Update on the: Canon EF 70-300mm L IS Lens and Canon EF 1.4x III Extender are Com...

[Photog82]

Back in October Bryan posting this article about the Extender and the 70-300L lens partially working. Does anyone know if he's posted an update anywhere else? My searching has not been fruitful.

[neuroanatomist]

What additional info were you looking for?

[Photog82]

In the last paragraph he stated that he'd put some ISO 12233 charts up and post what Canon's response is. I'll look at the charts page again and see if I overlooked it.

[neuroanatomist]

The ISO crops are there, just set the focal length drop-down to 420mm or 600mm.

I'd infer that Canon didn't respond directly, but they did remove the 70-300L from the lens list on the 1D X v1.1.1 firmware page, which is a response of sorts... Obviously it's not a supported combo, with the risk of damage to the lens or extender.

[Photog82]

I figured it would probably be risky from what Bryan had wrote; I'd hate to risk my $1300 lens and a $400 extender. Thanks for the response.

[ahab1372]

You can try the Kenko extenders, they fit. If you already have the Canon extender, it might be a bit of a stretch to own both, but M_Six has posted some good results here with that combo


Arnt

[Sean Setters]

Here was Bryan's news post that I think you are thinking of:

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/N...aspx?News=3266

[canonclix]

After trying out both (Canon 1.4vii and the Kenko PRO300 DGX) extenders on the 70-300L (using a 5D3) here are a few of my observations,
- when the next family vacation comes, the 70-300L and the Kenko extender are coming, the Canon extender will stay at home.
- the Kenko reports the focal length correctly - Canon does not.
- it is difficult for me to tell the pictures apart from an IQ standpoint, but I am no lens tester like many here are!
- the Kenko auto focuses much quicker than the Canon (in the daylight that I was testing in).
- the Kenko can be used over the entire zoom range, as others noted, the Canon has a rubber bumper that needs to be inserted in the lens, and that can only be done when the zoom is over 250mm. I think the rubber bumper would keep extender glass from contacting lens glass, but I agree with everyone else, that it is a risk not worth taking!
-both extenders utilized autofocus (in the daylight) and provided acceptable IQ in my opinion.
-as always, the Canon extender appears and feels much better built, and has the rubber seal for water resistance.

I briefly compared the extenders on a 70-200 2.8 IS vii to get some more comparisons.
- IQ again seemed comparable.
- AF seemed faster on the Kenko.

Then I tried a 135L
- Kenko doesn't work at all...actually froze the camera and had to shut off and remove the batteries to get it going again!
- Canon extender works fine.

Has anyone compared the 70-300L and Kenko 1.4extender, to the 100-400? Might be interesting!
Thanks.