topic Advice requested re Canon 1.4 extender in EF & RF Lenses

Advice requested re Canon 1.4 extender

Wandalynn — Fri, 30 Oct 2020 00:57:47 GMT

I already had a Canon 1.4x mark I extender when I recently bought a Canon 100-400 L II lens. The mark I extender seems to work fine with it but should I spring for a mark III extender for this lens? I had been using the mark 1 extender with the similar-vintage Canon 300mm f4 L. Cameras are EOS R and 90D and I shoot mostly butterflies, bees, and smaller nature--not many birds. Thanks.

Re: Advice requested re Canon 1.4 extender

Peter — Fri, 30 Oct 2020 13:33:34 GMT

If 90D has the same AF module as 80D has, then x1.4 III will give you more usable AF points than x1.4 or 1.4 II. Check page 135 in the 80D manual. From 1 point to 9 points.

You can try yourself right now with x1.4 and 100-400 II and check how many AF points you are able to use.

Re: Advice requested re Canon 1.4 extender

Waddizzle — Fri, 30 Oct 2020 14:32:42 GMT

@Wandalynn wrote:
I already had a Canon 1.4x mark I extender when I recently bought a Canon 100-400 L II lens. The mark I extender seems to work fine with it but should I spring for a mark III extender for this lens? I had been using the mark 1 extender with the similar-vintage Canon 300mm f4 L. Cameras are EOS R and 90D and I shoot mostly butterflies, bees, and smaller nature--not many birds. Thanks.

The 6D Mark II has the same AF system as both the 80D and 90D, or at least seems to. You get 27 f/8 AF points, three rows of 9 AF points, with the 1.4x III and the 100-400mm Mark II.

Re: Advice requested re Canon 1.4 extender

ebiggs1 — Fri, 30 Oct 2020 14:35:16 GMT

" I had been using the mark 1 extender with the similar-vintage Canon 300mm f4 L."

This is one of the few lenses I recommend using a 1.4x tele-con. It works very well. Personal experience with both since I own both. As a general rule I am not a great fan of extenders. My friends tell me the new 100-400mm zoom is also a good working combo. I can't say personally since I have neither the Mk III tel-con nor the new 100-400mm zoom. However, form what I am told it is worth getting the Mk III extender for the new zoom.

I very much prefer native FL. IMHO, a super zoom like one of the 150-600mm lenses is a better choice. Again though, you have the Mk II version 100-400mm so I would go for the new Mk III 1.4x tel con. AF points is not the only benefit here.

Re: Advice requested re Canon 1.4 extender

wq9nsc — Fri, 30 Oct 2020 15:42:47 GMT

Optically, I really don't think you are going to be able to tell a difference with most combinations between your original and the latest version. If you didn't have an extender and wanted one, then getting the newest one makes sense but I wouldn't move to the newer version from what you current are using.

An extender is always going to reduce the image quality of the native lens, with a really good lens that can be acceptable. But with the current high pixel count sensors, in many cases cropping is going to work as well or better. If the lost f stop from the extender forces you to an exposure triangle where the ISO is set more than a stop or two from native then the quality may be lower from the combination than cropped. The other option with the extender is dropping shutter speed to compensate but again the loss due to motion blur may exceed any gain from the extra 40% increase in image "fill" of the sensor.

I have taken a lot of test images with my EF 300 and 400 f2.8 lens with a 1.4X in place and I shot one soccer game with the EF 300 1.4X combo while my EF 400 was in for a checkup. The images are very nice because the bare glass is so good but even with these the loss between bare glass and using an extender is obvious. If you consistently need an extender on a lens, then you really need longer glass instead of a newer extender.

Rodger

Re: Advice requested re Canon 1.4 extender

PhotoGerry — Sat, 31 Oct 2020 16:38:52 GMT

I use the 1.4x mk III extender with the new 100-400 zoom lens on occasion and found the focus not quite satisfactory until I removed a clear lens filter. If I left the lens filter in place and removed the extender, the focus was sharp. I'm interested in hearing others experience/knowledge with this topic.

Just for fun, I'm posting two images shot at 560mm (Canon 100-400 F4.5-5.6L IS USM Mark II + 1.4X Mark III Ext) with no clear uv protector. I should have had a better shutter speed for the skydivers, as it was difficult tracking them as I had no warning when they would jump. Cheers.. G

Re: Advice requested re Canon 1.4 extender

Waddizzle — Sat, 31 Oct 2020 20:31:27 GMT

@PhotoGerry wrote:
I use the 1.4x mk III extender with the new 100-400 zoom lens on occasion and found the focus not quite satisfactory until I removed a clear lens filter. If I left the lens filter in place and removed the extender, the focus was sharp. I'm interested in hearing others experience/knowledge with this topic.

