Decisions Decisions..

I have been saving to upgrade my flash gear, I currently have an old 420ex and have saved enough for a 580exII. I have been looking forward to having a set of off camera flashes to use with the 7D since I got it. And I have been wanting the upgrade of my primary flash as well.

But this morning my kid hands me his soccer schedule and wants me to get some pictures of him and his team for their yearbook. Now I am thinking I might want to spend that money on a 1.4xIII extender to use with my 70-200 for soccer. I already have a 2xII extender, but I'm thinking the 1.4 would be better for soccer.

I am careful with money, I have a budget for this hobby of $60/month plus whatever my wife allocates to me at Christmas, birthday and Fathers Day. What I don't spend one month carries to the next; so I have been savings (within my budget) for quite a while for this flash and if I get the converter, it will (again) be a while 'til I can afford the flash.

So I am torn.. stick with the 70-200+2x and get my flash, or get the 1.4x!

So on the wide end with the 70-200 it's the difference between 100mm (ok, 98mm) and 140mm. And on the long end it's 280 vs. 400. Not sure how much the wide end would hurt you, but you've got lots of room to crop with the 7D, so 280 vs. 400 might not be that big of a deal. Only you can answer that.

There are also the Kenko "Pro" tele-converters that are less expensive than the Canon versions, you could look into those.

Why do you need the 580 for off camera? The 7D has it built in. Does the 420 not work with it? I have 2 430's (an EX and an EX II) and they work fine off camera with my 7D.

randy98mtu wrote in post #13138612
Why do you need the 580 for off camera? The 7D has it built in. Does the 420 not work with it? I have 2 430's (an EX and an EX II) and they work fine off camera with my 7D.

I want the 580 for 2 reasons:

1. As an upgrade of my on camera flash. It has more power and features than my 420 and the newer 430.
   
2. As the second off camera flash, in addition to my 420. I do currently use the 420 off camera occasionally, but normally, when I want to go off camera, I find myself wanting a second off camera flash.

dave_p wrote in post #13138597
So on the wide end with the 70-200 it's the difference between 100mm (ok, 98mm) and 140mm. And on the long end it's 280 vs. 400. Not sure how much the wide end would hurt you, but you've got lots of room to crop with the 7D, so 280 vs. 400 might not be that big of a deal. Only you can answer that.

There are also the Kenko "Pro" tele-converters that are less expensive than the Canon versions, you could look into those.

Good points. I did not consider the Kenko. I suppose if I did that, and got a 430exII as opposed to the 580exII -- I could really have most of what I want.

The Kenko 2x is inferior to the Canon 2x, in testing that I've done. But the Kenko 1.4x holds up with the Canon very well. But this was against the Canon II models. The Canon III model may have an edge, but still the Kenko does quite well. But definitely with the 2x the "win" goes to Canon.

Would you consider selling your 2x II for the 1.4x III and would that still allow you to get the flash units within a short time?

I don't have and have never tried a 2xIII so I really can't say, although I've heard good things about them. As to choosing between upgrading your flash or going for the TC, well, only you can decide according to your shooting needs!

zerovision wrote in post #13139814
Would you consider selling your 2x II for the 1.4x III and would that still allow you to get the flash units within a short time?

Hmm.. I never considered that. I don't really use the 2x that much, but I like having that reach when I need it.

I did just price the kenko and a 430exII 'outfit' from Adorama and I can have them both for less than, or about the same as either the 580exII or the canon1.4xIII.

I also had not considered the Canon 1.4x II extender, which is considerably less expensive than the III.. And as I understand it, the primary advantages (in AF speed) of the III does not apply to the 70-200 f/2.8L II. There may have been an optical improvement from II to III, but I am under the impression that it is negligible if it exists at all.

So with the 1.6x crop on the 7D and the 2x II you would be shooting 225-640mm at f/5.6 on that lens? With the 1.4x II you would be shooting 150-450mm at f/4? If AF does not change, does the change in range justify getting the 1.4x II or stick with the 2x II. I have heard that the 1.4x does not affect the IQ as much as the 2x, but I have not used either.

I was thinking both: the 1.4s affect IQ less than the 2.0 and that the range would be more ideal for soccer.

In either case, the speed of AF is greatly reduced from that of the lone 70-200.

The 1.4x II does have better IQ than the 2x II, so it's just a question of whether the 2x will best help you get the shot. And, I've heard good things about the 2x III. The best thing would be to run some tests, but...

Maybe, start with a 1.4x. I have a Kenko Pro 1.4x and found that it was as good as the Canon 1.4x II. But the Canon 2x II was better than the Kenko's 2x.

Quick update. I decided to get the 480EXII instead of the 580exII. I also got the Canon 1.4x II.
I had a chance to take some shots at my kids' soccer game yesterday; I do believe that, short of buying a new lens, the 70-200 with the 1.4x was the best choice I had for soccer; the 2x would have been too long and the 70-200 by itself was a bit too short (though I used it as the light faded). The following shots were taken late in the day with inconstant cloud cover. I did appreciate having f/4!

Thanks for the suggestions!

IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com …/44350103@N05/6​194648419/

IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com …/44350103@N05/6​194648323/

IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com …/44350103@N05/6​194648371/