Bang for your buck...

[eeyore]

nah dont do it - if you combine a 200mm f4 with a 2xtc you will wind up with an equivalent f8 lens and your auto focus will be extremely sluggish if it works at all - if you combine it with a 1.4 you will have create essentially a 300mm f5.6 for considerably more wedge than just buying one

what this says to me is that the guy in the camera shop has excess stock of the 70-200 f4 which he wants to offload.

The 70-200 f2.8 IS is a different fish of kettles - but that costs at least as much if not more than the pump ditto a 300mm f4 prime (or a 300mm f2.8 tho that will be a lot more)

i still standby my advice - if you have the dosh get a pump - if you want a budget option get either the sigma 135-400 or the little bigma 170-500.

[Roy C]

Originally Posted by Corso

I went and had a chat to a chap in a camera shop who suggested getting the cheaper combination of the Canon EF 70-200mm f/4 L USM and a teleconverter, how might that compare to the pump? my limited knowledge tells me this would be a bad idea seeing as i want to use autofocus...

I have the 70-200mm f4 it takes a tc very well with very little IQ lose and still very fast AF but for birds 280mm is too short for most situations - I use the 400mm f5.6 prime for birding and handhold for most of the time with no problems (trick is to keep the speed up to around 1/1000 or faster). I have never regretted buying this lens which is both lighter and cheaper than the 'pump'. This time of the year I have a 1.4 tc glued to it (pins taped) and can still handhold and get sharp shots. My ideal lens would be the 400mm f5.6 with IS.

[chkm8]

tele convertors are not recomended for zoom lenses les than 100mm. Though others have used them with success but the lens needs to be sharp throughout and generally the cheaper lenses will give slightly soft images towards the end of their zoom ranges. A problem which is magnified by the convertor.

John

[eeyore]

Originally Posted by chkm8

tele convertors are not recomended for zoom lenses les than 100mm. Though others have used them with success but the lens needs to be sharp throughout and generally the cheaper lenses will give slightly soft images towards the end of their zoom ranges. A problem which is magnified by the convertor.

John

the real diferentiating factor is not lens length (although there isnt a lot of point in puting a tc on a short lens unless it is the only one you have ) but the maximum f stop - Tcs arent reccomended for lenses with f5.6 or narrower - you can add a 1.4 no problem to a f4 lens but not a 2xtc while lenses f2.8 or wider are generally fine with both types. (obviiously you can physically add tcs to narrower lens but they will be dark and the AF may not function propperly except in bright light.)

the issue about abberations in cheaper lenses is an accurate one - but these generally occur at the edge and thus are much less a problem for dslrs with copped sensors as these see only the swet spot in the middle anyway.

Apart from the edge abberations i have not noticed any problems with sharpness at the long end of the little bigma or the 135-400 - I suspect that this an urban myth brought about my many people having problems with lens wobble at the long end - particularly when they have a tc fitted.

[Roy C]

Originally Posted by eeyore

the real diferentiating factor is not lens length (although there isnt a lot of point in puting a tc on a short lens unless it is the only one you have ) but the maximum f stop - Tcs arent reccomended for lenses with f5.6 or narrower - you can add a 1.4 no problem to a f4 lens but not a 2xtc while lenses f2.8 or wider are generally fine with both types. (obviiously you can physically add tcs to narrower lens but they will be dark and the AF may not function propperly except in bright light.)

.

There are a few inaccuracies in this. Canon do recommend tc's for some f5.6 lenses - there are only two though (as far as I can remember) the 400mm f5.6 and the 100-400 zoom for other f5.6 lenses the Canon tc will not physically fit the lens.
When you use a tc with these f5.6 lenses you can still AF on 1 series bodies but on other bodies you have to use manual focus ( unless you use the tape trick, which Canon would not recommend of course).

The statement ' obviiously you can physically add tcs to narrower lens' is not true if you use a Canon tc.

