Make: Canon
Model: Canon EOS DIGITAL REBEL
Size: 2048x3072
Bytes: 7186672
Aperture: f/5.6
ISO: 800
Focal Length: 400mm (guess: 622mm in 35mm)
Exposure Time: 0.0062s (1/160)
Exposure Bias: 0
ColorSpace: sRGB



--

Untouched, everthing works fine!



--

DickH said:

Thanks to all for the comments -

Is it correct to assume that the (100-400L) Image Stabilizer,
without 1.4x TC, will function OK with the DRebel ?

The B & H chart on the 1.4x converter suggests that it is possible
as indicated by several responses to my original question that AF
may work under some conditions. I assume that infers very good
lighting high contrast conditions.

Click to expand...

That B+H chart is from the Canon literature. The canon one won't autofocus (unless you tape off a pin)

DickH200652 said:

I have the 75-300mm Canon lens and want to improve on my bird
photography - the jump to the 100-400L lens should improve my
chances for getting sharper photos but had hoped with the use of
the 1.4X TC to improve my chances for better luck for small bird
photos.

Eric - would like to know model or part number of your Kenko TC -
if I decide to purchase the 100-400L. it might be more practical to
start with the cheaper TC and gain some first hand experience on
the limitations of using a TC. I assume that the IS will not work
with the Kenko and that tripod use becomes necessary.

Click to expand...

Here is the one I'm talking about, and yes, IS and everything else works like normal:

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=productlist&A=details&Q=&sku=63685&is=REG

and it will fit on ALL Canon EOS lenses and cameras. Even your 75-300 (another reason not to buy the canon versions).

--
Eric Sorensen
Bossier City, Louisiana
http://www.pbase.com/ericsorensen

Great - good to hear that autofocus worked with the 100-400L on the DRebel.

Did you shoot thru the window ??

Did you shoot handheld with the IS operating or from a tripod?

What was the approx distance to the hawk?

What model or part number is your Tamoron ?

Not sure whether that is a Cooper's or Sharp-Shinned hawk.

Nice shot and makes me anxious to make up my mind as to what to order?

I see hawks in our yard periodically but haven't been able to capture in a photo.

I have made a small sliding window to shoot photos of birds in the yard - temporarily confined to this type of photography - Most of my photos at this time are at 30-40 feet distance using the 75-300 Canon. Would hope that the 100-400L would be a major improvement over the 75-300 and the occasional use of a 1.4x TC would be a nice plus.

I have been testing a flash extender and have had good and poor results todate. Poor results tend to be related to poor focus and sometimes too low of shutter speeds (windy days and overcast skies)

I suspect that one has to plan on use of tripod for most telextender shots but would be nice to be able to take hand held shots (IS operating) when necessary to grab a photo (like your hawk photo) when the opportunity is presented.

Badfinger said:

I was reading this post a few minutes ago and put my Tamron 1.4
converter on under my 100-400L, walked upstairs and to my surprise
this hawk landed on my fence! I shot quickly and only got two
before he tore after a bird. This is out of the camera and levels
only adjusted. Auto foucus worked fine here's the details:

Photograph Details
Date Taken: 2004-12-16 12:56:12
Date Digitized: 2004-12-16 12:56:12
Date Modified: 2004-12-16 13:17:04
Make: Canon
Model: Canon EOS DIGITAL REBEL
Size: 2048x3072
Bytes: 7186672
Aperture: f/5.6
ISO: 800
Focal Length: 400mm (guess: 622mm in 35mm)
Exposure Time: 0.0062s (1/160)
Exposure Bias: 0
ColorSpace: sRGB

Click to expand...

**** H

Here's one with the cheap Kenko TC:



--
Eric Sorensen
Bossier City, Louisiana
http://www.pbase.com/ericsorensen

I don't have that lens, but my old 100-300 4.5-5.6 still auto-focused using the cheap $75 tamron 1.4X extender. I think most people with the 100-400 will verify this. The autofocus will not work with the canon 1.4X extender on the lens (AF is ONLY possible with the EOS-1v and EOS-3 cameras, ONLY when using the center focusing point).
--
http://www.mike-j.smugmug.com

Here is a shot that I took from my upstairs window using the Canon 1.4TC and my 70-200 4L.

My advice would be to spend the extra dollars and go for the Canon instead of the Tamron. Why compromise the sharpness of your $1,400 lens by trying to save a few dollars on the converter?

DickH said:

Did you shoot thru the window ??

Did you shoot handheld with the IS operating or from a tripod?

What was the approx distance to the hawk?

What model or part number is your Tamoron ?

Not sure whether that is a Cooper's or Sharp-Shinned hawk.

Nice shot and makes me anxious to make up my mind as to what to order?

I see hawks in our yard periodically but haven't been able to
capture in a photo.

I have made a small sliding window to shoot photos of birds in the
yard - temporarily confined to this type of photography - Most of
my photos at this time are at 30-40 feet distance using the 75-300
Canon. Would hope that the 100-400L would be a major improvement
over the 75-300 and the occasional use of a 1.4x TC would be a nice
plus.

