I really look forward to the magazine turning up and the latest issue duly turned up the other day. Whilst I've not read all of it in depth, I did read with interest the article on the 100-400 Mk II as this lens is a potential future upgrade from my Mk I, although only when they get a bit cheaper on the second-hand market (that's what my head says, anyway - my heart wants one NOW!)
In the quest for longer reach, I've occasionally used my Kenko 1.4x with my 100-400 Mk I. I'm happy to admit that I'm still a relative newbie and most of the problems are "user error" rather than the equipment but I've never really been happy with the IQ I get from that combo. So I decided that as long as it wasn't too pricey, I'd get a Canon 1.4x TC and try that. One of last year's issues compared the Kenko TCs with the Canons and the latter did seem to fare better and my own internet-based research seemed to indicate that there really wasn't a lot of difference in IQ between the II and III. Cost was another thing, though.
Anyway, the other day, I put in a cheeky eBay bid on a 1.4x II and won it for £160. Unfortunately, the seller then contacted me to say he "couldn't find it" and refunded me the cost plus an extra tenner "for my troubles". I have no reason not to believe him.
Then, reading this latest issue, and the article on the 100-400 lens, I spotted the body/lens/TC compatibility chart and see that the 80D (my next probable upgrade!) and the new 77D (which also has potential) both have 27 active AF points with the 1.4x III as against a single AF point with the 1.4x II. Obviously this is when matched with the Mk II lens, not the Mk I that I currently have.
Which makes me think that paying the extra for the III will be a better bet in the long run and that I got away with "buying" the 1.4x II from eBay. Now, what to do with that extra tenner.....
In the quest for longer reach, I've occasionally used my Kenko 1.4x with my 100-400 Mk I. I'm happy to admit that I'm still a relative newbie and most of the problems are "user error" rather than the equipment but I've never really been happy with the IQ I get from that combo. So I decided that as long as it wasn't too pricey, I'd get a Canon 1.4x TC and try that. One of last year's issues compared the Kenko TCs with the Canons and the latter did seem to fare better and my own internet-based research seemed to indicate that there really wasn't a lot of difference in IQ between the II and III. Cost was another thing, though.
Anyway, the other day, I put in a cheeky eBay bid on a 1.4x II and won it for £160. Unfortunately, the seller then contacted me to say he "couldn't find it" and refunded me the cost plus an extra tenner "for my troubles". I have no reason not to believe him.
Then, reading this latest issue, and the article on the 100-400 lens, I spotted the body/lens/TC compatibility chart and see that the 80D (my next probable upgrade!) and the new 77D (which also has potential) both have 27 active AF points with the 1.4x III as against a single AF point with the 1.4x II. Obviously this is when matched with the Mk II lens, not the Mk I that I currently have.
Which makes me think that paying the extra for the III will be a better bet in the long run and that I got away with "buying" the 1.4x II from eBay. Now, what to do with that extra tenner.....
Comment