If you use a reporting type tc on a canon lens of f5.6 with a non 1 series body AF is impossible as the camera is programmed so it will not AF at f8 (this is why the pins have to be taped).

[eeyore]

Originally Posted by Roy C

There are a few inaccuracies in this. Canon do recommend tc's for some f5.6 lenses - there are only two though (as far as I can remember) the 400mm f5.6 and the 100-400 zoom for other f5.6 lenses the Canon tc will not physically fit the lens.
When you use a tc with these f5.6 lenses you can still AF on 1 series bodies but on other bodies you have to use manual focus ( unless you use the tape trick, which Canon would not recommend of course).

The statement ' obviiously you can physically add tcs to narrower lens' is not true if you use a Canon tc.

If you use a reporting type tc on a canon lens of f5.6 with a non 1 series body AF is impossible as the camera is programmed so it will not AF at f8 (this is why the pins have to be taped).

it depends on what you man by reccomed - yes they will fit onthe 400 prime and the pump but that doesnt mean that its a good idea if you want to use af reliably in all low light conditions (which is when a lot of nature photography takes place)

what i meant to say was pro photographers dont reccomend that you use tcs on f5.6 lens because most cameras auto focus systems require f5.6 max ap to function correctly - some will focus at f8 in bright light but not in lower light conditions - you can however fit the majority of TCs to the majority of lenses if you want to use Manual focus. (yes you can tape pins on a canon converter to allow AF to function , but in low light it will be sluggish and hunt a lot - particullarly with a 2xtc)

[Roy C]

Originally Posted by chkm8

tele convertors are not recomended for zoom lenses les than 100mm.

John

This is obviously true as far as Canon are concerned because the canon tc's will not physically fit anything less the 70-200 f4 & f2.8 L's. apart from these two the Canon tc's will only fit 300mm or longer. Also the likes of Kenko Pro stipulate in their blurb that the tc is specifically for long telephotos.

[Roy C]

Originally Posted by eeyore

it depends on what you man by reccomed - yes they will fit onthe 400 prime and the pump but that doesnt mean that its a good idea if you want to use af reliably in all low light conditions (which is when a lot of nature photography takes place)

what i meant to say was pro photographers dont reccomend that you use tcs on f5.6 lens because most cameras auto focus systems require f5.6 max ap to function correctly - some will focus at f8 in bright light but not in lower light conditions - you can however fit the majority of TCs to the majority of lenses if you want to use Manual focus. (yes you can tape pins on a canon converter to allow AF to function , but in low light it will be sluggish and hunt a lot - particullarly with a 2xtc)

Many a pro photographer uses the 400mm f5.6 + tc for fight shots on a 1 series body which will AF up to f8 (unlike the non 1 series bodies which will only AF up to f5.6)

You cannot fit a Canon tc on the majority of lenses as it only physically fits a handful of Canon lenses.

[glsammy]

Originally Posted by Roy C

Many a pro photographer uses the 400mm f5.6 + tc for fight shots on a 1 series body which will AF up to f8 (unlike the non 1 series bodies which will only AF up to f5.6)

You cannot fit a Canon tc on the majority of lenses as it only physically fits a handful of Canon lenses.

This is certainly true for the Sigma 150mm. Apparently the Canon TC lens protrudes too far into the body of the lens. This isn't so with the Kenko or (Obviously!) Sigma ones.

[eeyore]

Originally Posted by Roy C

Many a pro photographer uses the 400mm f5.6 + tc for fight shots on a 1 series body which will AF up to f8 (unlike the non 1 series bodies which will only AF up to f5.6)

You cannot fit a Canon tc on the majority of lenses as it only physically fits a handful of Canon lenses.

I know - but how many people on here have 1 series bodies - not many i would wager , and also even with a 1 series body you can't use a 2xtc as an f5.6 lens with a 2xtc is effectively an f11 and even the 1 series wont af at that f stop

and as regards your second point canon dont have a monopoly on making tcs - there are a vareity of third party tcs in eos fit which will fit the majority of canon fit lenses - hence the point i made that most tcs (as in not all of them) will fit on most lenses - however this doesnt mean that it is a good idea or that you should use tcs habitually on anything other than wide apperture lenses.

[Pete W]

Too late with reply

[Roy C]

Originally Posted by eeyore

I know - but how many people on here have 1 series bodies - not many i would wager , and also even with a 1 series body you can't use a 2xtc as an f5.6 lens with a 2xtc is effectively an f11 and even the 1 series wont af at that f stop

and as regards your second point canon dont have a monopoly on making tcs - there are a vareity of third party tcs in eos fit which will fit the majority of canon fit lenses - hence the point i made that most tcs (as in not all of them) will fit on most lenses - however this doesnt mean that it is a good idea or that you should use tcs habitually on anything other than wide apperture lenses.

John said " tele convertors are not recomended for zoom lenses les than 100mm" and I agree with him - I was merely quoting canon tc's as a way of supporting this.

It was you who said "obviiously you can physically add tcs to narrower lens" and I pointed out that this is not necessarily so - Am I wrong?

I also pointed out that you can AF at f8 on a series 1 body _ Am I wrong?

I quoted Canon because according to their web site they make tc's specifically for Telephotos - Quote "Specially designed to work in conjunction with super telephoto L-series lenses" why is this so if the defining factor is lens speed and not focal length

and from the Kenko site:
"The PRO 300 family are designed specifically to be used with prime telephoto lenses" again why should they say this if it is more to do with lens speed rather than focal length

Obviously from your reply to John you know a lot more than the people at Canon or Kenko so I bow to your superior knowledge in just about everything.

[eeyore]

moving on from the rather unseemly stuff above the key points as far as corso goes would be.

The 70-200 F4 is a good lens but not the best choice as long glass for wildlife photography as unless you have a one series DSLR (ie a 1D or1DS) then it will not af reliably with a 2xtc and with a 1.4 it will be less than 300mm which isnt really long enough.

It is however a good lens as a mid to short telezoom but if you buy a pump or a bigma you will have that zoom range covered anyway (well nearly with the pump)

It is also expensive for the zoom range it covers - varying from 300 to 500 notes depending on where you buy it.

overall not to be reccomended for what you are looking for.

Teleconverter wise

-It isnt worth buying the expensive canon ones unless you are going to team them with expensive canon lenses - because a) there would be no real benefit in doing so , and b) the might not fit anyway

- If you want a tc you can pick up cheaper third party ones which will be fine for occasional use with cheaper lenses

- dont use a 1.4 with anything narrower than a f4 or a 2x with anything narrower than f2.8 unless you have pro spec camera.

- on the whole there is no point in putting tcs on short lenses - especially as mid length zooms are so cheap - the one exception to this is that you can get excellent results through teaming a tc with a f2.8 macro lens or with extension tubes and a fast (f1.8) 50mm lens

- If you do use a tc with ext tubes for macro photography for maximum magnification put the tc against the camera body , then the tubes, then the lens.

fell free to pm me if you want any one to one advice - I also have a set of advice sheets that i have sent to loads of our members - if you want these pm me your email address.

and finally photography is very subjective and there is often more than one way to do things - thus all of the above is based on my experience and that passed on to me by pros , but it may not be the only way- the more you read and the more different techniques you try the better photographer you'll be in the end - and at the end of the day what matters most is taking good pictures and having fun doing it.

[eeyore]

Originally Posted by Roy C

John said " tele convertors are not recomended for zoom lenses les than 100mm" and I agree with him - I was merely quoting canon tc's as a way of supporting this.

It was you who said "obviiously you can physically add tcs to narrower lens" and I pointed out that this is not necessarily so - Am I wrong?

