Hi
I have a 70-200 F2.8 II lens and I am planning to buy an extender, I see two choices canon extender ef 1.4x iii and 2x iii . Initial thought is 2X gives more reach than 1.4X, but the price of both of them is same. I found online that the AF speed is reduced by 75% on 2X and reduced by 50% for 1.4X. Please advise.
I have used both extenders with this lens. I have better luck with the 1.4x than the 2x. The image quality from the 70-200 F2.8 II is good enough that even with the 1.4x I scarcely notice the loss of sharpness, but with the 2x it is easier to notice. I was happier cropping the image with the 1.4x to the same dimension I had with the 2x. (Used on the 5D III). I am strictly a recreational photographer and would love to hear from the pros as well.
Remember that the 1.4x changes your effective aperture by 1.4x aka one stop, and the 2x changes your effective aperture by 2x aka two stops. That can be enough to affect your resulting exposure beyond what you're comfortable with, and can affect your AF if you were to use on other lenses.
We're a Canon/Profoto family: five cameras, sixteen lenses, fifteen Profoto lights, too many modifiers.
What do you want to do with the extender and what camera are you shooting it with?
I had a similar dilemma a few years ago and went 2x extender. It is pretty clear that the 1.4x gives better resolution. But I basically wanted to start traveling with the 70-200 II rather than the 100-400 Mk I for trips involving my family and not just landscapes and wildlife. My plan was to use the 70-200 II most of the time and when I needed a little bit more reach, crop first (ease of use, and with 22 MP, this has given some good results) and then, for subjects that require even further reach, use the 2x extender. So, for my purpose, where it is somewhat unknown just how much reach I will need, giving myself the most flexibility made sense to me.
As for the performance of the 2x extender. The AF is slowed, but not "slow". It is still pretty fast. It does tend to hunt more often. But it is a very usable option. You do lose a bit of contrast, but the IQ is still pretty solid, especially if you stop down to f/8.
What kind of photos will you be taking and what will you be doing with the images?
With the 1.4x most people are in agreement that the decrease in image quality is not that significant.
With the 2x there are some folks who won't use it. I do have one and mostly use it for increased magnification of close subjects to fill most of the frame. For other applications I tend to stick with the 1.4x as I find the files require less work in post processing.
Of possible interest would be the Kenko 1.4x teleconvertors. They will work with a MUCH wider selection of lenses including the 100mm macro.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote