I gave stacking extenders a quick try today, it was very overcast so not the best light. The combo struggled with AF a bit but live view focus was very snappy. I did not try infinity focus as it started to rain. I will use this combo again in good light when I get the chance. I used the 1.4x and the 2x with the 12mm tube to connect them. This lens just keeps amazing me.
Here are a couple.
This was handheld (resting on my knee) @ 1/250th f8
RobAmy wrote:
I gave stacking extenders a quick try today, it was very overcast so not the best light. The combo struggled with AF a bit but live view focus was very snappy. I did not try infinity focus as it started to rain. I will use this combo again in good light when I get the chance. I used the 1.4x and the 2x with the 12mm tube to connect them. This lens just keeps amazing me.
Here are a couple.
This was handheld (resting on my knee) @ 1/250th f8
I saw this first on my phone, but waited to look at the photos until I had my PC turned on with my 4K monitor. I checked the photos out on flickr as they always look best there, and HOLY SMOKES! That is absolutely amazing! I cannot believe the lens can be that sharp given those factors.
If you don't mind me asking, are you having to sharpen these a lot?
The one time I shot a few photos using stacked tc's (I think on a 600) I don't think it looked anywhere near this good. Even one tc can be not so hot, at max aperture, wide open
AmbientMike wrote:
Curious which tc's you're using? Sounds like III?
If you don't mind me asking, are you having to sharpen these a lot?
The one time I shot a few photos using stacked tc's (I think on a 600) I don't think it looked anywhere near this good. Even one tc can be not so hot, at max aperture, wide open
Yes they are the Version III TC's with the 12mm version II tube. No extra sharping, I always size my pics to 16x24 for Flickr and do my standard work flow. I used the same method on these. I use smart sharpen in PS CC. I agree with stacking TC's I never have had great results in the past. I think the main factor here is I am starting with f2.8. This 400mm lens keeps amazing me. I never owned the MK II version of the 400mm f2.8 and wonder how good that is also. There is one on this board for $5,500 which is a steal.
arbitrage wrote:
Thanks for sharing these Rob. Looks pretty good. How do you think that combo compares to shooting 1200/8 with the 600III/2x?
From the brief use at 1200mm with the 600mm, the 600mm focuses faster using the view finder vs the 400mm hands down, I never tried live view with the 600mm at 1200mm but the 400mm focuses fairly fast in live view. Quality wise I feel they are close with the edge to the 600mm. This combo would not be great for flight. I think the 600mm at 1200mm would be better for flight work if needed. If you are shooting at that length a lot I would say go with the 600mm. However this will be a nice trick in the bag when needed with usable results. I am pleased with the outcome.
RobAmy wrote:
From the brief use at 1200mm with the 600mm, the 600mm focuses faster using the view finder vs the 400mm hands down, I never tried live view with the 600mm at 1200mm but the 400mm focuses fairly fast in live view. Quality wise I feel they are close with the edge to the 600mm. This combo would not be great for flight. I think the 600mm at 1200mm would be better for flight work if needed. If you are shooting at that length a lot I would say go with the 600mm. However this will be a nice trick in the bag when needed with usable results. I am pleased with the outcome. ...Show more →
Thanks again for trying that out and reporting your finding.
Very good results. I have taken a number of moon pics with the stacked teleconverters (the Mk II 2X can accept a 1.4X without the extension tube "spacer") with pretty good results on the 400/2.8 IS I used to have. Unfortunately, that lens was not practical for me so I sold it.
Anyway, your Mk III does great. It will be interesting to see if it reaches infinity focus with the short extension tube in the stack.
Tom_W wrote:
Very good results. I have taken a number of moon pics with the stacked teleconverters (the Mk II 2X can accept a 1.4X without the extension tube "spacer") with pretty good results on the 400/2.8 IS I used to have. Unfortunately, that lens was not practical for me so I sold it.
Anyway, your Mk III does great. It will be interesting to see if it reaches infinity focus with the short extension tube in the stack.
Interesting, I wonder how that combo would work with the 100-400II lens. I now use the 100-400II for moonshots with the 1.4TCIII plus a 1.5x Kenko Pro TC, but there is a Canon 2x TCII up for sale on a local board for a good price. I'm sure the 2.8/400 will have higher resolution with both converters than the 100-400II (theoretically the bigger the front lens the higher the resolution for long tele), but the Kenko messes with the communication on 80D and shuts down Liveview at unpredictable times ...
___
While the resolution in Rob's images is surprisingly good indeed, the OOF areas often have the unpleasant bokeh of TC's so a native long lens probably shows an advantage there. For birds (or moonshots) usually not important though ...
I gave the 2X II and 1.4X III stack a try on the 500 f/4 II - results were decent, but I was really fighting against the light. The bright sunshine I had this afternoon when I mowed was replaced by bright overcast, so I did struggle with high ISO. Anyway, here's a couple of shots with the 500 f/4 with 2X and 1.4X stacked (1400 mm total).
Note that the actual f/stop is 1 stop slower than indicated, because the camera only reports the 2X teleconverter in this case.
DOF is quite shallow with this combination. I don't think I'd use it often though.
