Canon Lens Extenders

[aquaticmalamute]

I'm tossing up whether I should buy an extender or not, if so which one?

I'm going to Melbourne for the cup in November and will be going to the Zoo while i'm down there. I have my kit lens's and my 70-200 f/4 which I will be taking with me. Will my 70-200mm do the job at the Zoo? I can always use my kit 75-300mm but the quality is quite dismal....

I hear the 1.4x II is the better of the two, which would give me a max of 280mm with average (but still quite good) image quality. But my kit lens will reach that focal length anway. This option I feel that I won't be getting a whole lot of extra bang for my buck.....

OR I can go for the 2x II which will give me a max of 400mm (which I find quite attractive) at f/8 (not so attractive) coupled with bad IQ reviews for this extender leaves me feeling like I should save the $500 and put it toward a longer lens, which I certainly won't have before the cup weekend anyway! Has anyone used this extender and is it really as bad as everyone makes it out to be? Usually the f/8 wouldn't bother me either, but after visiting zoos here and overseas I have found them to be quite dark/shadowy places, where the lower f-stop, the better.

I'm also going out to a friends property in a few weeks to shoot a couple of Wedge Tailed Eagles that have nested up on the mountain side. I can get level, and within 50-80m of the nest and wonder if my 70-200mm is long enough to reach without the need for an extender? Again, I have the option of using my kit lens but will lose my image quality. It would be wonderful to use the 2x II extender in this case, as I will be shooting in the morning/middle of the day, but then again I question the image quality when using the extender....

Bah! If only my funds would streach to a 100-400mm

[Guest Tess32]

I think you lose auto focus with the 2x.

F8 will simply not do at melbourne zoo. I use ISO 1600 on most enclosures and that's with F5.6....the extender will be useless.

I'm selling my 1.4x if you are interested I've used it with a 70-200 F4 and it's pretty good, I saw no image degradation at all.

ETA - 200mm will be 'ok' at melbourne, it will depend on the enclosures. I found it lacking on most, to be honest.

Edited September 3, 2009 by Tess32

[Ashanali]

I'm tossing up whether I should buy an extender or not, if so which one?

I'm going to Melbourne for the cup in November and will be going to the Zoo while i'm down there. I have my kit lens's and my 70-200 f/4 which I will be taking with me. Will my 70-200mm do the job at the Zoo? I can always use my kit 75-300mm but the quality is quite dismal....

I hear the 1.4x II is the better of the two, which would give me a max of 280mm with average (but still quite good) image quality. But my kit lens will reach that focal length anway. This option I feel that I won't be getting a whole lot of extra bang for my buck.....

OR I can go for the 2x II which will give me a max of 400mm (which I find quite attractive) at f/8 (not so attractive) coupled with bad IQ reviews for this extender leaves me feeling like I should save the $500 and put it toward a longer lens, which I certainly won't have before the cup weekend anyway! Has anyone used this extender and is it really as bad as everyone makes it out to be? Usually the f/8 wouldn't bother me either, but after visiting zoos here and overseas I have found them to be quite dark/shadowy places, where the lower f-stop, the better.

I'm also going out to a friends property in a few weeks to shoot a couple of Wedge Tailed Eagles that have nested up on the mountain side. I can get level, and within 50-80m of the nest and wonder if my 70-200mm is long enough to reach without the need for an extender? Again, I have the option of using my kit lens but will lose my image quality. It would be wonderful to use the 2x II extender in this case, as I will be shooting in the morning/middle of the day, but then again I question the image quality when using the extender....

Bah! If only my funds would streach to a 100-400mm

You could hire a lens for the time you are there.

I'm off to Melbourne in a couple of weeks and considering doing this myself. The costs are quite reasonable and it allows you the chance to play with the lens before you commit to a purchase.

