My Pictures are Horrible with Extender RF1.4x

[Laney93]

I have the R6 using the 100-500 rf lens. The pictures are great. But when i add the 1.4 extender the pictures are horrible. Never had this problem before the rf series.. is there something i need to do on my setup???

[Laney93]

im sorry for some reason i havent been seeing the notifications i was getting responses. no i havent figured out the issue..sounds like we are having the exact same problem

[esimioni]

I gave up on the extender and sold it.
I may get a 200-800mm RF. I'm sure it will be way better than the 100-500mm with the 1.4x extender, because it is almost impossible to be any worse.

[Tronhard]

I am impressed with the results I have seen with the 200-800 and will likely go in that direction in Q1 of next year.  I still get decent results from the Sigma adapted lenses on my R-series bodies, for my purposes, at least.

[shadowsports]

3 users posting to this topic now.  All using different bodies.  It becomes increasingly difficult to provide meaningful assistance when multiple users post to the same thread.     

Its best to start your own thread, with specific information about your body, lens and accessories.  Its also helpful if you can provide sample photos for us to evaluate and provide feedback on.  Using an extender does 2 things.  It reduces the camera's light gathering ability by one or more stops.  It can also decrease the number of focus points that can be utilized depending on aperture.  This will affect the camera's ability to lock focus.   

In order for us to assist, we need sample RAW photos with EXIF data.  Additionally, you can use Canon's free DPP software to see what the camera is focusing on.  To keep things clear and on point, please start your own topic so that your individual shooting situation, hardware, etc can be evaluated.    

[Tronhard]

I have heard mixed reviews on using extenders.  I had bought both the EF MkIII 1.4 and 2 x extenders and found rarely used them.  The 1.4 was ok with the 100-400 and 70-200, but the 2x showed a marked loss of image quality and was incredibly dark.   So, I prefer to get a lens with a native FL that gets me there instead.  A lot depends on what you are going to shoot and produce, but given you want to FL the question of output is the more unknown.  If you are producing modest sized prints or for digital display, you can always put the camera in crop mode - depending on what model there is 1.3 and 1.6 available available for FF, and if you are shooting with an APS-C sensor, you're already in 1.6 crop mode.
If you need the extra reach the RF 800mm lens was likely much the same price, and I am currently using the Sigma 150-600 and 60-600 lenses, but MAY save up for the 200-800 when it has come down in price a bit.   

[FloridaDrafter]

I have always kept a 1.4X extender in my bag. Do I use them a lot? No. But they do have a place in my bag. First and foremost, and this just doesn't apply to teleconverters, as your FL increases, shake/movement is exaggerated. I use a very fast shutter to compensate. I have Essential Tremors, which forces me to use high shutter speeds anyway, but when I use the 1.4X, I have to double it. I guess you could say that my "curse" is also a benefit when it comes to getting sharper images with the 1.4X. Typically, I use Tv mode so I can control shutter speed, I then use ISO to get the best balance in exposure. From the EOS 5D mark IV to my current crop of R's, improvements in ISO performance has been very useful for me. I do have a monopod and a tripod with a Wimberly II gimbal, but I've found them to be very limiting. I do much better stalking and being mobile.

Yesterday, prompted by this post, I put the 1.4X on my R5 and RF 100-500 as I was headed out the door to grocery shop. There are three ponds on the way and I planned on visiting them to give the 1.4X a workout. The pickins' were slim, but it was a nice sunny day and I managed a couple hundred shots. I missed a perfect shot of a King Fisher hovering over one of the ponds because I couldn't find it in my EVF in time as it was too close. Pulling FL back was useless with the RF 100-500 because, with an extender, you only have 200mm of usability (300-500).

I ended up with about a 75% keeper rate. Here are just a few samples.

Anhinga at 200 feet, 1/1250th, f/10, ISO 2000, 700mm.

Anhinga.

Double-crested Cormorants, 260 feet, 1/1250th, f/14, ISO 2000, 700mm.Double-crested Cormorants.

For comparison, these Double-crested Cormorants were shot in 2020 with the 5D mark IV using the EF 100-400mm L and EF 1.4X near the same place as above. 280 feet, 1/1000th, f/11, ISO 1000, 560mm.Double-crested Cormorants - 5D4 with EF 1.4X Extender.

Osprey, 200 feet, 1/1250th, f/10, ISO 800, 700mm. This was a tough shot because of the uneven light.Osprey Splashdown.

Turkey Vulture, 200 feet, 1/1250th, f/10, ISO 800, 700mm.

Turkey Vulture Liftoff.

Herring Gull, 150 feet, 1/1250th, f/10, ISO 800, 700mm.

Herring Gul.

These shots aren't what I expect from a bare lens, but they are usable. You just have to follow a few rules when using the 1.4X.

Newton

[shadowsports]

Newton,

Great photos!!! 

[FloridaDrafter]

---

@shadowsports wrote:

Newton,

Great photos!!! 

---

Thank you, Rick.

As you know, it's very aggravating not being able to fully retract the RF 100-500 with the extender attached. Since I rarely use it, I kept banging the front of the lens into stuff. In a two hour shoot, you would think I would have remembered, LOL!

Newton

[MJROVNER]

Same problem. I don't think it ever grabbed an eye with the 1.4 on. Keeper rate was ~ 20%. In recollection, i cannot remember if i ever saw an eye capture square with in the viewfinder (i.e. AF found an eye) with the extender on. I am sending the lens and extender to Canon for calibration.

Here's a screenshot of the EXIF from Lightroom: