Is the 1.4x Canon extender worth the price?

[jmcnally]

I'm considering a 1.4x extender for my Canon 70-200 f4 L lense. The Canon version is more than twice the cost of the Tamron and Sigma varieties.

Has anyone used any of these and feel strongly one way or the other if the extra money for the Canon is worth it?

thanks,

[Persian-Rice]

Not sure about a comparison, but other then that, the Canon one is great.

[Cadwell]

I have the Sigma EX 1.4 which works very well with my Canon 70-200mm f/4L and Sigma 120-300mm f/2.8 EX.

[drisley]

I dont have the Sigma, or the Tamron, but I can say the EF1.4x is excellent. When used with the 135F2L, there is no visible loss in quality.

[KBMphotography.com]

My Canon mk2 1.4x works superbly with the 70-200F2.8L IS.

Not tried the others though

[CoolToolGuy]

I use the Canon 1.4 without hesitation on my 70-200 f4L. I have only had my 200 f2.8L for a short time and I have not had a chance to try it out, but I expect it to do a fine job there when needed.

Have Fun,

[defordphoto]

Just remember that the Canon TC cannot be used with most lenses. It only works with a limited number of L-glass...I'm sure there is a list somewhere...

[sGu]

worth every penny ;)

[slin100]

Optically, I hear it's excellent. It does have a protruding front element, which prevents it from being used with certain lenses. It won't work with my Canon 80-200/2.8L, for example.

Other brands, like Sigma, Tokina, Tamron and Kenko do not have protruding front elements. I've seen many anecdotes that you don't lose too much in quality when using them. So, the question you gotta ask yourself is if the Canon TC worth an extra $100?

[chris.bailey]

Since getting the 70-200 f2.8 and the 1.4x my 100-400 has seen much less daylight. To me it is worth it easily.

[CyberDyneSystems]

I've been using the Sigma 1.4X for over a year on all my lenses,. Sigma and mostly Canon now.

It works very well with the Canon 70-200mm, and 100-400mm zooms.

The only thing that has me thinking about the Canon 1.4X now is the recent aquisistion of the Canon 200mm f1.8... for this lens.. the Sigma T-con seems a bit like "sacriledge" :roll: :P

[Cadwell]

Optically, I hear it's excellent. It does have a protruding front element, which prevents it from being used with certain lenses. It won't work with my Canon 80-200/2.8L, for example.

Other brands, like Sigma, Tokina, Tamron and Kenko do not have protruding front elements. I've seen many anecdotes that you don't lose too much in quality when using them. So, the question you gotta ask yourself is if the Canon TC worth an extra $100?

The Sigma EX TC has "protruding front elements" and has exactly the same lens restrictions as the Canon unit.

[CyberDyneSystems]

Yep... you can find more info in our T-con sticky... but it's true. The SIgma 1.4X and 2X T-cons will only work with the same Canon lenses as the Canon T-cons will work with.

This restrictive design is part of what makes the Sigmas a bit better optically than the generic T-cons.

The Sigma's... like the Canons,. do not try to do everything for every lens.. they have only set out to do the best they can for the lenses that they will function with ...

[slin100]

I stand corrected. Interestingly, B&H claims that the Kenko Pro 300 1.4x doesn't work with the EF 50 macro, 100 non-USM macro, 300/4 IS, and the 85/1.8. There's no such restriction listed for the Tamron, which I understand is the same as the Kenko.

[CyberDyneSystems]

Kenko makes it's own optics.. they are part of THK.. aka Tokina, Hoya and Kenko (also includes "Slik" and some other smaller subs...

I don't think they have anything at all to do with Tamrom...

[KennyG]

Don't overlook the weather sealing with the Canon TC's. If you have invested in a lens that has weather sealing, why spoil it. Optically, the Canon 1.4 is better than the Sigma and I have tested both.

[barbwire]

Read this:
http://194.100.88.243/petteri/pont/Reviews/de_TC_vs_TC/a_Tamron_vs_Sigma_1.4x.html

[CyberDyneSystems]

The trouble with that article,.. though informative,. is the test is only with a single lens. (Canon 200mm f/2.8L)

T-cons perform very differently from one lens to another.

Very differently.

In this case.. neither T-con was designed for the test lens (Canon 200mm f/2.8 prime) the Tamron is "generic" in the sense that it is not designed for any particular series of lenses. The SIgma tested is designed specifically to work only with a certain number of Sigma EX lenses. As it uses a similar design to Canon T-cons.. it can however physically fit on any Canon lens that a Canon t-con will fit on. This does not neccesarily mean that it will perform as well on these lenses it happens to fit on.

My experience using the Sigma1.4X on the following lenses has given much better results;

Sigma 500mm f/4.5EX
Sigma 70-200mm f/2.8EX
Canon 70-200mm f/2.8L IS
Canon 100-400mmL IS
Canon 200mm f/1.8L

Anyway, my point is that the article above is far to limited in its test on a singe lens to be a usable benchmark for how a t-con will perform. It is a glaring oversight that he did not test the Canon T-con on the Canon lens.. I suspect that in that case the differences may have been far more significant.

The good news is that the "cheap" Tamron does seem to be a very good bargain :)

[BikerFox]

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-Extender-EF-1.4x-II-Tele-Converter-Review.aspx