300 f2.8 IS II AF performance on 1DX II vs 5D4

I use my 300 f2.8 IS II along with the 1.4xIII and 2.0xIII on the 5D4 for air shows.
AF performance is good, although when using the 2x the AF and IQ does take a hit.

If instead I used the 1DX II, will I see much improvement in AF when using the extenders?

Has anyone used this lens and extenders on both cameras? Care to comment? Thanks.

I had the opportunity to meet, observe and shoot with some excellent bird and wildlife photographers this December in Coeur D Alene. Probably 10 really outstanding guys/gals who knew what they were doing.....I learned a lot and I I even got a chance to try to some version 11 super Teles like a 300 F/2.8 with the new version 3 Teleconverters on 500 F/4's .... I used both 1.4's and 2.0''s...version 2 and version 111 teleconverters.......B​eyond impressed with how well these new super Tele's performed with with the newer version 3 teleconverters....espe​cially the 2.0's....just a wow on the version 2 lens with version 3 teleconverters....blow​n away

They definitely had a far better hit rate on the 1Dx2 bodies v/s the 5D4 bodies. Again I was really impressed with the newest version 3 teleconverters on the version 2 updated lens. The version 1 300 F/2.8 that I own, did not do as well as the version 2 that my friend owns with the newest version 3 teleconverters. He had both 1.4 and 2.0 new teleconverters and I saw very little break down on the 2.o and Nothing on the 1.4 TC's with that brand new 300 F/2.8 version 2

If you can afford they definitely have petter performance

They performed even better on that 500 F/4 V2 lens....FYI....the new 500 F/4 with the new teleconverters are very bulletproof

Thanks Mike, that's good information.
I may give the 1DXII a try. I'll monitor used prices and see if I can buy one this spring.

i know a UPI photographer who is using (Im SURE) older mk I lenses (400mm and 500mm) and maybe TCs too, on 1D4 bodies. he shoots the Seattle Seahawks and im sure he doesnt have a lot of issue with missed images...

Ltdave wrote in post #18987764
i know a UPI photographer who is using (Im SURE) older mk I lenses (400mm and 500mm) and maybe TCs too, on 1D4 bodies. he shoots the Seattle Seahawks and im sure he doesnt have a lot of issue with missed images...

Im sure he does not as well. A Football player is a really big target and for ISO needs I am willing to bet he rarely is above 6400 for shutter speed needs......The 1D4 will handle that all day long

Now take the same guy and put him shooting at night for winter sports like the olympics or in a gym that is poorly lit.....now you have a guy thats going to be in trouble with a 1D4

different bodies for different needs

Ltdave wrote in post #18987764
i know a UPI photographer who is using (Im SURE) older mk I lenses (400mm and 500mm) and maybe TCs too, on 1D4 bodies. he shoots the Seattle Seahawks and im sure he doesnt have a lot of issue with missed images...

I have the 1D4 and 5D4 that I use with my 300 f2.8 II. I don't have a lot of missed images, either.
But when used with the 2XIII my keeper rate is lower for moving subjects. Maybe I'll see an improvement with a 1DXII.

I worded my first post poorly. My comments should have been about the 2xIII extender only. Sorry.

For the record

I have a Sigma 2.0 TC. I use it on the 1Dx2....too much image loss for me. The version 3 canon TC was a bit better.....the version 2 300 F/2.8 and the canon version 3 2.0 TC was much much better...very little loss...I was really impressed...I wish I would have put that Sigma 2.0 on the version 2 lens to test...totally forgot