400 f/5.6 + 1.5x tc + AF?

[warby]

Hello,
My question is in regards to the functionality of AF when using a teleconverter with the 400 f5.6 lens. I have read mixed reviews...some claiming AF still works with converters such as the Kenko 1.5x SHQ, while others say MF is the only was. Can anyone confirm or dispute this. I have been shooting eagles lately and could use a bit more reach for some fishing shots. My setup is Canon 30D and the 400 lens. Thanks for any input.

[wings]

There's considerable discussion on this topic under the thread "400mm+stacked tc". Just scroll down and you'll find it.

[JohnZ]

I have also tried my 400 f5.6 with a 1.5x and to be honest it was not the best. You really need particularly good light to make it function properly. Maybe I wasn`t patient enough ?

[Roy C]

It will certainly not work nearly as well as the bare lens but AF should be ok with that set-up. I use the 30D and 40D with a taped 1.4 tc, from what I can gather the non reporting 1.5x AF's better. You need lots of light and contrast and even then you will get the occasional 'hunting'.

Although I hand hold the bare 400/5.6 I always use a tripod when using it with a 1.4tc. There are two advantages to using a tripod with this set-up IMO.

1) It pays to stop down to f8 (effectively f11) to get the best IQ and so the shutter speeds could be slowish.

2) With a tripod it is a lot easier to manual focus if it is struggling to AF, in these circumstances I find if you roughly manual focus and then let the AF finish the job.

If you get it right it right the IQ is almost as good as the bare lens. Attached are a few shots I have taken over the past couple of weeks with a 400/5.6 and 1.4 tc.

[Bob Thompson]

I can verify all that Roy has mentioned, I found the AF was a bit slower to lock on but I have only been using the Canon 1.4x extender with the Canon 400mm f5.6 on a Canon 400D camera.

Bob

PS: I forgot to mention I have taped the pins

[seggs]

I have the same set up with the 400mm and 1.5 Kenko tc. with a 350D.
Like others have said, you need good light and have to be rock steady for good results.
The AF works fine and you don,t have to tape the pins, sometimes its a bit harder to lock the focus onto the subject being the only downside.

[IanF]

I use the 400mm with Kenko 1.5x. Provided the focus is somewhere aroundabout it's almost instantaneous in decent light - though for some subjects I find the smaller diagonal focus points work much better than the centre one. I find it works better than the Canon 1.4x which I seldom use nowadays.

In poor light the set up struggles to find focus.

For me it's something to use when the birds are just too distant for the lens alone rather than to use permanently attached to the camera.

The first was taken last Friday hand held with 1.5x from a long way off (c.90m) - a straight crop of 900x675 pixels with some unsharp mask.

The second is just the 400mm f5,6 by itself - straight crop of 900x675 pixels with unsharp mask.

[wings]

Bob, nice shot of the spoonbill. Looks like it's been tagged 3 times.

[Bob Thompson]

Wings, thanks about the comment on the Black-faced Spoonbil, actually the bird has been tagged once but the colour combination of the tags show in which country it was tagged

Bob

[wings]

Thanks for the up and up. Interesting traveller.

[Roy C]

Wings, thanks about the comment on the Black-faced Spoonbil, actually the bird has been tagged once but the colour combination of the tags show in which country it was tagged

Bob
This is quite right, I got a pic of a tagged Spoonbill on my local patch last year and sent the tag info to a guy in Holland - he sent me the life history of the bird.

[IanF]

Even managed a flight photo with the 400mm+1.5x yesterday of a fast flying Goldeneye!

The Long-tailed Duck was around 80m hence the 1.5x added. I was trying for a few photos when the Goldeneye came into to land. Mind you it's the only sharp photo I managed despite it passing twice.

Taken hand held in just about perfect lighting.

[christineredgate]

Ian,that flight shot is super sharp.

[Andrew]

Hi all,

Could I ask what the full/proper name for this non-reporting 1.5x Kenko Canon Teleconverter is so as to ensure I am looking at the right item when checking the websites.

Thanks,
Andrew.

[Andrew]

Hi again,

Would this be the 1.5x teleconverter that needs no pins taping?

http://www.bristolcameras.co.uk/p-kenko-1-5x-dg-af-teleconverter.htm#FAQs

Anyone know of a better UK based price?