Just for fun, I'm posting two images shot at 560mm (Canon 100-400 F4.5-5.6L IS USM Mark II + 1.4X Mark III Ext) with no clear uv protector. I should have had a better shutter speed for the skydivers, as it was difficult tracking them as I had no warning when they would jump. Cheers.. G

There is such thing as a "clear UV filter". There are UV filters, which the lens does not like. And, there are Clear filters, which do not seem to have any effect on lens performance. I recommend B+W Nano Clear filters for any lens. Never UV or CPL.

Re: Advice requested re Canon 1.4 extender

ebiggs1 — Sun, 01 Nov 2020 16:10:10 GMT

"there are Clear filters, which do not seem to have any effect on lens performance."

Not my experience. My first version 100-400mm Canon did not play well with any filter. I sold my ef 400mm f5.6L prime to buy the 100-400mm and later regretted it. So I sold the 100-400mm zoom to buy another 400mm f5.6L. Live and learn.

Re: Advice requested re Canon 1.4 extender

Waddizzle — Sun, 01 Nov 2020 18:24:42 GMT

@ebiggs1 wrote:
"there are Clear filters, which do not seem to have any effect on lens performance."

Not my experience. My first version 100-400mm Canon did not play well with any filter. I sold my ef 400mm f5.6L prime to buy the 100-400mm and later regretted it. So I sold the 100-400mm zoom to buy another 400mm f5.6L. Live and learn.

Sounds like a good reason to simply remove the filter, and go without one. If your images were still not to your liking, then the problem was the lens, not the filters.

I could not get sharp images with the 100-400mm II until I removed the UV filter, and set Image Priority to FOCUS.

Re: Advice requested re Canon 1.4 extender

ebiggs1 — Sun, 01 Nov 2020 18:42:36 GMT

"Sounds like a good reason to simply remove the filter, and go without one"

The filter did not remain on it for long. Two of my closer friends had the same lens and filter issues. We all sold it and bought, in my case bought another, the 400mm f5.6L. Even without a filter the 100-400mm is not as sharp as the prime. Besides the first 100-400mm has additional problems not just not liking filters. It really soured me and probably why I never bought the current version of the 100-400mm which I am told is much better. No first hand experience with it.

Re: Advice requested re Canon 1.4 extender

Waddizzle — Sun, 01 Nov 2020 19:51:54 GMT

@ebiggs1 wrote:
"Sounds like a good reason to simply remove the filter, and go without one"

The filter did not remain on it for long. Two of my closer friends had the same lens and filter issues. We all sold it and bought, in my case bought another, the 400mm f5.6L. Even without a filter the 100-400mm is not as sharp as the prime. Besides the first 100-400mm has additional problems not just not liking filters. It really soured me and probably why I never bought the current version of the 100-400mm which I am told is much better. No first hand experience with it.

I have not used the 400mm f/5.6 nor the original 100-400mm. The 100-400mm II is razor sharp, even wide open.

Re: Advice requested re Canon 1.4 extender

ebiggs1 — Sun, 01 Nov 2020 22:24:15 GMT

"The 100-400mm II is razor sharp, even wide open."

That is what I have heard. However, not interested. Two reasons and they both begin with Sigma.

Re: Advice requested re Canon 1.4 extender

Wandalynn — Wed, 04 Nov 2020 02:18:58 GMT

Thank you everyone for your input and sample photos. It gives me some good points to look further into. And to see if I know someone who has a mark III that I can try out.

Re: Advice requested re Canon 1.4 extender

wq9nsc — Wed, 04 Nov 2020 16:53:56 GMT

Doing a test with the version iii extender would be the best way for you to decide if the upgrade is worth it for you.

With current sensors, you really have to decide whether you are better off cropping versus using an extender. I am going to be shooting some outside stuff later today and for fun shot the same subject from the same distance using an EF 400 f2.8 IS II with and without the version II 1.4X extender. Here are a couple of comparison shots below with the bare lens cropped to basically the same subject size for both conditions.

The EF 400 f2.8 is one of optically sharpest lenses Canon makes so even with the degradation via the extender it is still sharp but the results are noticeable. This was using my 1DX III, the same setup with my 5DS R would likely bias the results even more towards cropping.

Just a little more data to help you decide whether it is worthwhile to upgrade from an early to later version of an extender. The better high ISO performance of newer bodies helps offset the old problem of losing a stop with the 1.4X but with the denser/higher MP sensor it makes cropping a much more viable option also.

First image is bare EF 400 f2.8 IS II, the second with the 1.4X and both were shot from exactly the same location. The last image shows why the loss of depth of field is a drawback to the use of the extender, only about a 3" loss for this combination at the distance I was shooting but if I had used the extender with the last image it would have been an issue.

