100-400mm plus 2x Teleconverter = Overkill?

[Didereaux]

Well, am lacking a few important details. A project across thecross water, a mile plus away, and 500mm just barely adequate. What is missing is the actual subject. A road project, a building? A rare tiny bird? If it is a construction project you can easily calculate the focal length needed to fill a given frame size if you know the size of the subject and the distance. So with nothing of value to go on I will comment on your proposed equipment list. I have both a FF Canon 6D, and crop T2i, and a 100-400 IS USM L, and a Canon 2x extender. That lens with extender gives excellent results on both cameras. Equivalent 800mm on the 6D, and around 11-1200mm on the crop.

 

[astroNikon]

How about a telescope and a T-mount adapter? That's what I do for my job at school.

Telescope+H-alpha filter+camera pointed towards the sun = way too much fun!

Most telescopes require manual focusing.
You have a fixed aperture
and the scope width may be too much to handle
The T-adapter may also make it hard to handle in the hands depending upon the scope. I think for my Meades the T-Adapter is about 5 inches long (guess). So heavy scope ... + a 5 inch tube . then the camera. Sounds like a leveraging nightmare eh?

It's not the best handheld solution by far.

I'd rather have a 900mm lens truthfully.
My newest scope is 2000mm and fairly wide and extremely cumbersome to handhold (I've tried) - forget about taking a photo.
The 900mm was better but you can't handhold them.
The Nikon 500mm Reflex was doable to handhold and take photos but MF
I recommend telescopes only when you are pointed up to the stars/planets. Stick with regular lenses otherwise.

 

[runnah]

Well, am lacking a few important details. A project across thecross water, a mile plus away, and 500mm just barely adequate. What is missing is the actual subject. A road project, a building? A rare tiny bird? If it is a construction project you can easily calculate the focal length needed to fill a given frame size if you know the size of the subject and the distance. So with nothing of value to go on I will comment on your proposed equipment list. I have both a FF Canon 6D, and crop T2i, and a 100-400 IS USM L, and a Canon 2x extender. That lens with extender gives excellent results on both cameras. Equivalent 800mm on the 6D, and around 11-1200mm on the crop.

The structure is about 180ft high, width I don't know.

 

[jaomul]

I think the difficulty and loss of af with the image quality hit may mess it up. Of course it could be ok but maybe a superzoom bridge camera or a Canon crop rented with say the newer tamron might be better.

 

[runnah]

I think the difficulty and loss of af with the image quality hit may mess it up. Of course it could be ok but maybe a superzoom bridge camera or a Canon crop rented with say the newer tamron might be better.

Not concerned about AF. I've tried to find the new Tamron but no one has it.

 

[runnah]

The 5D III and 1D X can have working auto-focus up to f/8... but that's it. .

I am afraid I don't know what you mean here.

 

[Theo2]

How about a telescope and a T-mount adapter? That's what I do for my job at school.

Telescope+H-alpha filter+camera pointed towards the sun = way too much fun!

Most telescopes require manual focusing.
You have a fixed aperture
and the scope width may be too much to handle
The T-adapter may also make it hard to handle in the hands depending upon the scope. I think for my Meades the T-Adapter is about 5 inches long (guess). So heavy scope ... + a 5 inch tube . then the camera. Sounds like a leveraging nightmare eh?

It's not the best handheld solution by far.

I'd rather have a 900mm lens truthfully.
My newest scope is 2000mm and fairly wide and extremely cumbersome to handhold (I've tried) - forget about taking a photo.
The 900mm was better but you can't handhold them.
The Nikon 500mm Reflex was doable to handhold and take photos but MF
I recommend telescopes only when you are pointed up to the stars/planets. Stick with regular lenses otherwise.

I thought he was using a tripod? I have used a 16" Dobsonian scope with a camera a lot, good luck handholding that . I've never had any problems doing landscapes with my telescope and a fixed aperture. You just have to be creative. I also only use manual focus, so I can't comment on that. To each their own.

 

[jaomul]

The 5D III and 1D X can have working auto-focus up to f/8... but that's it. .

I am afraid I don't know what you mean here.

It means if you add a Tele the f number on the lens Combo becomes smaller than f8, which is the cameras mentioned limit for successful af.