I have been testing a flash extender and have had good and poor
results todate. Poor results tend to be related to poor focus and
sometimes too low of shutter speeds (windy days and overcast skies)

I suspect that one has to plan on use of tripod for most
telextender shots but would be nice to be able to take hand held
shots (IS operating) when necessary to grab a photo (like your hawk
photo) when the opportunity is presented.

Badfinger said:

I was reading this post a few minutes ago and put my Tamron 1.4
converter on under my 100-400L, walked upstairs and to my surprise
this hawk landed on my fence! I shot quickly and only got two
before he tore after a bird. This is out of the camera and levels
only adjusted. Auto foucus worked fine here's the details:

Photograph Details
Date Taken: 2004-12-16 12:56:12
Date Digitized: 2004-12-16 12:56:12
Date Modified: 2004-12-16 13:17:04
Make: Canon
Model: Canon EOS DIGITAL REBEL
Size: 2048x3072
Bytes: 7186672
Aperture: f/5.6
ISO: 800
Focal Length: 400mm (guess: 622mm in 35mm)
Exposure Time: 0.0062s (1/160)
Exposure Bias: 0
ColorSpace: sRGB

Click to expand...

**** H

Click to expand...

--
Visit my gallery at http://www.pbase.com/dstearn/300d_gallery

As I said earlier this was a real time effort to demonstrate the converter. The light was poor, there were branches in front of the hawk, and I was inside the house. I don't know why the tamron would give up any sharpness compared to the Canon but I can tell you there wouldn't have been a picture if I had to manually focus this shot. I was too busy cranking up the ISO to 800 to get some shutter speed. As I took it he went after a bird and was gone! I'll try to answer your questions below.

DickH said:

Great - good to hear that autofocus worked with the 100-400L on the
DRebel.

Did you shoot thru the window ??

Click to expand...

Yes, I didn't have time to set-up the shoot as I would like to.

DickH200652 said:

Did you shoot handheld with the IS operating or from a tripod?

Click to expand...

Handheld with IS on 1

DickH200652 said:

What was the approx distance to the hawk?

Click to expand...

About 50'

DickH200652 said:

What model or part number is your Tamoron ?

Click to expand...

It's "F" model

DickH200652 said:

Not sure whether that is a Cooper's or Sharp-Shinned hawk.

Nice shot and makes me anxious to make up my mind as to what to order?

I see hawks in our yard periodically but haven't been able to
capture in a photo.

I have made a small sliding window to shoot photos of birds in the
yard - temporarily confined to this type of photography - Most of
my photos at this time are at 30-40 feet distance using the 75-300
Canon. Would hope that the 100-400L would be a major improvement
over the 75-300 and the occasional use of a 1.4x TC would be a nice
plus.

I have been testing a flash extender and have had good and poor
results todate. Poor results tend to be related to poor focus and
sometimes too low of shutter speeds (windy days and overcast skies)

I suspect that one has to plan on use of tripod for most
telextender shots but would be nice to be able to take hand held
shots (IS operating) when necessary to grab a photo (like your hawk
photo) when the opportunity is presented.

Badfinger said:

I was reading this post a few minutes ago and put my Tamron 1.4
converter on under my 100-400L, walked upstairs and to my surprise
this hawk landed on my fence! I shot quickly and only got two
before he tore after a bird. This is out of the camera and levels
only adjusted. Auto foucus worked fine here's the details:

Photograph Details
Date Taken: 2004-12-16 12:56:12
Date Digitized: 2004-12-16 12:56:12
Date Modified: 2004-12-16 13:17:04
Make: Canon
Model: Canon EOS DIGITAL REBEL
Size: 2048x3072
Bytes: 7186672
Aperture: f/5.6
ISO: 800
Focal Length: 400mm (guess: 622mm in 35mm)
Exposure Time: 0.0062s (1/160)
Exposure Bias: 0
ColorSpace: sRGB

Click to expand...

**** H

Click to expand...

--

Dave S said:

Here is a shot that I took from my upstairs window using the Canon
1.4TC and my 70-200 4L.

My advice would be to spend the extra dollars and go for the Canon
instead of the Tamron. Why compromise the sharpness of your $1,400
lens by trying to save a few dollars on the converter?

Click to expand...

Excellent sharp photos of the robin, starling and cedar waxwing ! I noted that you used flash for several of your bird photos. I am curious as to what distance you were from the birds, which flash you used and other details if you care to discuss !

**** H

****,

I just got my 100-400 on Friday and shot a regatta yesterday. All were handheld with IS, on a moving boat at moving boats. I wasn't using a teleconverter, so it is just an example of how the IS DOES indeed help.

DickH said:

I have the Canon DRebel and considering purchase of Canon 100-400L
plus the 1.4 II telextender. After looking over some reviews, I
have questions about whether autofocus will work with the above
combination and what other areas may be limited when used with the
DRebel.

If someone has experience with the above setup, would appreciate
hearing their comments !

Thanks
--
**** H

Click to expand...