[Ripley]

I have a Canon L 1.4 extender. On my f/4 lens it drops the aperture to 5.6. It was impossible to hand hold (for me) my 70-200 non IS lens with it attached so I never used it. However, now I have a 300mm lens that has IS in it, I can attach the 1.4 extender and hand hold it. I still wobble a bit but the IS compensates a little. It's still better to use a monopod with it attached though, something I haven't done but will do when I affix it again.

I bought mine from B&H New York last year when the exchange rate was good as it was much cheaper than buying it in Australia.

[aquaticmalamute]

Sorry for taking so long to reply, been away showing...

Thankyou everyone for your insightful advice

I've been thinking about it, and I really would like to save my dosh for the 100-400mm L, so might go down the route of lens hire. I found a place that I can hire the 100-400mm L IS for $129 a week, or $151 with insurance, which is by far the best I have found!

[Ripley]

I have a Canon 300mm L (it's a fixed focus) and had the first good go with it on Saturday. I had my 1.4 teleconverter attached (also an L) and found it slowed down the auto focus a bit, especially when I tried to track birds in flight and I have successfully tracked birds in flight no probs with my 70-200 L (which is now deceased). So just be aware that with fast moving objects, it may slow down your auto focus. Apart from that, images are still sharp even hand holding but it's much sharper without the teleconverter. However, If I didn't have the teleconverter attached, I wouldn't have managed a close enough shot of a whistling kite who was just hanging out in the wetlands - and with 300mm and 1.4 teleconverter I got close enough by sneaking up on him.

eta: It also 'clunks' and whirs with the teleconverter but if you want extra reach, try and spring for the L series if you are thinking of getting the 100-400 L. As I mentioned, I got mine much cheaper from B&H New York than I would have paid for it here and the AUD is still pretty good against the USD although I hear that this won't be the case in the next few months!

am: What do you primarily want the lens for? You mention wildlife. There were a few guys at the wetlands on Saturday with these huge f*ck off lenses, serious birders perhaps. OH remarked how big their lenses were, I think they were 500mm or 600mm lenses. I want mine for wildlife shots but didn't want a zoom and I'm too small framed to hand hold a bigger lens, plus I couldn't afford it, the 300mm prime was expensive enough. I had to think about whether I would get the use out of a more expensive lens and thought that yes I would as my main interest is birds and scenics.

Edited September 8, 2009 by Ripley

[aquaticmalamute]

I shoot alot of watersports (jet skiing mainly), horse sports (rodeo/showjumping/showing), dog showing/sledding/sports and the like, Macro, and love to dabble in pet and wildlife (birds and deer) a fair bit too. Unfortunately I didn't have an SLR on my last trips to the USA/Canada/Mexico, but with those destinations being frequently visited i'll certainly want to shoot landscape and need something for the zoos/wildlife. I think i'd get alot more use out of a zoom lens, rather than a prime.

I bought my 70-200mm f/4 for the sole reason that it was light (as opposed to the 2.8 verson) for traveling, it was quality and that it was within my price range. I now feel that I need something 'bigger and better' though I do have the funds available for the 100-400mm, but then there is always the temptation to spend that on a body upgrade instead (I only have a 20D). Not to mention that the OH is strongly opposed to my need to spend money on camera gear (apparently all lenses do the same thing ), and the fact that we have just bought another house and are in massive debt, I really shouldn't spend my savings (thus my temptation to buy an extender rather than fork out for a new lens)

[Ripley]

I bought my 70-200mm f/4 for the sole reason that it was light (as opposed to the 2.8 verson) for traveling, it was quality and that it was within my price range. I now feel that I need something 'bigger and better' though :p I do have the funds available for the 100-400mm, but then there is always the temptation to spend that on a body upgrade instead (I only have a 20D). Not to mention that the OH is strongly opposed to my need to spend money on camera gear (apparently all lenses do the same thing ), and the fact that we have just bought another house and are in massive debt, I really shouldn't spend my savings (thus my temptation to buy an extender rather than fork out for a new lens)