Cheers,
Andrew.

[Roy C]

As an update to this thread here are a few shots I took in the garden last week with the 400/5.6 and 1.4tc (Canon-taped). I very often use the lens with a tc these days and If you get it right you lose very little detail with the combo.

[JohnZ]

Yes I do believe it is Andrew. If you are fortunate you may find one on ebay.
Nice pics Roy.

[IanF]

Hi again,

Would this be the 1.5x teleconverter that needs no pins taping?

http://www.bristolcameras.co.uk/p-kenko-1-5x-dg-af-teleconverter.htm#FAQs

Anyone know of a better UK based price?

Cheers,
Andrew.

Yep! That's the right one. Got mine from there.

[Andrew]

Wonderful Ian, looks like a day trip to Bristol for me next week.

Pricier than delivery but I get it in my hands and have a day out.

[JohnZ]

There are two on ebay. One is from Hong Kong costing £69.99 but the P&P is free. The other is up to £27.00 so far.

EDIT ; The latter is in Gateshead.

[john-henry]

As an update to this thread here are a few shots I took in the garden last week with the 400/5.6 and 1.4tc (Canon-taped). I very often use the lens with a tc these days and If you get it right you lose very little detail with the combo.


Roy,

If you can get top quality like that out of your 400 + TC what do you want to spend a grand or two on another lens for??

[Roy C]

Roy,

If you can get top quality like that out of your 400 + TC what do you want to spend a grand or two on another lens for??
The IQ will not be a lot different I am sure but what you do get with, say, the 300/2.8 and 2x tc is better AF on a xxD body, also you gain 1 stop of light and a 2 stop IS system. It is up to the individual as to whether this is worth £2.5k?

BTW I use my 400/5.6 with a taped tc most of the time now but I also use a good tripod and gimbal head which for me makes all the difference.

[eastwood]

That's one beauty about the 300 f4 IS. Add on a Canon 1.4X EF makes it 420 f5.6. Stack on a Keno or Tamron Pro 1.4X and it becomes ~570 f8, but the second TC is not reported and recorded. Still retains AF and IS, no taping required. (slower, of course, and hunts a bit).
Worth it or not? It is very personal.
These 2 are taken with 50D Full frame just resized. Shoot from same point.
1/. 300f4 with Canon 1.4
2/. 300f4 with Canon 1.4 + Tamron 1.4
(I know the 400 f5.6 has several advantages over the 300 f4 though)

[AC/DC]

But surely a 400 f/5.6 with one teleconverter will be a bit sharper than a 300 f/4 with 2 converters?

[Roy C]

That's one beauty about the 300 f4 IS. Add on a Canon 1.4X EF makes it 420 f5.6. Stack on a Keno or Tamron Pro 1.4X and it becomes ~570 f8, but the second TC is not reported and recorded. Still retains AF and IS, no taping required. (slower, of course, and hunts a bit).
Worth it or not? It is very personal.

You are right that when you stack converters the Camera will only ever see one but you are still effectively shooting at f8 the same as a f5.6 lens with a 1.4tc (be it taped or non reporting). There is no reason why a f4 lens with stacked 1.4tc's should focus any better than a f5.6 lens with a single 1.4tc.

The same thing would apply to the 300/2.8 if you stacked a 2x and 1.4tc, sure the camera would attempt to AF as it only sees f5.6 but again you are shooting at f8 regardless of what the camera actually thinks it is.

I have a 70-200/4 which I have stacked tc's on and it will attempt to AF as it only sees f5.6 but the actual AF performance is not quite as good as the 400/5.6 with a taped tc. I would expect it to be about the same but maybe the zoom does not perform as good as the prime.

At the end of the day the only reason why anyone can get AF on a non 1 series Camera at f8 is because Canon have to build-in a bit of slack with the AF system to make doubly sure that it will perform well at f5.6.

I would be surprised if the 300/4 with stacked converters would come near to the IQ of the 400/5.6 with a single converter. With due respect I think your second picture compared with the three that I posted kind of substantiates this, maybe others would disagree.