 

[runnah]

It means if you add a Tele the f number on the lens Combo becomes smaller than f8, which is the cameras mentioned limit for successful af.

That doesn't seen right. I have no trouble with af at and above f/8. Or is it just with the converter?

 

[jaomul]

Lenses focus open and close down as shutter is pressed. It's actual aperture that matters

 

[Tailgunner]

It's been my experience, if I have any questions about my zoom range, I don't have enough. I would pick up a Tamron 150-600 and a 2x TC. I don't have any experience with this set up but most of the downsides I've read about it common like slow focusing speeds. This shouldn't be an issue seeing how this is a dusk shot that will be done in manual focus. The only place I've seen the 150-600 in stock is on ebay, so you're looking at a $1400 up front but if this is something you do often, it's probably a good investment.

Ironically, my local camera shop was trying to talk me into a 800mm today lol

 

[JacaRanda]

The Tamron 150-600 does not take canon TC's. Not sure it would be worth it either. The largest aperture at the 600 end is already 6.3. With a 2x tc, you may not see anything through the viewfinder if your eyes are like mine.

 

[Overread]

Canon cameras cap the AF through the lens at around f5.6 on most bodies - some newer ones (as mentioned earlier) go up to f8, after which the AF simply won't engage. It's data transmitted to the camera via the lens and relates to the maximum aperture (ergo the aperture the AF sensors work with). So long as the camera can "read" that the setup is smaller than its limit it won't engage the AF.

Now some 3rd party lenses that go to f6.3 trick the camera by miss-reporting the aperture to that part of the setup (so you still get the right aperture in your viewfinder but the camera doesn't twig that the maximum is f6.3). Sometimes using certain lens and teleconverter setups also won't fully report (using 3rd party lens/TC or using a TC/lens combo that isn't officially supported). There is also the "taping the pins" method where you put a bit of electrical tape over the metal contacts on the teleconverter which makes it invisible to the camera (google it you don't tape them all just a select number).


Thing is most users of the 100-400mm that I've spoken to don't like the 1.4TC on that lens - enough for record shots in good light only. The 2*TC is much much more demanding and chances are you'll get a very soft shot that will record the sight but won't be any good at all.

 

[runnah]

Canon cameras cap the AF through the lens at around f5.6 on most bodies - some newer ones (as mentioned earlier) go up to f8, after which the AF simply won't engage. It's data transmitted to the camera via the lens and relates to the maximum aperture (ergo the aperture the AF sensors work with). So long as the camera can "read" that the setup is smaller than its limit it won't engage the AF. Now some 3rd party lenses that go to f6.3 trick the camera by miss-reporting the aperture to that part of the setup (so you still get the right aperture in your viewfinder but the camera doesn't twig that the maximum is f6.3). Sometimes using certain lens and teleconverter setups also won't fully report (using 3rd party lens/TC or using a TC/lens combo that isn't officially supported). There is also the "taping the pins" method where you put a bit of electrical tape over the metal contacts on the teleconverter which makes it invisible to the camera (google it you don't tape them all just a select number). Thing is most users of the 100-400mm that I've spoken to don't like the 1.4TC on that lens - enough for record shots in good light only. The 2*TC is much much more demanding and chances are you'll get a very soft shot that will record the sight but won't be any good at all.

Maybe I am dumb but if I go up to f/11 the camera focuses just fine.

 

[Tailgunner]

The Tamron 150-600 does not take canon TC's. Not sure it would be worth it either. The largest aperture at the 600 end is already 6.3. With a 2x tc, you may not see anything through the viewfinder if your eyes are like mine.

You're right, he would have to go with a 3rd party TC...at least that is what I've read what people was using. If this would work, he would be pushing 1200mm vs 900mm and by the sound of it, 900mm may not be enough.

Now I don't speak Canon and know some of their glass only works with some bodies and not others. Anyhow, here is a site where you can rent a Canon 600mm F4L IS II for $359 for 4 days and a 2X TC for an additional 25/day.

https://www.lensrentals.com/rent/canon/lenses/supertelephoto/canon-600mm-f4l-is-ii#.UAXAQrTUM2w