Using 2 1.6X Extenders? at DVinfo.net

Norman Woo · September 6th, 2002, 02:45 PM

Folks

Is it possible to use two (or maybe more) 1.6X Extenders? I currently have one. I do a lot of sports video and would love to get one of those X-treme closeups shots that you often see in the sports mags.

Thanks

Don Berube · September 6th, 2002, 04:48 PM

OK, this MAY work, but you may lose functionality, wev'e never tested this before at any of the shows, at least I haven't - not sure if Chris has either... It certainly is not officially recommended by Canon hehe

I don't recommend it, seems kinda hacky to me. You won't get nearly as close as you would if you were to use the EF adaptor with a high quality EF lens.

http://www.usa.canon.com/eflenses/lineup/telephotozoom/index.html

I did some testing with both the 70-200mm IS USM and the 100-400mm IS USM lenses last year and was taken aback by how steady the shots were at full tele. Remember, you have to multiply the focal length of the lens you use with the EF adaptor by 7.2 - so that 100-400mm lens becomes a 720-2880mm lens with an f-stop of f5.6 or so, due to the EF adaptor. This lens is around $1500, not bad considering what it does for you, actually that is a great price considering the quality of the optics and the CANON IS. Maybe it is time you start charging for your services if you have not already ;)

You could always reach for a more affordable EF lens to get similiar results, if you have a limited budget. Make sure you bring a good fluid-head tripod or Tiffen SteadyStick, at least a monopod,,, because without the IS, that extreme telephoto focal length will be shaky!

- don

Jeff Donald · September 7th, 2002, 07:23 AM

A very good alternative to the 100-400mm EF lens is the 70-300EF IS lens. Several people here have posted very favorable reviews of the lens. Check out Steve's recent insect shots here http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/showthread.php?s=&threadid=3565 He does alot of work with that lens. I normally use the 100-400 for my wildlife work, but decided to take a look at the 70-300 again. Last weekend I shot some jet skiers and was very impressed by it. The image quality is nearly as good as the 100-400 and about 1/3 the price or less.

Jeff

John Klein · September 24th, 2002, 07:12 PM

IF you can focus, don't need steadyshot, can set an f/stop and have no big money, I'd try an optex to nikon (35mm) adapter and give it a go. Used glass is pretty inexpensive and I'm thinking an 80-200 f/4.5 is going to be quite sharp. I'd love to give my 300mm single focal length lens a try as it's one sharp lens (esp when you compare to something that's supposed to look good at 16 different focal lengths.

September 6th, 2002, 02:45 PM	#1
Norman Woo Regular Crew Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: Brossard, Quebec, Canada Posts: 147	Using 2 1.6X Extenders? Folks Is it possible to use two (or maybe more) 1.6X Extenders? I currently have one. I do a lot of sports video and would love to get one of those X-treme closeups shots that you often see in the sports mags. Thanks

September 6th, 2002, 04:48 PM	#2
Don Berube Moderator Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: Boston, MA (travel frequently) Posts: 837	OK, this MAY work, but you may lose functionality, wev'e never tested this before at any of the shows, at least I haven't - not sure if Chris has either... It certainly is not officially recommended by Canon hehe I don't recommend it, seems kinda hacky to me. You won't get nearly as close as you would if you were to use the EF adaptor with a high quality EF lens. http://www.usa.canon.com/eflenses/lineup/telephotozoom/index.html I did some testing with both the 70-200mm IS USM and the 100-400mm IS USM lenses last year and was taken aback by how steady the shots were at full tele. Remember, you have to multiply the focal length of the lens you use with the EF adaptor by 7.2 - so that 100-400mm lens becomes a 720-2880mm lens with an f-stop of f5.6 or so, due to the EF adaptor. This lens is around $1500, not bad considering what it does for you, actually that is a great price considering the quality of the optics and the CANON IS. Maybe it is time you start charging for your services if you have not already ;) You could always reach for a more affordable EF lens to get similiar results, if you have a limited budget. Make sure you bring a good fluid-head tripod or Tiffen SteadyStick, at least a monopod,,, because without the IS, that extreme telephoto focal length will be shaky! - don __________________ DONALD BERUBE - noisybrain. Productions, LLC Director Of Photography/ Producer/ Consultant http://noisybrain.com/donbio.html CREATE and NETWORK with http://www.bosfcpug.org and also http://fcpugnetwork.org

September 24th, 2002, 07:12 PM	#4
John Klein Regular Crew Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Wisconsin, USA Posts: 182	IF you can focus, don't need steadyshot, can set an f/stop and have no big money, I'd try an optex to nikon (35mm) adapter and give it a go. Used glass is pretty inexpensive and I'm thinking an 80-200 f/4.5 is going to be quite sharp. I'd love to give my 300mm single focal length lens a try as it's one sharp lens (esp when you compare to something that's supposed to look good at 16 different focal lengths. __________________ < >< . . . . . < >< . . . . . < ><

September 7th, 2002, 07:23 AM	#3
Jeff Donald Warden Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: Clearwater, FL Posts: 8,287	A very good alternative to the 100-400mm EF lens is the 70-300EF IS lens. Several people here have posted very favorable reviews of the lens. Check out Steve's recent insect shots here http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/showthread.php?s=&threadid=3565 He does alot of work with that lens. I normally use the 100-400 for my wildlife work, but decided to take a look at the 70-300 again. Last weekend I shot some jet skiers and was very impressed by it. The image quality is nearly as good as the 100-400 and about 1/3 the price or less. Jeff