Extender III Review

[HDNitehawk]

Bryan

[neuroanatomist]

The 1.4x III looks noticeably sharper in the center, but looks noticeably less sharp in the mid-frame and corners. So, overall it seems to be a wash. Based on one quick look, not worth the extra $. The 2x III also does not seem like a big improvement (in fact, contrast seemsnoticeably lower than the 2x II). So much for the idea (not mine, but proposed in other posts) that the 2x III + 70-200 II would magically be a perfect 140-400mm f/5.6 IS zoom lens...

[HDNitehawk]

Your right I took a look again, the 1.4x III is a little sharper in the center. This might be a little improvement in that the long Tele

[freelanceshots]

Those extenders have gotten so expensive it

[neuroanatomist]

adding gear so that you can make your work better is like pulling teeth.

Doesn't the way your gear looks improve your photos? The new MkII supertele primes will have, "A highly durable white leather-tone coating ... This is a new, more neutral shade of white compared to earlier lenses. It is intended to indicate that the IS II lenses have evolved..." The white paint on the new MkIII extenders matches the paint on the new supertele primes. Do you really expect people to use an extender with that old, outdated white paint when they can pay $200 more for almost equivalent optical performance, but get a paint that matches their new lens?


[:P] [:P] [:P]

[freelanceshots]

Camera anything is absurdly expensive but I guess that's what kind of makes it an exclusive club. When camera gear prices come down and IQ still goes up everybody thinks they can start shooting professionally. I just have to remember that the best photographs come from the photographer and not their gear.

[piiooo]

I would be interested to seeif the claimed increase in AF speed and accuracy of the extenders MkIII is substantial enough.I alsowonder if they are compatible with older lenses, and if so, how they comparewith the MKII extenders.

[JJphoto]

The 2X III maybe not that good anyway but I think it

[wickerprints]

I don

[HDNitehawk]

I don't know what charts some of you have been looking at, but the EF Extender 2x III to me is very clearly superior to the 2x II

Yes, it has improved. But did it reach a level that a person would be satisfied with the results they get with it. We have only seen the results on one of Canon's sharpest, if not sharpest lens. I will be curious to see the results on with the 500mm F4L.


Those that were waiting for the AF questions to be answered. I bet we can take Canon at their own words:

• "Each Series III Extender features a newly developed microcomputer that increases AF precision when the extenders are used with an IS II super-telephoto lens. AF precision remains the same as the Series II Extenders when the Series III Extenders are used with earlier extender-compatible EF lenses."

And since the IS II super-tele's aren't even on the market yet, it doesn't look like this is going to make much of a diffrence.