Canon 24-70 with extension tubes

I shoot a lot of indoor sports currently with my Sigma 50-150 OS on a 7DM2. It works great. However I need a smaller zoom set for other applications. Question is will a canon 24-70 be quick and accurate with a 1.4 or 2.0x extension tube for sports. It would give me the reach but want to make sure the AF will still be spot on.

Thanks
(Indoor volleyball)

Are you looking for extension tubes, which is used for macro photography...or a teleconverter, which increases focal length? I'm assuming teleconverter, because you mention 2x or 1.4x. One caveat with Canon brand converters is that they won't fit a 24-70. You can see if other brands will, but they'll have mixed results when it comes to AF speed.

Just physically checked my 24-70 F2.8 L V2 and Canon extenders are a no go. The "old" Kenko 1.5 would work but results???

Sounds like you need a 70-200 F2.8! Expensive - but designed for the job?

70-200 is too long. The sigma 50-150 is a great focal length but wanted a 24-70 canon lens for all the other work I do and was hoping it could replace the 50-150. Doesn't sound like it will. Wish there is was 35-135 2.0. Haha

johnf3f wrote in post #18389263
Just physically checked my 24-70 F2.8 L V2 and Canon extenders are a no go. The "old" Kenko 1.5 would work but results???

I have an 'old' Canon 1.4x-II and a Kenko DG 1.4x, and did testing a long time ago with the Canon 70-200mm f/4. There was not a significant difference in performance between the two, one was very slightly better in the Center, the other was very slightly better at the Edges. The Kenko could even be used with the Canon 100mm f/2 lens, which would not work with the Canon 1.4x due to its protruding front element.

Sorry Wilt - I obviously didn't make my point clear.

The problem is that extenders with a protruding front element will foul (damage?) the rear element of this lens. I mentioned the Kenko 1.5 (not 1.4) as it does not have a protruding front lens element. The IQ is not brilliant but they are very cheap!

johnf3f wrote in post #18393426
Sorry Wilt - I obviously didn't make my point clear.

The problem is that extenders with a protruding front element will foul (damage?) the rear element of this lens. I mentioned the Kenko 1.5 (not 1.4) as it does not have a protruding front lens element. The IQ is not brilliant but they are very cheap!

Your point was clear enough. That is why I mentioned the Kenko mounted on lenses that would not work with the Canon 1.4x teleconvertor, and that the IQ is 'different' but not clearly inferior.

Mine was!

However it was cheap!