Extenders, are they worth it?

If there's enough light I'll play around a bit more, for Rugby I want to be getting up around 1/1000th so I can't really afford to stop it down too much

I said:
1/ "You tell us"
and
2/ "I doubt you will find the 2X worthwhile for sports"

So I think I was right for 1, suspect wrong for 2. Looks like quality is confirmed good, AF during sports pending.

Milutiche wrote in post #18585938
So my 2x iii Arrived today and I had half an hour or so to play around with it before dark and so far i'm impressed, the AF has slowed a bit but that was to be expected, sharpness looks fine. Can't wait to test it out on the Rugby field this weekend

Hosted photo: posted by Milutiche in
./showthread.php?p=185​85938&i=i133432460
forum: Canon EF and EF-S Lenses

Hosted photo: posted by Milutiche in
./showthread.php?p=185​85938&i=i55664776
forum: Canon EF and EF-S Lenses

Look at that 25000 ISO shot on the 1Dx. Impressive. Is this the canon 2x. My sigma 2x is sharp as well. I may have to start using it more on the 1Dx2

Thanks for posting

Milutiche wrote in post #18585963
If there's enough light I'll play around a bit more, for Rugby I want to be getting up around 1/1000th so I can't really afford to stop it down too much

The good thing about the 1Dx is that its high ISO celling is near-unlimited, so just put it on auto ISO and fire away!

umphotography wrote in post #18586110
Look at that 25000 ISO shot on the 1Dx. Impressive. Is this the canon 2x. My sigma 2x is sharp as well. I may have to start using it more on the 1Dx2

Thanks for posting

Bonkers isn't it. 20+ years ago I was using ISO 50 slide film, and ISO 800 colour film was "fast"

The weaker 1.4X teleconverters do "less harm" to image quality.

Canon's II or III series are both excellent. For the newer 70-200 II, you might prefer the III, but the 1.4X II will work fine. It also works great on 300/2.8 IS.

If you need 2X... for use with the 70-200 II you will definitely want the 2X III.... it's the best combo. I won't use my 2X II with any 70-200... too much loss of image quality for my liking. It's good on the 300/2.8, though.

You've discovered the exact reason I prefer and use APS-C 7D Mark II for sports photography.... the "free 1.6X" effect (free because there's no loss of light the way there is with a TC.... f/2.8 is still f/2.8 instead of being turned into f/4 with a 1.4X or f/5.6 with a 2X). The 1DX is a great camera, but full frame require longer focal lengths... bigger, heavier and often MUCH more expensive. Give me a high performance 20MP APS-C like the 7DII and I'm a happy camper. (I do use full frame too... just not for sports.)

Bassat wrote in post #18583457
...With both listed lenses, either/both cameras will be at f/4 with a 1.4X, and f/5.6 with a 2.0X. All AF points will remain available on both bodies.

True... but with teleconverter focus will likely slow a bit. Exactly how much depends in part on the ambient light conditions, subject detail and contrast, too... in addition to the lens' focus performance. But basically the stronger the teleconverter, the more focus will slow.

You're right. I'll be sure to read the original post more carefully from now on. My bad, as they say.

2x on the 70-200 II and the 5D4, not for the faint of heart, since it pushes ISO to the stratosphere. AF was good enough for the less aggressive action though... I won't do that again, I will just bring the Kenko 1.4x, these barely pass for web images. I will reserve the 2x for outdoor sports.

I gave it another go today, the light wasn't great, rain was coming and going, it takes a bit of the sharpness out of the images but I do like how tight I can get without too much cropping

HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.

HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.

Yes, they are worth it!

I've had mixed results with my 400 (5.6) + 1.4xii combo. Some shots have been adequately sharp, others very soft. Centre point F8 AF on my 80D is noticeably slower than without the TC but I've still managed to get a few slow gliding BIF shots with it on.

Overall, I'm glad I have the TC.

I thought I'd try out my new 2X TC. 210mm & f/8 & 2X TC, so: 420mm f/16. Shot on 80D, so 672mm effective. Hand held, no IS. Lens is Vivitar Series 1 70-210mm f/3.5 (one of the greats). TC is Yashica YUS 2X (one of the el-cheapos). Flash is Contax TLA 30. Nothing exciting here, just a stuffie my wife keeps in the dining room.

Full aps-c frame, then 100% crop. I may take this setup to Cubs game this year.

EDIT:
On second thought, I'd leave the 80D at home. I just bought 2 copies of the Yashica FX-D. Cubs game deserves full frame.

HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.

HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.

Milutiche wrote in post #18592818
I gave it another go today, the light wasn't great, rain was coming and going, it takes a bit of the sharpness out of the images but I do like how tight I can get without too much cropping

You may need to up your ss to help with sharpness. Was your i.s. on or off for these. Tho honestly i think those are more than acceptable. Have you printed any to see how they look? The other problem you'll find now is needing another body with a shorter lens for try scoring runs. I've found that 300mm+1.4x+1D mk3 is the ideal length at the pitches i shoot at. Enough mp to crop action at the other end of the pitch and just wide enough to catch a player going over the line

I've never had a use for a TC (or anything past 200mm) but with an up coming trip overseas I decided to get a 2X III and to get a different perspective on landscapes and such at 400mm. I'll report back in a few weeks if I find out anything earth shattering.