1.4x or 2x Canon converter on 300mm f/4 L

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

>Anyone with experience with this combo can you tell me the image quality
>or even show me a link with the images?

With the 1.4x you won't see any noticeable image quality drop off and
you'll still be able to autofocus, which is nice. AF speed slows down
a bit but not too bad.

With the 2x you might notice a bit of light fall-off in the corners but
image quality is still OK. You won't be able to AF with the non-Pro
bodies but can still AF with the center sensor on the 1D series Pro
bodies. Even with the Pro bodies the AF speed drops off quite a bit
though.

>Even a non Canon converter on the lens, I'd still like to see the
>results.

Different lens (500 f/4 L IS) but here are a couple of full frame
images I shot recently that might show how little you lose with a
converter if you start with a good quality lens, keeping in mind you
lose some image quality when converted to jpegs ...

http://members.aol.com/bhilton665/ [...] 4_corm.jpg ... 2x
t/c, ISO 320, f/11, 1D M II body ... this is the 2x II, I still had
center focus so got the eye sharp.

http://members.aol.com/bhilton665/T9D8069_quail.jpg ... 1.4x full frame
shot last week, 1D M II with the older 1.4x (ie, not the II converter).
With the 1.4x I could shift the AF point to get the eye sharp.

You should get similar results with the 300 f/4 L (which I also have,
but rarely use with converters anymore after getting the 500, which is
an incredible lens). I would start with the 1.4x and add the 2x later
though.

Bill

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"JohnR66" <nospam@att.net> wrote in message
news:tBrne.274857$cg1.30352@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
> Anyone with experience with this combo can you tell me the image quality
> or even show me a link with the images?
> I'd be very greatful!
> John
>
> P.S. Even a non Canon converter on the lens, I'd still like to see the
> results.
>

Not the 300 but 400 5.6L with/out the 1.4x..
www.knighttrain.freeserve.co.uk/400.htm

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Hi,
The link don't work.
John

"mike" <mike.greenslade45@ntlworld.com> wrote in message
newsVCne.5444$Mi4.4165@newsfe2-win.ntli.net...
>I have a lot of images with the 300mm L IS and 1.4x TC on my web site, on
>the ACTION page.
> Regards
> Mike
> www.mikzite.co.uk
>
> "dylan" <no@mowhere.com> wrote in message
> news7mmmh$b91$1@news8.svr.pol.co.uk...
>>
>> "JohnR66" <nospam@att.net> wrote in message
>> news:tBrne.274857$cg1.30352@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
>>> Anyone with experience with this combo can you tell me the image quality
>>> or even show me a link with the images?
>>> I'd be very greatful!
>
>>> John
>>>
>>> P.S. Even a non Canon converter on the lens, I'd still like to see the
>>> results.
>>>
>>
>> Not the 300 but 400 5.6L with/out the 1.4x..
>> www.knighttrain.freeserve.co.uk/400.htm
>>
>>
>
>

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

In article <tBrne.274857$cg1.30352@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net>,
JohnR66 <nospam@att.net> wrote:
>Anyone with experience with this combo can you tell me the image quality or
>even show me a link with the images?
>I'd be very greatful!

I've got the 1.4x TC on a 300mm f/4 L IS USM which I use on a 10D. No
full-size crops up (but it has nothing to be ashamed of at the pixel level),
but I do have this:

http://narcissus.dyndns.org/Chris/Tubing.jpg

That was using AI-Servo, from the back of the towing speedboat, which it had
no difficulty with.

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

JohnR66 wrote:
> Not the way it is given. Adding the dropped e helped.
>

Oh _that_ link. You right. That dood it.

> "Frank ess" <frank@fshe2fs.com> wrote in message
> news:QsednSxrgtxrHALfRVn-jA@giganews.com...
>> JohnR66 wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>> The link don't work.
>>
>> Oh yes it do.
>>
>>> John
>>>
>>> "mike" <mike.greenslade45@ntlworld.com> wrote in message
>>> newsVCne.5444$Mi4.4165@newsfe2-win.ntli.net...
>>>> I have a lot of images with the 300mm L IS and 1.4x TC on my web
>>>> site, on the ACTION page.
>>>> Regards
>>>> Mike
>>>> www.mikzite.co.uk
>>>>
>>>> "dylan" <no@mowhere.com> wrote in message
>>>> news7mmmh$b91$1@news8.svr.pol.co.uk...
>>>>>
>>>>> "JohnR66" <nospam@att.net> wrote in message
>>>>> news:tBrne.274857$cg1.30352@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
>>>>>> Anyone with experience with this combo can you tell me the
>>>>>> image
>>>>>> quality or even show me a link with the images?
>>>>>> I'd be very greatful!
>>>>
>>>>>> John
>>>>>>
>>>>>> P.S. Even a non Canon converter on the lens, I'd still like to
>>>>>> see the results.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Not the 300 but 400 5.6L with/out the 1.4x..
>>>>> www.knighttrain.freeserve.co.uk/400.htm

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Bill Hilton wrote:

> Different lens (500 f/4 L IS) but here are a couple of full frame
> images I shot recently that might show how little you lose with a
> converter if you start with a good quality lens, keeping in mind you
> lose some image quality when converted to jpegs ...
>
> http://members.aol.com/bhilton665/ [...] 4_corm.jpg ... 2x
> t/c, ISO 320, f/11, 1D M II body ... this is the 2x II, I still had
> center focus so got the eye sharp.
>
> http://members.aol.com/bhilton665/T9D8069_quail.jpg ... 1.4x full frame
> shot last week, 1D M II with the older 1.4x (ie, not the II converter).
> With the 1.4x I could shift the AF point to get the eye sharp.
>
> You should get similar results with the 300 f/4 L (which I also have,
> but rarely use with converters anymore after getting the 500, which is
> an incredible lens). I would start with the 1.4x and add the 2x later
> though.
>
> Bill
>

I agree with Bill. I have the 500 f/4 and 300 f/4 L IS lenses.
When I travel light and leave the 500 at home, I'll take the 300
with 1.4 and 2x converters. Here is an example with full size
crops done with the 300mm and 1.4x TC.

http://www.clarkvision.com/galleri [...] b-700.html

I also have penguin images done hand held with the 300 f/4 +2x that with the
IS are similarly sharp (someday I'll get them added to the website).
The 300 f/4 + 2x autofocuses nicely on the 1D Mark II, but it
is a little slower that with the 1.4x. Also, I use Kenko Pro 300 TCs.

Here are some more 300 +1.4x TC (with a tripod):
http://www.clarkvision.com/galleri [...] b-600.html

http://www.clarkvision.com/galleri [...] b-600.html

This sunset shows the 300 f.4 L IS has no flare issues, this with a
Hoya supercoated UV filter on:
http://www.clarkvision.com/galleri [...] a-600.html

Roger
Photos, digital info at: http://www.clarkvision.com