Canon extender for my 24-105 be any good?

I'm planing to buy a 70-200 zoom, but I have stumbled upon the Canon Extender?
So if any of you are using a 7D 24-105 lens and have this extender...the new version 2x III
I would be happy you give me advice

Canon extender doesn't work with 24-105....

Not sure about kenko.

Adding any extender means worse IQ and af, if you need the reach just get the 70-200.

Oh even if it works with 2x (which I'm 110% sure it doesn't), the lens becomes a f8 which means manual focus only.

So i'm F***ed is that what your saying?
Well, now I really got no choice and get a 70-200 with comes in different versions.
I was trying to save money and room at the same time.
I'l check the other brand Kenko

kin2son wrote in post #14776617
Oh even if it works with 2x (which I'm 110% sure it doesn't), the lens becomes a f8 which means manual focus only.

So I lose one stop but why the autofocus???
Why manual at F8?

Teleconverters aren't really designed, or intended for use on shorter focal length lenses.
Canon's TC's only fit on their 135mm or longer primes, and their long zooms(70-200 and 100-400). 3rd party TC's may work on shorter lenses, but the benfits really decline fast, as focal length drops.

I use a Sigma 1.4x TC on my EF 100 f/2.8 Macro USM, and it works beautifully, Canon's own TC's won't fit it. All of my shorter length primes and zooms won't fit the TC's, though i hear the Kenko's and Tamron's fit most EF-mount lenses. No EF-S lenses will even physically fit any TC's.

Well you will definitely do that but suffer the results of the compromise and as kin2son has stated "Adding any extender means worse IQ and af". The Canon extender has been optimized for very specific lenses and the 24-105 is not one of them.

John from PA wrote in post #14776633
Well you will definitely do that but suffer the results of the compromise and as kin2son has stated "Adding any extender means worse IQ and af". The Canon extender has been optimized for very specific lenses and the 24-105 is not one of them.

Ok, now I'm wondering about the 70-200 non IS, there is one for sale somewhere and it's cheaper but I've seen good reviews, as long as you don't shake

Canon Extenders can not physically be attached to the 24-105. The front element of the extender protudes into the rear of the lens it is mounted on. The 24-105 does not have an opening at the rear of the lens to allow for this.

Canon Extenders report the resulting f-stop to the body, so a 2x extender on a f/4 lens will result in a reported f/8, Canon bodies(other than 1 series) lose AF at f/8.

I have a 70-200 f/4L non IS lens, for the price it is a very good lens. If you are not real steady you will need fast shutter speeds to counter act movement, otherwise use a mono/tripod.

^^ Yup.

get a canon 55-250mm IS instead...it gives you more range, and AF, and it's dirt cheap....and has pretty good optics....

xhack wrote in post #14777810
^^ Yup.

Is this an example of attempting to put a round peg in a(n almost) square hole ? ROFL when I saw this..

sega62 wrote in post #14776627
So i'm F***ed is that what your saying?
Well, now I really got no choice and get a 70-200 with comes in different versions.
I was trying to save money and room at the same time.
I'l check the other brand Kenko

I didn't see anyone say that - maybe I missed it..

If money is tight- as I suspect- you should decide which qualities are important to you as far as a 70-200. Do you need Image Stabilization ? Do you need an ultrasonic motor ? Do you need f/2.8 or is f/4 good enough ? Do you need low light - f/2.8 ? Do you need fast AF or are you working static shots ? How good of IQ are you looking for ?

Answer the questions- and then look at the Canon F/4's, the older Canon f/2.8's or the third party f/2.8's. For example, tamron's f/2.8 is right around $800 or so. Only slightly more than Canons 1.4x III TC. Sigma's OS version has most of the features as Canon's f/2.8 IS II- for about $1300. the F/4's - all canon - range from about $700 to 1300.. You've got options- just decide which features you want ...

DreDaze wrote in post #14777913
get a canon 55-250mm IS instead...it gives you more range, and AF, and it's dirt cheap....and has pretty good optics....

x2

Great lens, for a dirt cheap price!