BTW I am not in any way knocking the 300/4 as it is obviously a very fine lens and over the 400/5.6 you have the obvious advantage of IS and if shooting at 300mm the extra stop is handy in low light conditions. Only yesterday I was reading a review from a well know professional who reckoned that the 300/4 was not that far behind the 300/2.8 in terms of IQ with the bare lens.

[JohnZ]

Well I tried again today and did not fare much better than before. I am using a Kenko 1.5x TC and once again the lens hunted furiously. Mind you when it did lock on it locked on big style. I also noticed that, once again, it affected the exposure as well. The pics came out slightly overexposed.
It did come in handy as I got some shots of a very small Lapwing chicklet !

[eastwood]

You are right, Roy. I have both the f2.8 and f4. When I stacked 2X and 1.4 to the f2.8, IQ is much lower. The 2 bare lenses are almost equal, but the 2.8 gives the edge in low light condition and the reach if I add the 2X. With the f4, I normall add the 1.4 only.

[Roy C]

Well I tried again today and did not fare much better than before. I am using a Kenko 1.5x TC and once again the lens hunted furiously. Mind you when it did lock on it locked on big style. I also noticed that, once again, it affected the exposure as well. The pics came out slightly overexposed.
It did come in handy as I got some shots of a very small Lapwing chicklet !
I used to notice the exposure thing with a tc John but since changing to Manual the exposures come out correct. I am surprised that the combo hunted so much with a Kenko 1.5 tc as some users have reported that AF with this non reporting tc was fine. Mind you you are still trying to AF at f8 regardless of what the camera thinks it is so in that respect you would not expect it to be any different to a reporting tc with the pins taped.

I am just out to try and bag a shot of a Male bullfinch that has been visiting my feeder for the past few days (with a taped tc of course ;) )

[Roy C]

You are right, Roy. I have both the f2.8 and f4. When I stacked 2X and 1.4 to the f2.8, IQ is much lower. The 2 bare lenses are almost equal, but the 2.8 gives the edge in low light condition and the reach if I add the 2X. With the f4, I normall add the 1.4 only.
Lucky you having the 300/2.8, I am always trying to talk myself out of this lens but it keeps coming back to tempt me :t:.
Do you hand hold the 300/2.8 + 2x and is the AF quick enough for Birds in flight at 600mm ?

[eastwood]

Lucky you having the 300/2.8, I am always trying to talk myself out of this lens but it keeps coming back to tempt me :t:.
Do you hand hold the 300/2.8 + 2x and is the AF quick enough for Birds in flight at 600mm ?

Roy,
I used to hand hold it all the time before. But now I tried to use a tripod for stationary birds and birds in perch. This improves the IQ and keeping rate a lot. It also enables me to use a slower shutter speed and/or stop down the aperture.
Tracking speed is OK if I set the limiter to 6.5m~infinity, provided the object is nothing like swallows, but it gives me sore arm if I do it for longer time (main reason for me to acquire the 300 f4). Another problem is, for a bigger subject at close range, it is very easy to have it not properly framed.
For a young and strong guy, this shouldn't be the problem though.
Thanks.

[Roy C]

Roy,
I used to hand hold it all the time before. But now I tried to use a tripod for stationary birds and birds in perch. This improves the IQ and keeping rate a lot. It also enables me to use a slower shutter speed and/or stop down the aperture.
Tracking speed is OK if I set the limiter to 6.5m~infinity, provided the object is nothing like swallows, but it gives me sore arm if I do it for longer time (main reason for me to acquire the 300 f4). Another problem is, for a bigger subject at close range, it is very easy to have it not properly framed.
For a young and strong guy, this shouldn't be the problem though.
Thanks.
Thanks for that Eastwood and apologies to the OP for deviating on this thread.
Although the 300/2.8 is considered lightweight against the 500/600 lenses it is still double the weight of my 400/5.6 which will not help with my style of shooting which is walking long distances and snatching a shot as and when an opportunity occurs. Also I am not a 'young and strong guy' but a weakling OAP :eek!:
Agree with you about using a tripod, I now use one all the time when I have a 1.4tc attached and sometimes even with the bare lens - the difference is immense with the keeper rate increasing dramatically. I am sure that if I got a 300/2.8 I would use it with a tripod most of the time.

[eastwood]

Exactly my style too, Roy. (Unless some special birds are known to hang on around a certain area, then I will bring the tripod along).