Upload & Sell: Off
| p.1 #9 · What's the truth regarding 100-400 with 1.4 TC on 60D. |
paperdesk wrote: Can you get decent images using a 60D + 100-400 + 1.4 TC? Some swear you can, some swear you can't. I don't want to buy a TC if it's a total waste. Any feedback from people who've tried it? I'm posting this question after reading this article in which the author says it's a really, really, really bad idea: Arguments for not using 100-400 with TC
The truth is that the 100-400 L with Canon 1.4x Tele-extender has no problem making "decent" images and is capable of making excellent images (constrained of course by the skill of the photographer). I use the combination frequently on full-frame (and used to on crop-factor when I had it) and just manually focus.
The referenced articles states: If you have cheaper wildlife/sports lenses (under $2,000), then a teleconverter will bludgeon your image quality to a bloody pulp. Seriously, itís nasty.
That's nonsense. It only applies to a cheap teleconverter on a cheap lens. The 100-400 L is not a cheap lens, but price is not the deciding factor in the final analysis in any case. The 100-400 L is a very sharp lens that does well with the Canon 1.4x Tele-extender.
The article is right that you will lose one stop of light and lose AutoFocus. But with careful technique, you don't need it, even for birds in flight. This is the 100-400 L with Canon 1.4x Mark II on a 20D (an earlier crop factor camera), cropped down some from the original image, manually focused (in good light):