JDphotography Posted May 4 Share #1 Posted May 4 Advertisement (gone after registration) I wonder what users’ experience is of using the vario elmar 100-400 without the 1.4x extender and then cropping in on the photo taken, or using the extender and not cropping? I find the extender restricts lower light photography due to its constraint on the maximum aperture, so I wonder whether it is better just not to use it and to crop…? Taking it on and off as conditions dictate is an option but not ideal in the field. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted May 4 Posted May 4 Hi JDphotography, Take a look here Wildlife lens. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
jaapv Posted May 4 Share #2 Posted May 4 Very little difference. At these distances the difference in DOF is hardly relevant and the perspective is identical. As is motion blur. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coral Palm Posted May 5 Share #3 Posted May 5 Have used the extender, once or twice I think. Unless on at the start often what you wanted to photograph has moved on by the time you get it out of the bag and attach it. Definitely easier to crop and as you stated one loses aperture and low light can become a nemesis. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted May 5 Share #4 Posted May 5 Nemesis? With cameras with high ISO capability and effective OIS? It must be pretty dark for that to happen.One thing to consider: if the intention is to photograph animals a long way off, atmospheric disturbance becomes a real concern, whether cropping or using an extender. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coral Palm Posted May 5 Share #5 Posted May 5 @jaapv—meant nemesis in regards to using a higher aperture than would have liked and yes high ISO and OIS have certainly been a game changer. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted May 5 Share #6 Posted May 5 Even then, at the distances that you would be using an extender for the difference in DOF between f 2-8 and f 16 will range from “nothing” to “ next to nothing”. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coral Palm Posted May 6 Share #7 Posted May 6 Advertisement (gone after registration) Yes but not as high an aperture would allow me to use a lower ISO and in the end for me that is good, because as good as high ISO has gotten rather keep it lower if possible. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
JDphotography Posted May 6 Author Share #8 Posted May 6 Hi all thank you for your comments. Very helpful! Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Photoworks Posted May 8 Share #9 Posted May 8 Have you looked at the 60-600mm from Sigma. It has faster AF and a redesigned IOS. Some people like it better 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
JDphotography Posted May 14 Author Share #10 Posted May 14 Thank you. I understand it is a bit of a beast but will certainly have a look! Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
helged Posted May 16 Share #11 Posted May 16 On 5/14/2025 at 2:16 PM, JDphotography said: Thank you. I understand it is a bit of a beast but will certainly have a look! For beast, check the new Sigma 300-600mm f4... Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
LD_50 Posted Thursday at 10:13 PM Share #12 Posted Thursday at 10:13 PM On 5/4/2025 at 9:20 AM, JDphotography said: I wonder what users’ experience is of using the vario elmar 100-400 without the 1.4x extender and then cropping in on the photo taken, or using the extender and not cropping? I find the extender restricts lower light photography due to its constraint on the maximum aperture, so I wonder whether it is better just not to use it and to crop…? Taking it on and off as conditions dictate is an option but not ideal in the field. Anything you can crop with the 100-400 without extender, you can also crop with extender to get that much more reach. I would always choose the optical reach if I can deal with the smaller aperture. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.