Kenko 1.4x used together with Canon EF 75-300mm III USM. Wise move?

[mahathir]

Hi all,

I have this itch to use the Kenko 1.4X teleconverter with the modiocre EF 75-300mm III USM lens. I heard that it'll degrade the image quality and it will reduce the F-Stop by 1.

a. Can the mentioned canon lens be fixed with the 1.4X kenko converter in the first place?
b. Can autofocus work when the teleconverter fixed? My body is Canon EOS 1000D.
b. How bad the image quality can get?
c. The EXIF data recorded, is it going to be accurate?


Thanks guys...

[Headshotzx]

Yes, No (at least, I don't think so), Very, No.

Not a good move at all.

[charlesleong]

a) probably (kenko TC has no protrusions iirc)
b) probably, but it'll hunt a lot. your 75-300 is a 4-5.6, which after TC will be a 5.6-8, which is very marginal on the long end.
b) IQ is marginal at best (to quote the-digital-picture.com,

Quote: Image quality from the Canon EF 75-300mm f/4-5.6 III USM Lens is also mediocre.

and that's without TC.
c) EXIF data recorded with any TC will be off (incl canon's iirc)

[Russ]

The 75-300 is not a great lens to start of with.

It will work with the TC but the aperture gets even smaller, AF will not work as well, and the image quality will be even worse than the already very average results for this lens. The lens is OK if you don't enlarge much, with the TC will be OK but don;t expect too much when you crop and see soft images.

[chjohans]

The AF will *not* work as your camera will automatically shut it off if you mount lens has a higher "lowest" aperture value than f/5.6. The image quality will also, at best, "leave a lot to be desired".

Teleconverters should, IMHO, only be used for good quality fixed aperture (like 2.8 or 4 or lower) lenses. Unless it's an "emergency case" where you *really* need that extra reach.

Bying a teleconverter to use on that lens will only make you frustrated. Trust me, been there done that

[mahathir]

Hi all,

Thanks for all your insight and input. It seems my mind is already made up for me.

I have developed an obsession with a long reach ever since the old days of my Lumix FZ-18. Since the TC will not work, how about settling for the Canon EF 100-400mm IS F/4-5.6? Is it a worthy buy or shall I just settle for the Sigma 80-400mm EX OS HSM?

Thanks

[charlesleong]

you want long reach zoom? sigma 50-500 or 300-800. the 100-400 will also be ok.

but long lenses tend to be $$$$$$

[cancan7]

Wa, if you have the budget for the 100-400, then don't even consider adding the TC to the 75-300!

[chjohans]

Originally Posted by mahathir Hi all, Thanks for all your insight and input. It seems my mind is already made up for me. I have developed an obsession with a long reach ever since the old days of my Lumix FZ-18. Since the TC will not work, how about settling for the Canon EF 100-400mm IS F/4-5.6? Is it a worthy buy or shall I just settle for the Sigma 80-400mm EX OS HSM? Thanks

(I believe the Canon is f/4.5-5.6? - not that it makes much of a difference)

I have the Sigma 120-400 f/4.5-5.6. I'm pretty satisfied with it although it's not as sharp as the Canon 100-400 f/4.5-5.6. But then again it's not as pricey either.

My choice was narrowed down to either the Sigma 120-400 or the Sigma 150-500. I chose the 120-400 because of the compact size and the slightly less weight. I do have a Sigma 1.4x teleconverter as well but I only use it on that lens if I really cannot get the shot without it. And even then it would probably be better to shoot at 400 and just crop the picture. And yes, I loose AF with the teleconverter but thats not much of a loss compared to the loss in light and sharpness.

BTW my teleconverter was bought to use with a Sigma 50-150 f/2.8 and it works great with that lens. No (well almost) loss in sharpness and the combo will still give me f/4.

[mahathir]

After so much reading, I'll probably settle down for canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L + Kenko 2X. However, I have to save up for nearly a year or even more than that.

Again thanks for the invaluable info guys... Really appreciate it.

I'm just curious... anyone here have a sample image taken with the EF 75-300mm III USM plus a kenko teleconverter. Much appreciated.

[chjohans]

Be adviced that 2x teleconverters generally gives you a much worse result than a 1.4x. I can understand that the extra reach might seem tempting but it's important to remember that there's no such thing as a free lunch. One way or another it has to be paid for.

You might want to consider a 1.4x teleconverter instead. Or at least get the lens first and try both teleconverters before you buy.

[charlesleong]

Originally Posted by mahathir After so much reading, I'll probably settle down for canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L + Kenko 2X. However, I have to save up for nearly a year or even more than that. Again thanks for the invaluable info guys... Really appreciate it. I'm just curious... anyone here have a sample image taken with the EF 75-300mm III USM plus a kenko teleconverter. Much appreciated.

please don't.

2x converters eat light like nobody's business. and the IQ goes down south very quickly.

[sloth]

I look at it the opposite way - with the 75-300 so poor already, a 1.4x is not going to hurt much more

Be prepared to use manual focus, basically. Stop down as much as you possibly can. It is going to be a bad experience all round but there are things that can be mitigated.


Get a good Kenko 1.4 (Pro DG 300 model) if you plan to carry it forward to your next lens. If you like zoom, the 100-400 is a superb lens and pairs well with this TC. I have used this setup on a 40D to take moon shots.

If you like reach, avoid the 70-200/2.8 and 2X TC. The 70-200 excels for speed, the 1-4 excels for reach.

Another option is the Sigma 50-500 (or get the newer version with OS, I think 150-500). I owned the old 50-500 at one point, it was a good lens but tremendously challenging to use. I need my stabilizer..

[charlesleong]

Originally Posted by sloth Another option is the Sigma 50-500 (or get the newer version with OS, I think 150-500). I owned the old 50-500 at one point, it was a good lens but tremendously challenging to use. I need my stabilizer..

any long lens (esp the slow ones) will need a stabiliser/tripod

[lightning]

in maths -ve and -ve = positive. But in this case it does not work that way -ve and -ve = super lousy image! Think twice, better off getting a PnS with 20X zoom.

[lightning]

Originally Posted by mahathir I'm just curious... anyone here have a sample image taken with the EF 75-300mm III USM plus a kenko teleconverter. Much appreciated.

Not many people are "Stupid" enough to do that.

[mahathir]

I guess any lenses with the use of a TC will never beat any lenses without a TC in terms of image quality and speed.

Since I intend to shoot distant subjects during daytime (nature photography) I guess I'm planing to save up for the Canon EF 100-400mm F/4.0-5.6L. On my 1000D, the max reach is 640mm. I think that much reach will be useful enough.

I guess my mind is already made up. I think I need to tighten my belt and firm up my hand muscles... I understand the lens is going to be very heavy!

Thanks for your time and invaluable feedbacks/opinions guys. I guess I'll close this thread for now.

Cheers.