Canon EF 70-300 ISKenko Teleplus PRO 300 DGX 1.4x AF Teleconverter (1 Viewer)

Craig S · Jun 12, 2011

Hi everyone.
Anyone had experience with the Kenko Pro 1.4x and the Canon EF 70-300 IS lens.
I have read so many reviews, it sounds like the Kenko will work reasonably well with the 70-300 IS, but, I have read some reviews that still cause me to have some doubts. I'm on the verge of ordering one but still hesitate and hope some of you with some experience can allay those last niggling doubts.
I already know that I will lose 1 stop of light, not concerned.
I have seen images of different lens using the Kenko, some are great others no so great. I am not concerned about getting tack sharp images.
I am currently using a 500mm mirror lens for distance, but, find it is limited as it does not have zoom capability, which is something I really do want and need for the areas that I shoot in. Other than that I am pretty satisfied with the mirror lens.
I have looked at the 70-200 f2.8 lenses and they will not meet my needs. The L series lenses are not even a consideration at this time.
Sounds like auto focus will work in good light but am not that concerned about it.
I posted a couple of images below that I captured with the mirror.
Brown Thrasher at about 15 feet.
Goose 30-40 feet, both hand held, with a Canon T1i.
Do you think the Kenko will produce an image close to the quality of these?

Craig S · Jun 14, 2011

I changed my search string and came up with hits on a few sites where the 70-300 IS and Kenko were discussed at length.
It confirmed the others reviews I have read. It works rather well in good light, but, af hunts in dim light at the long end of the zoom. I would have to use manual focus at the long end of the zoom in dim light. Images can degrade in dim light.
I did see sample images that were much better than I thought they would be.
I now realize that I would be using manual focus quite a bit in the areas that I walk. Not a big problem in early spring and fall, but, in summer I have to wear a mesh insect hood which would make accurate manual focus pretty much impossible.
I now feel I have enough information to decide.

eastwood · Jun 15, 2011

Hi, Craig,
I got this combination, but the images are a bit disappointing. (May be from the beginning, my 70-300 EF IS is in the not-so-good batch). I have stopped using them, see if I could try it out again sometime in good light day. I would say you mirror lens shots are better than mine shot with this combo. (Actually my 1.4 converter is a bit different, it is the TamronSP, but quite close to the kenko.)

Craig S · Jun 15, 2011

Hi Eastwood
Thanks for the reply.
Sorry to hear the Tamron didn't work so well for you.
I don't mind the mirror lens, it is entirely manual. Image quality seems to vary for no apparent reason, but it is not to bad for a really cheap lens. Worst thing about it is when in bush and subject is fairly close, within 15 feet or so, I often have a hard time getting the subject in the viewfinder due to starting out at 500mm. I would really prefer a zoom lens.
The other thing about the mirror lens is the depth of field is very shallow. Bokeh can be really heavy in some light conditions, but, normally I don't find it to bad.
Bugs are out now, nasty little black flies, mosquitoes and a myriad of other insects that fly into my eyes, nose, mouth and ears every time I stop to take a picture. I wear a mesh bug hood most of the time in summer and that interferes with the ability to manual focus so I doubt I would get a lot of use out of the Kenko this year.
I think I will wait until next spring and maybe take another look at zooms that go to 400mm or 500mm. For me the biggest drawback for these lenses is the weight.
I would really love an L series lens but that is not in the budget for a few years, at least.
Thanks again for your reply.

eastwood · Jun 17, 2011

Hi, Craig,
got good sunshine today, so I mounted the 70-300 IS with the Tamron 1.4X SP on my 50D and have a go.
Found the Centre point focus doesn't work. so have to shift to a side point. Found this mallard at close range, so an all point focus actually works better because it almost filled the frame. At this range, the image is not too bad, and is fully good for web. However on viewing it at 100%, it's quite soft though.
This is a full frame, after PS and resized. I would say it is what I can expect from the price I pay for the combo. Tamron has released a new 70-300 a few months ago, and my friend find it very good, and it is about 1/3 cheaper than the Canon, but don't know how it fares with the 1.4.