Rodger

Re: Advice requested re Canon 1.4 extender

Wandalynn — Thu, 05 Nov 2020 01:05:10 GMT

Rodger,

Thank you so much!! Excellent points and fabulous images to illustrate them. Wanda

Re: Advice requested re Canon 1.4 extender

wq9nsc — Thu, 05 Nov 2020 14:50:34 GMT

You are welcome Wanda and I hope it helps you with your decision making.

My first digital was an EOS 1D Mark II with an 8.2 MP sensor and I found the 1.4X extender to be very useful. With my 1DX II and III and 5DS R bodies I find that the difference in final quality between heavier cropping with a bare lens and using an extender is far closer and this is with very sharp primes, generally the drop in sharpness is going to be more significant when pairing a zoom lens with an extender making a 1.4X vs cropping an even closer decision.

There are certainly cases where a 1.4X will work quite well, particularly if the loss of one stop and the slowing of AF speed is acceptable. In really good lighting, a converter can produce very nice results but under less optimal conditions the 1.4X makes them even less optimal.

With a high pixel count sensor, cropping works very well if you can keep the ISO in the lower range. The slight increase in depth of field can save you at times because if shooting sports or wildlife the AF point isn't always exactly where you would have liked it and a little extra DoF gives you a sometimes image saving fudge factor. With landscapes and portraiture you can take the time to get the shot perfectly set up but trying to do that in other environments often means you missed a killer shot by 100 milliseconds which means you completely missed the opportunity.

I believe any image quality improvement between your current 1.4X and the new one would require extreme pixel peeping to see. I would put these to the same test as those who try to sell expensive audio patch cables, if the difference isn't readily apparent then your money is probably better spent towards another useful lens or other item that will give you greater benefits for the work that you do.

Rodger

Re: Advice requested re Canon 1.4 extender

PhotoGerry — Sat, 07 Nov 2020 13:45:33 GMT

I'm wondering were the forcus points might be in the first photo. Could you use AF with the 1.4X in the lens stack?

Thanks in advance,

Re: Advice requested re Canon 1.4 extender

wq9nsc — Sat, 07 Nov 2020 15:47:49 GMT

Gerry,

I was using single point spot AF and I shifted the camera right before that shot so the focus point is just inward of the leading edge of the roof, basically the vertical plane would be the middle of the head of the bird sitting on the left edge of the feeder.

I was using a 1DX III which has no problem doing AF with the 1.4X. Since this is the EF 400 f2.8, the 1DX III will AF with both the 1.4X and 2X extenders and PROBABLY could do with both in use simultaneously since the AF will work at f8 but I have never tried that combination.

These are a couple of shots taken with the EF 400 f2.8 with 2X and heavily cropped, still usable but the extender takes a toll. The cat photo has the AF point at the bottom corner of the image and is at ISO 1250 which has a very minor impact upon detail, the moon has the AF point on the center of the moon and is at ISO 400.

The final image is with the EF 800 f5.6, same focal length and aperture as the EF 400 f2.8 plus 2X combination. Image quality wise it performs a bit better than the 400 plus 2X. Some lenses do take a converter well but not all of them and especially the 2X. I used a 400 f5.6 for many years and I as much as I tried I could never capture what I felt was a really good image using it with a 2X converter while the 400 f2.8 plus 2X is a fairly usable combination as long as you don't critically compare it to the bare 400 lens.

Extenders do work and provide usable images but when you directly compare an image with the bare lens versus the extended version, the loss of quality is there. There are times that the extender is definitely useful but I think with the higher res sensors we have now, many of us who relied upon them a lot in the past will need to re-evaluate. I don't think the choice is as clear or easy a decision as it was 10 years ago.

Rodger

Re: Advice requested re Canon 1.4 extender

ebiggs1 — Mon, 09 Nov 2020 15:29:45 GMT

The house sparrows were all shot with a tel-con? I ask but wasn't going to say anything as they are not up to your usual outstanding work.

The cat and the finch are very nice, indeed. BTW, the little finch is pretty red. Ours are not that brilliant.

Re: Advice requested re Canon 1.4 extender

wq9nsc — Mon, 09 Nov 2020 19:35:24 GMT

Ernie,

Those sparrows were heavily cropped shot from too far away hand held in a strong wind so one word for those conditions would be sub-optimal but in reality they were pretty typical. I was curious how the setup would do with and without a telecon in pretty typical conditions where you aren't as close as you would like to be.

And I think I am entering my sub-optimal photography phase. I have been stalking an extremely shy woodpecker who refuses to let me get anywhere close and he also loves to be strongly backlit, maybe the bugs are closer to the surface on the shaded side of a tree. These were shot with a 5DS and EF 800 and cropped from about 10% of the sensor area. I am sure that at some point he will decide to actually pose for me. At least my washing machine transmission repair went well today so maybe I can take that up as my new calling 🙂

Rodger