1.4x vs. 2x Extender (Mark II)

[Rudi]

Hi everyone,

looking for people with personal experience using both of these extenders. I am thinking of saving some money by buying a 2x Mark II Extender instead of another lens (also to save weight, but this would be secondary).

I have heard that the 2x Extender produces softer images than the 1.4x, and that the 1.4x is MUCH better as far as image quality is concerned. (The price seems to reflect this, the 1.4x being slightly more expensive than the 2x...).

Now... HOW MUCH better is the 1.4x? Is it a huge difference? (I already own the 1.4x, and am very happy with it, so I'm trying to get an idea of how much image quality I will lose by using the 2x). Is the difference readily noticeable?

[Rudi]

What? No one here uses both Extenders???

[mrchips]

Sorry Rudi, just the 2X II

Denny

[Rudi]

Denny,


what are your impressions of the 2x ?

[ethan1219]

i dont have the 1.4 but i do use the 2x with a 70 200 2.8 is. i do feel that i lose some degree of sharpness with it but not so much that it is terrible.
using the 1D i end up with a 520 5.6 that is lite...that is hard to beat for the money
j

[mrchips]

Ridi

Use it often with my 100-400 IS, I love it, outside of loss of AF.

http://www.through-my-lens.com/0415.htm

Denny

[Rudi]

OK, That's IT then! I'll have to go and buy one! :)

[jadams]

Hi-

Does anyone have experience with the 1.4 extender on the 28-70 L 2.8?

First off, is it compatible fully with this lens or will I loose some camera features? Is it worth it, or should I just save the money to go towards another lens?

It seems like a great deal for the price (if I can use this same lens), and it certainly means carrying less weight around with me (always a good thing).

Just wondering if it's one of those "too good to be true" things -- and if so, what the faults of using it are.

I often need a bit more range, but I hate to have to carry around another 3 pound 15 inch brick to get it....

Thanks,
Jasper

[Roger_Cavanagh]

Here's a link to a Michael Reichmann article where he compares the old and new 2x extenders:

http://luminous-landscape.com/c-ext.htm

Regards,

[Rudi]

jadams wrote:
Hi-

Does anyone have experience with the 1.4 extender on the 28-70 L 2.8?




Jasper,

is the 1.4x extension in focal length worth it for you? It will make your lens a 39-98mm f/4 zoom. From the posts in this thread, it appears you might be better off to get the 2x Extender (Mark II).

Me? I'd just get the 70-200 f/4 L. Sharp, light, a pleasure to use. The best kept secret in the Canon lens line-up!

[jadams]

I like that link that compares the new and old 2x extenders.... the photos are very helpful.

Does anyone have any photos to share that were taken using the 2x or 1.4x extender? Judging by the quality of the photos on the link given (well, I guess he was using a much larger zoom lens that I would be.. hehe) I don't think it's a wise decision.

Well, I think you guys just convinced me that I should start looking around for another lens. Maybe I should drive into Boston and check the pawn shops.. hehe :) It's very hit or miss -- but sometimes you get one where someone dumped all their equipment and the pricing man can't tell the difference between a good lens and a bad lens. But that's all going downhill because of the internet -- now they plug the information into google and it tells them how good the lens is. :( It was better for me before -- when they had to guess.

My only other option is to stop posting and to go out to work and EARN money. We all know that's no fun....

Jasper

[Jane Lipman]

Rudi wrote:
jadams wrote:
Hi-

Does anyone have experience with the 1.4 extender on the 28-70 L 2.8?




Jasper,

is the 1.4x extension in focal length worth it for you? It will make your lens a 39-98mm f/4 zoom. From the posts in this thread, it appears you might be better off to get the 2x Extender (Mark II).

Me? I'd just get the 70-200 f/4 L. Sharp, light, a pleasure to use. The best kept secret in the Canon lens line-up!

I don't believe the 1.4x or 2x Mark II work with the 28-70/f2.8 L. I purchased both extenders for my 70-200/f2.8 L IS - and remember reading that it only worked on the white lenses (and one other zoom that peaked at 135mm - I believe). I also have the 28-70 but have never tried connecting it to the extenders.

[Roger_Cavanagh]

Jane is right. This page http://www.usa.canon.com/eflenses/lineup/index.html has links to tech data on the two extenders that show lens compatibility.

Regards,

[Rudi]

jadams wrote:
Does anyone have any photos to share that were taken using the 2x or 1.4x extender? Judging by the quality of the photos on the link given (well, I guess he was using a much larger zoom lens that I would be.. hehe) I don't think it's a wise decision.



Jasper,

this link should answer both your questions (about the 1.4x TC AND the 70-200 L f/4:)):

http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=3242

[Dick Ginkowski]

The 1.4x and 2x are different animals indeed. I use both.

Yes, there is some loss of sharpness with a 2x, more so than with the 1.4x. However, the images are still very good.

The increase in focal length is so dramatic between the two...as is the difference of sharpness...that it is not really choice between "either or."

I recommend that you buy BOTH and go used if you need to save money (which is what I did).

Let me give you some examples of how these work on a D30/D60:

70-200 f.2.8 L becomes 112-320 f/2.8
with 1.4x 156-448 f/4
with 2x 224-640 f/5.6

300 f/2.8 = 480 f/2.8
with 1.4x = 672 f/4
with 2x=960 f/5.6

It's OK to buy Kenko extension tubes. They're great. But stick to the Canon teleconverters.