Craig S · Jun 17, 2011

Hi Eastwood
Thanks for posting the Mallard picture. The picture looks pretty good to me, looks better than my mirror lens captures.
I took the plunge yesterday and ordered a Kenko TelePlus MC4 AF 1.4X DGX from B&H.
I should have it by the middle of next week, I'll post some samples after I get used to it. Maybe by next weekend. Looking forward to getting it and trying it out.

eastwood · Jun 18, 2011

Waiting to see your report, Craig.

Craig S · Jun 22, 2011

The tc arrived today.
It is raining and overcast so I won't be getting any pictures outside today.
I did take a few pictures through a tripane window of my seed feeder and 2 birds.
The exif data is reported showed lens at 300mm and at 420mm. Even though light was very poor today the af did work, though it did search the odd time.
The only thing that surprised me was that the IS is constantly running. It seems that this is caused by not enough light or contrast.
The pictures of the seed feeders are at about 10 feet.
The Blue Jay is at about 7 feet.
The Grey Catbird is about 15 feet.
All pictures taken on AV setting, F8, ISO 400.
I didn't retouch any of the pictures, only resized them as they were right off the camera. Photos taken with a T1i mounted on a stedi-stock.
Weather forecast shows cloudy for next few days then more rain. I'm thinking it will perform better in brighter light.
The 300mm photo of the seed feeder is much better than the 420mm picture.

eastwood · Jun 23, 2011

Same thing with my 2X Kenko (non-pro) version with my 300 F4 IS. The IS jumps constantly, IQ is worst than a 300 with 1.4 (either Canon or the Tamron SP/Kenko Pro, I have the latter left in Hong Kong so that I don't have to carry everything with me on my trip back) IQ of the 2x Kenko + my 300 f2.8 is not good either, wash out, low contrast, and very noticeable chromatic abberation. I guess the IS issue may have something to do with the Kenko software. I need further trial to see if other factors are there.

Craig S · Jun 23, 2011

The IS stopped running when I focused on a bright object or something with a high contrast.
So far I'm not impressed with the image quality. I tried several variations using manual settings and still could not get a satisfactory image.
Weather forecast changed from cloudy to sunny and warm for the next few days. I will try the tc in the sunlight, but, I'm not confident that I will be happy with the results.

Craig S · Jun 23, 2011

Today was a nice sunny day so I went out and got some pictures.
All pictures are taken at 420mm, on AV setting, ISO 400, F8, free hand.
Picture of the Blue Jay and Brown Thrasher taken at about 15 feet, lightened and sharpened just to see what I could do with them.
Clay Colored Sparrow about 20 feet into the bush, I lightened it enough to see the birds markings. I was actually just a little surprised by the detail captured considering the dim light and distance.
Dragonflies are as they came off the camera.
In bright light the tc didn't do to badly and I think that is the best it will do with the 70-300 IS lens. I don't think the 70-300 IS would do much better on its own.
The lens does have problems focusing without contrast. I tried to take a picture of light yellow siding across the street but lens kept searching, until I used a brown wood rail in front of the house as the focus point.
Tried to take a picture of a bed of small white flowers, had to move camera around before af locked on, but picture turned out blurry anyways. If you are taking a picture into a dark spot in the bush the af might lock on but the picture will be of very poor quality.
The tc seems to work OK most of the time as long as there is sufficient light, which I found was almost bright day light.
I would probably question sending it back, but, the image stabilization runs constantly when the camera is on unless af locks on, but as soon as you move the camera away from the af point the is begins to run again. This alone is going to cause me to send it back.

eastwood · Jun 24, 2011

Should be a wise decision, Craig. I think you Brown Thrusher taken with the Mirror has a better IQ. I guess your MC4 is the non-pro Version. Somebody said that even the Pro version 1.4X will AF with lens max aperture f5.6. Haven't try that out myself. Will try to grab one when I go back to Vvisit my relatives in Hong Kong this Oct. I think we need to wait for more user reports before stepping into any further purchase. But definitely the non-pro version looks disappointing.
Thanks.