I also pointed out that you can AF at f8 on a series 1 body _ Am I wrong?

I quoted Canon because according to their web site they make tc's specifically for Telephotos - Quote "Specially designed to work in conjunction with super telephoto L-series lenses" why is this so if the defining factor is lens speed and not focal length

and from the Kenko site:
"The PRO 300 family are designed specifically to be used with prime telephoto lenses" again why should they say this if it is more to do with lens speed rather than focal length

Obviously from your reply to John you know a lot more than the people at Canon or Kenko so I bow to your superior knowledge in just about everything.

I wasnt originally going to dignify this with a response - but having slept on it i would just like to clarify a couple of points.

a) I am not saying that i know more than the guys at canon or kenko - if you actually read my posts you will see that there is nothing of consequence that is contradictory to those quotes - yes the canon TC is designed to work with there L series pro lenses - most of which are f4 or f2.8 and yes the kenko pro is designed specifically to work on their primes - and as i said more than once there would be incredibly liittle point in putting a tc on a short lens unless it is the only lens you own (macro excepted).

But this doesnt change the basic fact that the principal limiting factor in tc use is the ammount of available light and thus they function best with faster lenses - I am sure that kenko, canon and everyone else who has a real appreciation of photographic basics is fully aware of this simple tenet.

and

b) I am fully aware of the capabilities of the canon 1 series and other pro spec cameras - however this thread was started by someone with limited financial means who is looking at acquiring a 20D so to my mind it is neither relevant or helpful to go into minute depth about the capabilities of cameras whose street price is several grand.

This thread was about helping a new photographer to understand the options open to him , which has been my aim all along - I have no need to boost my ego by bragging about the expensive kit I own or by seeing the debate as some kind of contest - it is a great shame that not every member feels the same

[Jon]

It is a while since a I read up on this but I think this is still true:

The canon TC are designed for use with canon L series lenses only, the photographic element in the converter protrudes so it would foul against a non L series lens.

[eeyore]

Originally Posted by Jon

It is a while since a I read up on this but I think this is still true:

The canon TC are designed for use with canon L series lenses only, the photographic element in the converter protrudes so it would foul against a non L series lens.

I quite agree - they only fit the L series , which are principally long lenses - however if you want to use a tc on shorter eos lenses you can get third party TCs from a variety of other manufactuers ( I have a kenko , a jessops own , and a tamron - all of which fit on the shorter lenses)

[Interpreter]

Oh dear, you are amateurs. Haven't you got wives or girlfriends? Take them with you and stand them in front of you when taking your photographs and you can rest the lens on their shoulder. They can also be usefull in carrying most of your equipment so that your hands are not too tired when you need to take a snap.
Seriously though, if you want sharp photographs, you should use a tripod when ever possible. IS helps a lot, but not as much as a good tripod.

[Corso]

many thanks for your help and advice guys, in the end I decided to buy the canon 70-300 is usm as its weight/price benefits outweighed the other competitors. It's arriving in a bit and i'm sure i'll be back on here requesting further pointers before long. Out of interest a couple of people on other forums mention that they used 1.4 tc's fairly successfully with this lens.
Corso

[Interpreter]

Originally Posted by Corso

I went and had a chat to a chap in a camera shop who suggested getting the cheaper combination of the Canon EF 70-200mm f/4 L USM and a teleconverter, how might that compare to the pump? my limited knowledge tells me this would be a bad idea seeing as i want to use autofocus...

The 100-400L IS is a fine piece of glass. It also develops your muscles. Think long and hard about what lens is best for you. I find that my 16-35 gets more use that the 100-400.
Really you can lump Canon lenses in quality as follows:-
1. Prime lenses. They are the very best.
2. Zoom lenses. Good. Flexible. Not as good as primes. Zooms save shoe leather.
3. Zooms with TCs fitted. Not as good as primes and not as good as zooms. They lose 1 or 2 stops of light gathering ability.