need teleconverter recommendation

Just went from a 40D body to a 5DM2 in 2012 and am really missing the loss of range in my 70-200 f/2.8 MkII. If you could buy only one teleconverter, which one would you recommend and why? I have never used one before so this is new territory for me. I want to use it primarily for my son's little league games but also am considering using it with my 24-70L.

The first one I would by is Canon's 1.4x. The Canon however, can not be used with the 24-70.
The version II is almost as good as the version III and can be bought for quite a bit less.
If you want the 2x, get the new version.

Tapeman wrote in post #15451288
The first one I would by is Canon's 1.4x. The Canon however, can not be used with the 24-70.
The version II is almost as good as the version III and can be bought for quite a bit less.
If you want the 2x, get the new version.

I noticed the MkII and MkIII of the 1.4x are slightly different in color, the latter being a lighter shade. Not that it really matters, but which is closer in color to my 70-200 2.8 IS MkII lens?

I like the 7D's built in teleconvertor with a 70-200. Although a Canon 1.4 is a close second

If you plan on using it with the 24-70L, (as was mentioned) then all Canon TCs are out, as they are not compatible.

I like my Kenko Teleplus PRO 300 1.4x AF. Some say it is on par with Canon's 1.4X II (and III). I don't know, I've never used the Canon. There is a newer version Kenko Teleplus PRO 300 DGX 1.4x AF which I would assume is just as good as the older Kenko. My Tamron SP 1.4X is pretty good too.

I never liked any of the 2X, though I have the Kenko Teleplus PRO 300 2X AF that really sits unused (but I keep it just in case). Some seem to like Canons newest 2X III on the 70-200mm MKII that you have in your signature. Some say the results are as good (better?) as (than) the 100-400L.

Since you have 70-200, there's little reason to use the 24-70 with a teleconverter. The combo would be about a 34-112mm f4, rather odd and focal lengths you have already covered, at f2.8 and probably sharper than possible with the added optics of any TC. The 24-70 is not really designed for TC use anyway. And TCs generally work best on telephoto lenses.

Canon's TCs are made to be compatible with 135/2 and longer lenses, and their 70-200 zooms. They will not physically attach to shorter focal lengths or to most of the other zooms, due to a protruding front element. Any of them will work with your 70-200/2.8 IS II, though. Either the 1.4X II or III would be fine. The latest one has an updated optical formula, but the IQ is very similar in both. Both also will give you fast focus with that lens.

The Kenko Pro 300 DGX 1.4X also is exellent. Some feel it's as good or better optically than the Canon. The DGX is the latest version, an update of the DG. The main difference is that it's been improved to provide faster AF than the earlier version.

Haven't tried the Sigmas or Tamrons, so can't really compare them. (Tamron isn't currently producing any, AFAIK)

One of the lowest priced is the Kenko Teleplus 1.4X MC4. Don't expect as good optical qualities with it, as you'd see with the more expensive Pro 300 DGX or Canon II or III.

There are other, third party that I haven't tried (and won't bother trying).

timberlandlh is right.... You might consider picking up a 7D or 6D sometime. Either would give you a "free 1.6X teleconverter" effect. 7D would be my preference, since the control layout is similar to 5DII and it shares both batteries and memory cards. (60D has a different control layout and uses SD memory). I don't use my 5DII for sports/action.... it's not the best AI Servo camera. I switch to 7D for sports, in part for their "extra reach", but in large part for the much better AI Servo focusing.

Another possibility... pick up a 300/4 IS sometime. It's a very good lens, about the same size and weight as your 70-200/2.8 and would get you a little more reach. It is very handholdalbe, also works quite well with the Canon and Kenko 1.4X if needed for even more reach.

If you prefer a zoom for the convenience and usually are shooting in good light, Sigma 120-400 or 150-500 are pretty good, too... and both are priced less than the EF 300/4 IS. Because they are f4.5-5.6 or slower lenses, they are somewhat limited to good light.

I have to agree with getting a 7D recommendation... Second would be the Canon 1.4 TC.. Only used the version III.. You will always be better off without the TC-- using the TC as an emergency measure.. For reach-- with either the 7D or 5D3, daylight-- I turn to the Sigma 50-500 OS...

If you find the 7D a bit on the expensive side-- a 60D or T4i would also be be better than your 5D II is for reach.. Both have all cross type AF points-- and get you that "free" reach..

I'd be curious to see an IQ comparison between APSC vs FF + 1.4X on same lens.

For the 70-200 IS II, I would suggest the 1.4xIII. When I bought mine I was told I would probably not see a difference with the I version but it does make a difference with the II.

I have the Kenko Pro 300 DGX 1.4X that I use on my 5DII. It works great, autofocus is spot on. I use it sometimes on my 40D as well but it throws up a lens error after a few shots. It is pretty good for IQ, I am not overly impressed with the out of focus bokeh I get with it though, it looks slightly different than without the TC.

I've had a Tamron SP 1.4x (the white model) for quite awhile. It's a brilliant teleconverter but almost impossible to get these days on the new market,, used is a possibility. The Kenko equivalent is readily available and every bit as good.

B&H's price for the Canon 1.4 II is $329 currently and the price for the 1.4 III is $395. Why the deep price cuts?

I don't know why but I feel myself leaning more towards the Canon 2X III over the 1.4X III. I know I'll lose another stop going with the 2X over the 1.4X but this way I'll be covered from 70mm-400mm rather than 70mm-280mm if I went with the 1.4. That's a big difference.

coeng wrote in post #15456105
I don't know why but I feel myself leaning more towards the Canon 2X III over the 1.4X III. I know I'll lose another stop going with the 2X over the 1.4X but this way I'll be covered from 70mm-400mm rather than 70mm-280mm if I went with the 1.4. That's a big difference.

Every test that I have seen of the version I and II Canon extenders proves that the 2X is noticeably much worse for optical quality than the 1.4X versions. I would expect the same for the version III version.

wickedsprint wrote in post #15451797
I'd be curious to see an IQ comparison between APSC vs FF + 1.4X on same lens.

Consider this...

• photozone.de measures MTF resolution in 'line pairs per frame height' (i.e., how many pairs of black lines separated by white space, across the full height of the frame, whatever the frame size)
  
• photozone.de has shown only about 10% decline in MTF values when using Canon 70-200mm zooms with Canon 1.4x teleconvertor
  
• photozone.de measures MTF of 2530 at f/4 on 15MPixel APS-C with 70-200 f/2.8 IS II
  
• photozone.de measures MTF of 3719 at f/4 on 15Mpixel FF with 70-200 f/2.8 IS II
  
• we can interpolate MTF of 3347 (90% of 3719) at f/4 (actual f/5.6 due to TC) on 15Mpixel FF with with 70-200 f/2.8 IS II and 1.4x TC