Craig S · Jun 24, 2011

Thanks for the reply Eastwood.
I got my RMA from B&H this morning will send it back this afternoon.
None of the pictures were really that much to my liking, the Blue Jay wasn't as sharp as I had hoped.
A little disappointed but I wasn't expecting great quality, I was hoping it would be similar to the 70-300IS quality but it really isn't. I might have kept it longer but for the IS problem.
I've read quite a few reviews on the Pro version and it is supposed to be better than the non pro version. Some say the Pro version is much the same as the Canon TC's.
I might give it a try, still deciding, it is almost twice the price of the non pro version delivered.
Next year I hope to get an L series lens, would prefer the 70-300 L with a TC as it is more compact and less weight than the 100-400 L.
I did have the Sigma 120-400 but didn't like it, slow focus and heavy.
I might just order the Pro version to try out, then I will have a better idea if it will work with the 70-300 L. If it isn't satisfactory I may have to buy the 100-400L as the Canon TC's won't fit the 70-300L.
I can rent a 70-300L or 100-400L in Winnipeg, will probably go that route before deciding.

eastwood · Jun 24, 2011

By the way, Craig, the 70-300 IS does AF with a Pro Tamron or Kenko 1.4X, so you may give it a try and see.
Another good one with great value is the New Tamron 70-300, it is a special edition, a birding friend is using it as a walk around lens and claimed that it is even better than his Nikon 70-300 VR. May be you can rent one and compare. It is about 1/3 the price of the Canon 70-300L, but I feel the build quality shoud not match the Canon.

Craig S · Jun 26, 2011

I have been looking at the new Tamron lens and it certainly sounds interesting. I think I'm going to wait until next spring before looking at any new lenses.

eastwood · Jun 27, 2011

When I was back in Hong Kong last Autumn, I bought a Tamron 18-270mm old version, and intended to use it as an all-round travelling lens to accompany my 300mm prime + 1.4. I used it to shoot birds occassionally and found it turned out better than my Canon 70-300 IS, I don't know if it is due to sample variation or not. Since then a newer PZD version of this lens has come out. I paid around4,000 HKD (around 500CND) for it, 270mm is for sure a bit too short, but here are 2 100% crops with some photoshop work (on brightness, contrast and sharpness only) and they are quite a big crop too.
The wode open aperture at 270 is 6.3. It akes the Kenko DG Pro 1.4X TC but simewhat sluggish AF, and cerainly not much in photo IQ.

Craig S · Jun 27, 2011

Hi Eastwood
Those crops are pretty impressive.
I find I can't crop images, taken with the 70-300IS, much before they start to degrade.
I looked at the 18-270 and thought it would not have the zoom I desire. I think I will wait until next spring before I decide on a lens or teleconverter.
The lens I favor most at the moment is the Canon70-300L, but, it is another 10 months before I will make a decision so that could change.

eastwood · Jun 27, 2011

Sure the L lens should be the top of the batch, Craig.

Craig S · Jun 27, 2011

I've seen samples of the 70-300L taken hand held and they are quite impressive.
Yes indeed it is at the top of the list, but, when the time comes will I be willing to part with around $1,800.00, plus another $300 for the Kenko 1.4 pro.
I use my camera pretty much every day in spring and summer, it falls off toward fall and through the winter. I would use the lens a lot but still parting with around $2,100.00 will be a question when the time comes.

Craig S · Jun 28, 2011

Here is a link to a site that hosts links to several reviews of the Tamron 70-300mm f4-5.6 Di VC USD.

http://lensreviews.1001noisycameras.com/tamron-70-300mm-f4-56-di-vc/

Canon EF 70-300 ISKenko Teleplus PRO 300 DGX 1.4x AF Teleconverter (1 Viewer)

Member

Attachments

Member

Well-known member

Member

Well-known member

Attachments

Member

Well-known member

Member

Attachments

Well-known member

Member

Member

Attachments

Well-known member

Member

Well-known member

Member

Well-known member

Attachments

Member

Well-known member

Member

Member

Similar threads

Users who are viewing this thread