|
| 
 enlarge | Brand: Canon
Category: Photography
List Price: $470.00
Buy New: $263.98
You Save: $206.02 (44%)
New (17) Used (1)
Avg. Customer Rating:  33 reviews
Media: Electronics
Autographed: No
Memorabilia: No
Shipping Weight (lbs): 0.8
Dimensions (in): 4.4 x 3.8 x 3.7
MPN: 6845A004
Model: 6845A004
UPC: 013803002423
EAN: 0013803002423
ASIN: B00009R6WL
Availability: Usually ships in 1-2 business days
|
| Customer Reviews:
 Great Accessory, Great Service from Amazon December 17, 2007
3 out of 3 found this review helpful
I bought this extender to use with my EF70-200L f/2.8 lens on my Rebel XT. I expected the extender to soften my images, but was very pleased to see no softening. And, on my lens, the autofocus still works just perfect.
Amazon did me right yet again with their pricing and delivery, as well. I don't hesitate to recommend Amazon to anyone looking for camera gear.
Get 1.4 times closer October 30, 2007
3 out of 3 found this review helpful
This is a handy item to have in your camera bag. I use it with my 70-200 f/4L when I need a little more reach and don't want to take my 300 f/4L. Since it's made by Canon it works flawlessly with the EOS system. I've noted no discernible image degradation using the extender.
Extra reach at minimal cost August 7, 2007
16 out of 16 found this review helpful
I've used the Canon 1.4x tele-extender for about six months with my Rebel XTi and two lenses - a f/4.0 70-200mm (non-IS) and the f/4.0 300mm IS. Most of my shots are of kid soccer and baseball.
For these applications, the 1.4x tele-extender is a great accessory. Because of the extra reach, you can get more frame-filling shots. The loss of image sharpness is minimal and tends to be offset by the fact that you can doing less cropping. Since both lenses are f/4.0, they maintain their autofocus capabilities. If there's any slowdown in focusing speed, it's not obvious.
I took the same equipment on a two week safari in Tanazania. Without the extender I'd have had a much harder time capturing decent wildlife shots. The f/4.0 300mm + 1.4x gave me an effective f/5.6 420mm lens with image stabilization. That was about the minimum for many shots (a leopard with its kill in a tree 120 yards away, for example). Even then, I often wished for more length, but to get it you have to move up to serious telephoto lenses that are much more expensive (and much heavier).
As other reviewers have pointed out, there are many lenses - including Canon lenses - that are not compatible with Canon tele-extenders. Check the list of compatible lenses carefully before you buy. 3rd party teleconverters from Tamron and Kenko are reputedly less finicky, although image quality may not be quite as good.
Many photo equipment reviewers (e.g. Bob Atkins) claim that teleconverters work better with primes than with telephotos. That may account for the complaints about the 1.4x with the Canon 100-400mm telephoto. It works fine with my 70-200mm, but that's generally thought to be a sharper lens than the 100-400mm.
Overall, the 1.4x teleconverter is a relatively inexpensive way to extend the range of your Canon telephoto lenses without significant loss of image quality.
 Decent sharpness, poor Bokeh. August 2, 2007
20 out of 26 found this review helpful
I compared this extender on my Canon EF 70-200 USM F/2.8L IS to the new Canon EF 70-300mm F/4-5.6 USM IS lens. For sharpness wide open, the 70-300mm has the edge, but when stopped down to F8, the 70-200mm w/1.4 has the sharper picture. Granted I was pixel-peeping, but when you have the luxury of comparing for quality alone, not disregarding contrast, resolution etc., you can pixel-peep too (just don't limit yourself by that). In fact, the color of the 70-200mm lens with 1.4x was slightly better even wide open. Now here's where I have my beef, and none of the reviews I've read seem to delve into this aspect: Bokeh. When shooting wide open with the 1.4x extender, I found the quality of objects out of the depth of field to look strange. For example, I was shooting elephants at the zoo (no bullets), and I noticed that the leaves on the trees behind the elephants looked very peculiar--something like compressed green jelly-beans. They were out of the depth of field, but they didn't look natural to me. I mounted the 70-300mm lens and took the same shot, and the leaves were nice and soft, even at f/5.6 compared to the 70-200mm w1.4x extender. So, if you ask me, I don't find the extender useful unless you have no lens to reach the subject as close or closer or you shoot at F8-F11. I certainly wouldn't buy the 2x unless I had no other choice, and weren't going to print anything larger than an 8x10 or go to the web with the pics.
For background, I was determining whether to buy the EF 70-300mm USM F/4-5.6 IS lens over a mere extender for my existing EF 70-200mm USM F/2.8L IS w/1.4x extender. I finally resolved to buying the 300mm F/4 IS Prime Tele instead of either.
 Works well July 31, 2007
4 out of 9 found this review helpful
This product works as advertised. It reduces sharpness a little bit, and costs 1 f-stop, but you get more reach.
|
|
|
Disclaimer: This is an Amazon storefront - the products referenced on this site are manufactured and sold by other parties and sold through Amazon.com We make no representations regarding either the products or any information vendors offer about their products. Any questions, complaints, or claims regarding the products must be directed to the appropriate manufacturer or vendor, or to Amazon.com. |
| |
