Canon 200-400 f/4 reviewed by "Chasseur d'Images"

Started Jun 20, 2013 | Discussions thread
dhogaza Regular Member • Posts: 343
Re: Canon 200-400 f/4 reviewed by "Chasseur d'Images"

Jerry Fusselman wrote:

Anyway, perhaps you can tell me what is wrong with my thoughts on additional reasons for making it not rearmost:

  1. Higher image quality compared to an external multiplier due to more degrees of freedom for the lens designers.

Intuitively, nothing wrong with your thinking at all.  When I first read about the internal TC I assumed the same.

The problem is, as written above, that the 1.4x III is so good that testers find remarkably little difference in image quality (sharpness, CA, vignetting) when the 1.4x III is added to the latest supertelephotos.

Thus, as said above, there's just not much headroom for improvement.  When I first saw systematic and objective comparisons of the new 600/4 IS II with the 1.4x III I realized that an internal TC wouldn't be noticeably better.  It's hard to compete with near-perfection!

This is not a knock on the internal TC.  It's a testament to how amazingly good the 1.4x III is.

Post (hide subjects) Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow