Which 2x TC for my 70-200 2.8LII ?

What's the best price quality 2x TC for this lens ?

Is the competition also good like the Sigma & Tamron, is there any test online with Teleconverter comparison of the latest 2x versions ?
It's to have some more tele for soccer games, as long as the zoom still works, AF, sharpness stays good.

The Canon Extender EF 2x III or is the competition getting better at more interesting prices, like the Sigma Art series in the lens categories
Kenko seems to be well known also, I saw even a 3x exist, but then i'll lose too much light I think

Are most without losing AF ?

I've had the Canon 2X ver2 and the Canon 2X ver3. Rarely used the ver2 and sold it at the first opportunity. I frequently used the ver3 on the 70-200 2.8Lll. That worked really well. Slow to focus but that is due to the circuitry. Images were quite sharp. I now have the new 100-400 and was impressed that the 70-200 with 2X images looked similar to the ones from the 100-400. Focus speed is much better on the 100-400 but that is expected. That was using the 5D3 and 1D4. For soccer, the 2X focus might be fast enough for daytime soccer. The 1.4x ver3 will work extremely well with the 70-200. I've gotten some great BIF shots with that combo.

And the other brands are not sharp enough like Kenko / Sigma / Tamron,.... ?
Are there any tests with those online ?

Well, there is the Traumflieger test. It's a German photography site that does a lot of gear testing. They also did a big TC test that was updated after the Canon III versions came out. They were all done with the Canon 5DII and one of the 70-200mm lenses. Much to their own surprise the Kenko 1.4 MC4 DGX, the most humble extender of them all (and the cheapest), was the best overall. I have it and it's excellent.

The site is in German, but Google Translate is your friend and the graphs speak for themselves: http://www.traumfliege​r.de …elekonverter/ov​erview.php

I tested Sigma APO EX DG 2X versus Canon 2XTCIII. I found the Sigma just slightly better, sharper, more contrast.
I only had (still have) 1 of each, another POTN member tested 2 Canon 2XTCIII versus the same model Sigma and his results matched mine.

I tested with EF300 f4 IS L, EF 100-400 II , 500 f4 IS L, and Sigma 150-600 S. Same result for all, Sigma just slightly better.
This is testing optical quality. Regarding AF performance I can't detect any difference.

https://photography-on-the.net …/showthread.php​?t=1454043

I have the Canon 2X II and I have used it with my 70-200 2.8 II........I hate to death for anything moving. Someone above mentioned slow to focus. HA! That the understatement of the year, especially if you're used to the way the lens focuses without the TC. If you're shooting stationary objects and you have the time to wait for it to focus, the image quality is fine.

If you want 400mm, you would be doing yourself a favor to buy the 100-400 II.

The MKIII of the Canon TCs address some of the AF speed issues, I believe. I have the Canon 2x III, and want to upgrade my 1.4x old Kenko, so perhaps I might look at the Sigma version.

I just received (and still testing) the Yongnuo 2X (Canon 2X extender knockoff).

Teamspeed did a mini-review here:

https://photography-on-the.net …/showthread.php​?t=1487269

I can confirm that the IQ is pretty good (par with the Canon 2X Version II extender, which I tested a couple of years ago, when I rented it for my son's graduation).

AF I think depends on the camera. My 5DIII locked on target even in demanding situations (shooting through window in grey light and with window film and venetian blinds in the way). The 60D was a lot more hesitant... Fast to cover the range from MFD to infinity and back, but not locking as easily on target.

There are some issues with overexposure, which you can deal with using Exposure Compensation, as TS describes in his mini-review.

The good news is that it cost $169. The IQ for the price is phenomenal...

I had good luck with the YN 2x on the 70-200, definitely, minus the over exposure issue. Between a good deal on the Canon III and my desire to not have to manage EC if I used the TC and wanting to do things with other lenses without errors/lockup, I decided to get the Canon.

If I wanted a good 2x to put solely on the 70-200 and didn't mind dialing -2EC, the YN would still be in my bag. I bought my YN from Adorama, and they had a very good return policy and managed my return without incident. If you want a go at it, I would suggest Adorama as your source.

I have been happy with Canon's 2X III. Autofocus speed takes a hit, but I have found the 100-400II to be a good alternative. When you need f/2.8, you need it though.

saea501 wrote in post #18533149
I have the Canon 2X II and I have used it with my 70-200 2.8 II........I hate to death for anything moving. Someone above mentioned slow to focus. HA! That the understatement of the year, especially if you're used to the way the lens focuses without the TC. If you're shooting stationary objects and you have the time to wait for it to focus, the image quality is fine.

If you want 400mm, you would be doing yourself a favor to buy the 100-400 II.

It is my understanding that the 70-200 f2.8 ll is the only series ll lens that does not benefit by the chip in the Canon 2X lll teleconverter. I tried the 2X lll on my 70-200 f2.8 ll and it is a dog as far as AF speed and the AF gets easily confused when focusing near the minimum focus. I have the 100-400ll and that focuses quickly even when the 1.4 is attached.

I am pretty sure the AF improvements are restricted to the long fast primes like Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II USM Lens, Canon EF 400mm f/2.8L IS II USM Lens, Canon EF 500mm f/4L IS II USM Lens and Canon EF 600mm f/4L IS II USM Lens.

My Canon 2 x Mk3 extender does AF quicker and tracks better (by a little) on my Canon 100 F2.8 (non L) Macro and 300 F2.8 L IS Mk1 than my Mk2 did. I don't have any Mk2 SuperTeles () but the small,worthwhile, AF improvement and the major advance in IQ make the Mk3 a significant upgrade IMO. A friend, who has the Canon 600 F4 L IS Mk1, would not buy a 2 x extender until he tried the Canon 2 x Mk3 - he bought one within a couple of days!

Any 2 x extender is pushing things a bit but the Canon 2 x Mk3 can be a useful accessory if you simply cannot get the lens that you really want.

Just my 2p.

It is strange that Canon didn't advertise these other lenses as improving their AF over the MKII then, they only call out the super zooms. They only say MKII lenses can see improved AF, and specifically the long telephotos.

I have tested several 2x TC's and always revert to the Canon 1.4x Mk.iii TC. A/F speed and image quality seems compromised using the 2x. I will admit, though, I have not tried a 2x TC of any type on the 70-200mm f/2.8 Mk.ii lens...