I hear you. We are looking at buying a place again atm but it's so boring looking at houses, I'd rather be out on weekends back to nature , I'm in no rush unless something wonderful grabs our eye. So I have to be careful money wise too. Believe me, I thought long and hard about the lens I needed. I would have gone for that lens but didn't want a big zoom, I wanted a prime. I don't even have a website up and running (just a pbase account), I'm about 4 months behind in all my photo editing as I hate doing it, I'd rather be out away from the city and people on weekends. I have a 30D which I'm pretty happy with, it's just over a year old (they still made them in the US up until later last year) but the 7D is pretty tempting, not sure whether to save for that now, I just bought myself a monopod with a ball head.

eta: I know about the OH thing. My husband wasn't amused when I told him the price of my 300mm but then I justified it. You see, I used my stimulus package cheque and the insurance cheque received when I broke my 70-200 which was in USD so then it was only a couple of hundred bucks worth - justification!

Edited September 8, 2009 by Ripley

[aquaticmalamute]

Too true! I think it only took us about a month to find the right house, and now we have finally bought one I'm stuck home all day renovating this one so that we can rent it out. With all the birds, insects and flowers starting to 'spring' into action I can certainly say that i'd much rather be outside taking it all in, rather than being stuck inside painting, blech!

That reminds me, i'm still in hot water about the last lens I bought (100mm f2.8) with my 'stimulus money' *cough* Too bad I forgot that I got all of my previous years tax back, so theoretically didn't pay tax so was ineligable for the stimulus money. I bought the lens with thoughts that i'd replenish our saving when my cheque arrived.... woops!

I thought i'd be happy with my 70-200, which believe me, I am. But I feel I need something a bit bigger, and the 100-400mm seems to tick all of my boxes. And although I'd like to upgrade my body, I can do that at any time, my 20D is still serving me just fine - I'd rather buy quality lenses first

New question: Anyone with a 100-400mm? Any reviews, good or bad? I've been reading all good reviews about this lens so it looks like i'll be buying one, whether it's sooner rather than later I don't know (I might still have to hire one and give it a test drive). I'll just need to convince my 'Mr Minister of Finance' that I need yet another lens. Heck, doesn't he understand I have a nest of Wedgies to take photos of? And my current assortment of lenses will not do for the zoo trip, not at all.......

[kja]

Love my 100-400 Last time I took it out I had a great time!

It's a great lens, you won't regret it!

[Ripley]

I think I'll need a camera with a really high ISO or a flashgun if we are going where I think we are going for our 10 year wedding anniversay next year.

Edited September 9, 2009 by Ripley

[aquaticmalamute]

KJA - I hope I won't regret it! I just bit the bullet and bought a 6 month old lens with soft case, padded and pressurized hard case, hood, tripod ring, and a 2x extender for just shy of $2000 (over budget, woops!). I have a feeling I won't use the extender, but if I don't then I'm happy to sell it to re-coup some money.

Now to organize freight or take the 4hr round trip to pick it up

Ripley - Ooooh sounds intriguing..... and expensive

[Ripley]

KJA - I hope I won't regret it! I just bit the bullet and bought a 6 month old lens with soft case, padded and pressurized hard case, hood, tripod ring, and a 2x extender for just shy of $2000 (over budget, woops!). I have a feeling I won't use the extender, but if I don't then I'm happy to sell it to re-coup some money.

Now to organize freight or take the 4hr round trip to pick it up

Ripley - Ooooh sounds intriguing..... and expensive

Not expensive, frequent flyer points are covering the airfare. We are tossing up where to go but Borneo looks good - but now I will need a macro more than a flash for all the froggas and other amazing small critters. There is a rainforest lodge there and then not far from that it's Sipadan for amazing diving!

back on topic, AM, what lens did you buy and where if you don't mind sharing?

I had a quick look (as the shots are still in raw) at a few wild bird pics taken with my 300mm prime and 1.4 teleconverter. They are sharp even hand held with no support, I'm impressed with this lens hand holding it. I'd love a bit more length but couldn't afford a 400mm prime IS and don't want the 'trombone' 100-400 one. I'll post a pic when I get home.