200mm 2.8 mark ii and 1.4iii converter

Can anyone tell me how well the canon 200mm 2.8 mark II and the canon 1.4III play together. I'm looking for a poor mans 300mm to shoot evening soccer. How's AF and IQ with that combo. Just trying to buy a little time before I buy the 300 2.8
Image examples would be great too.

Thanks in advance.

I used the 200 2.8L II with the 1.4x II converter. Focus speed and accuracy were as good as without the TC. The mark III TC should be better.

How was it in challenging light?

No info on that, sorry. I only used it outside, in daylight. I mean, maybe some cloud cover, but still broad daylight.

That said, I think the camera makes more difference than the lens when focusing in poor light. Put that combo on a newer camera, and it should sing. Most new(er) Canon bodies can focus to -3EV. My 80D will focus in light that befuddled the 1DIV.

I would be using it on my7d mark II and 5dIV

My guess is you'll have no problems. Both focus down to -3EV, just like my 80D and 6D. These cameras are part cat; they can see in the dark!

jlstan wrote in post #18434796
Can anyone tell me how well the canon 200mm 2.8 mark II and the canon 1.4III play together. I'm looking for a poor mans 300mm to shoot evening soccer. How's AF and IQ with that combo. Just trying to buy a little time before I buy the 300 2.8
Image examples would be great too.

Thanks in advance.

Heya,

I've been in this exact boat.

I was birding with a 200 F2.8L and a Kenko 1.4x TC (280mm F4) and a Kenko 2.0x TC (400mm F5.6), wide open often on a 1D2 & 7D and it works great. It's sharp even wide open with the 2x TC at F5.6 making a really compact 400mm system. Focus is still fast, its sharp, and tracks great. I've done longer, but I always found I wanted a shorter faster lens to save on weight and size (often going in a kayak, etc). I recently moved to a 300 F4L IS where I compromised because while I want the F2.8L version, the cost and weight isn't ideal for my use, and I wouldn't be shooting at F2.8 most likely anyways as I get very close often to the subjects. So for me a used 300 F4L IS ($550 at KEH, was a great steal of a deal) was it. I use it on an APS-C and it's basically the same FOV and speed as a 500 F4 on a full frame is if you think about the end results, but way lighter, and way, way, way cheaper. I use it with a 1.4x TC as well. Love it.

These two TC's are the Kenko DGX Pro 300 Series ones. They're quite good, inexpensive, so you should get even better results from a MKIII Canon I would assume.

Also, these examples are with a MKI version of the 200F2.8L (same exact glass, just a built in hood).

It handled hard sunlight on open water just fine for me. That's bad light in my book.

The 200F2.8L handles AF very well with TC's and remains quite sharp. Here's wide open examples, that could be sharper stopped down a hair, but I shot wide open to test the system on two bodies:

1D2 + 200 F2.8L + 2.0x TC wide open at F5.6:

IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/sKPi​nm

IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/zMFz​vZ

IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/BEy5​oS

IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/DnmP​Vm

IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/GyMo​9c

I'm liking what I'm seeing and reading. I hope it works this well on a college soccer field in the evening hours. I'm hopping to use it for hockey as well.

Thanks for the excellent review