Using a Kenko 2x extender on a Canon 50mm 1.4; impractical, impossable or just plain insane? :-D

[Frodosbigtoe]

Has anyone ever paired these two pieces of gear with any success? Heading to India and need to travel light so I'm only taking 16-35mm and a 50mm. I'm afraid I won't have enough reach with just those 2 lenses hence the extender idea

 

[dr croubie]

Do you have the extender already?
I'm not sure how much they cost, but the 85/1.8 and 100/2.0 can't be much more, and they're pretty sweet lenses, better than a 50/1.4 and extender would be...

(fwiw, I just tried my Kenko 1.4x on my 50/1.8ii, it won't get to infinity wihout the glass touching. I'd suspect the same of your combo)

 

[Nishi Drew]

Or just carry around the 50mm. Not enough reach? Get closer. Not wide enough? Step back!
Though for travel, and if you want scenery/indoor then of course, carry the 16-35.

As for extenders, yeah- no, you'd be better off with cropping, that's right, you indefinitely lose quality
by using an extender, especially on a unsupported lens, and if you don't mind quality then
heck go get yourself a compact super zoom. And I also agree that either the 85 or 100 F2 are good alternatives.

 

[brianwallace21]

It'll work.... but trust me, don't do it. You'll have cloudy, discolored photos that aren't worth a thing. Keep in mind, that you'll need to stop it down to a minimum of 4.0 to get anything resembling reality, more likely 5.6. I have the exact pairing and it's just not worth it.

 

[crasher8]

I'd search Keh.com for an LN- or EX+ EF 100 f/2. Or a refurb on the Canon site. Really, why not get good glass instead of an extender for ~ the same $?

 

[Mt Spokane Photography]

Extenders don't generally work well with retrofocus lenses. Thats why they specify using them with a lens of 100mm or longer. It might physically function with the 50, but you might not be happy with the results.