Kenko 1.4x Pro300 DGX on the 70-200 2.8 IS II

I'm the market for an extender, but having trouble choosing one. From what I've seen, the optics on the Kenko are as good, or better, than the Canon 1.4x II. Is this generally accepted or is it an argued view? I haven't heard much on how it affects AF, though. Any first-hand experiences with this combination?

i currently have the same kenko 1.4 and use it often with the 70-200 mk 2 with no probs also have canon mk 2 1.4 tele and can confirm that the difference between the 2 are slim to none at all

Would you mind pointing me to, or posting, some full-res sample pictures?

I am considering between Kenko and Canon to... I don't know if this is to steal the thread, but i would like to hear more oppinion on it. How big is the difference between the Canon MKIII and Kenko?

Check out Silverfox's threads. He has done extensive testing with the 70-200 Mk 2 and Kenko's

dadgummit wrote in post #13032418
Check out Silverfox's threads. He has done extensive testing with the 70-200 Mk 2 and Kenko's

Ditto. I went with Kenko because of his tests. Wouldn't hesitate to do it again.

dadgummit wrote in post #13032418
Check out Silverfox's threads. He has done extensive testing with the 70-200 Mk 2 and Kenko's

I have. Here he tests a pro 300 DG, but not the DGX:

https://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthre​ad.php?t=999626

I'm asking because the DGX is $249 and the Canon 1.4x II is $300. As they are very close in price, if the Canon AF's much better than the DGX, then I'll be going with the Canon. However, I've yet to hear how good or bad the DGX 1.4x AF is.

I have the Kenko converter you are asking about. Concerning AF, one thing I can tell you is that it functions without taping the pins, even on a lower-quality body like my 60D, even if your lens then is slower than 5.6.

As far as how it functions with the 70-200, I don't know, but my 60D was very poor at AF with the TC and my Tamron 70-300. The lens more often than not failed to achieve focus and hunted a lot. If conditions are really bright and very contrasty, sometimes it would work.

With it on my Canon 400 5.6 lens, it is also kind of uncertain. The lens won't hunt, it just sits there and does nothing. With full-time manual override, I can get it close to focus and then sometimes the AF will take over and achieve focus. In bright, contrasty conditions, it will sometimes work OK, but it seems very unreliable. I think it might be good to use for situations where you know it will be bright and you need the reach and you have plenty of time - say ducks on a pond. Can't hurt to try it.

Edit: I just reread the thread and see that the lens in question is a 2.8, so the TC would probably work better with that, since you won't exceed 5.6 anyway. I'll leave my posting in place, just FYI.

Fligi7 wrote in post #13058951
I have. Here he tests a pro 300 DG, but not the DGX:

https://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthre​ad.php?t=999626

I'm asking because the DGX is $249 and the Canon 1.4x II is $300. As they are very close in price, if the Canon AF's much better than the DGX, then I'll be going with the Canon. However, I've yet to hear how good or bad the DGX 1.4x AF is.

The only difference between the original DG & DGX is the internal circuitry as the optics & AF response are identical whether its the Pro300 or MC4 model. The Pro300 simply has one more element.

Reputable dealer below:

http://www.ebay.com …enses&hash=item​27b4a57249

TBH if you dont need weather sealing and the 1.4 extender will be used on a lens such as the 70-200MKII that dont suffer from CA i would buy the Kenko 1.4 MC4 DGX below which is rated very good:

http://www.bhphotovide​o.com …TelePlus_MC4_AF​_1_4X.html

http://www.traumfliege​r.de …elekonverter/ov​erview.php

Regards, Ron

As always, Ron, your input is very much appreciated on the subject of extenders. Weather sealing isn't much of a concern when I'll be using this. From the traumflieger site's test, it appears that the MC4 DGX has the best optics of the bunch, which is surprising that it bests Canon's new 1.4x mkIII.

Fligi7 wrote in post #13058951
the DGX is $249 and the Canon 1.4x II is $300.

Sometimes you can get a good deal on the Kenko. I bought mine on Amazon for $219 two weeks ago. It was one of those independent sellers who go through Amazon, and their lower price shows up on the page as the primary thing to buy. So I did.

The price was up to $229 in a few days, so it varies all over the place. Very odd but you should try it every day if you want one.

I will be selling my Sigma 1.4x and moving to the Canon 1.4xIII soon. Reason is that I moved from using it exclusively on a 1.6x crop to using it mainly on 1.3x and some on FF. Also I plan on using it a lot now that I have the 70-200 II, so I want something extremely durable.

Silverfox1 wrote in post #13060067
The only difference between the original DG & DGX is the internal circuitry as the optics & AF response are identical whether its the Pro300 or MC4 model. The Pro300 simply has one more element.

Reputable dealer below:

http://www.ebay.com …enses&hash=item​27b4a57249

TBH if you dont need weather sealing and the 1.4 extender will be used on a lens such as the 70-200MKII that dont suffer from CA i would buy the Kenko 1.4 MC4 DGX below which is rated very good:

http://www.bhphotovide​o.com …TelePlus_MC4_AF​_1_4X.html

http://www.traumfliege​r.de …elekonverter/ov​erview.php

Regards, Ron

Just purchased the 1.4x MC4 DGX. Should arrive this week in time for testing at a swim meet this weekend.

Just posted up two very simple comparison pics.

https://photography-on-the.net …/showthread.php​?t=1096144