1.4 or 2x extender for 70-200

I just opened the box to my brand spanking 70-200 2.8 IS, been waiting a long time for this lens.

Now I am off to get an extender, any advice on a 1.4 or 2x? I looking to capture wildlife at a distance, etc.

Thoughts, advice, etc? They are so darn expensive for what they are I want to make the right choice.

Thanks!

Kim

Anyone have any good shots that are a good exsample of the extenders plus the 70-200? I would love to see them!!!

1.4 works pretty well for me, 2x a bit of a loss

I have the 1.4x... it's nice for that "extra" reach, but considered getting a 2x in addition to it, and stack when I really need the reach (albeit manual focus). Of course, IQ and light drop significantly with anything past 1.4x... my 70-200mm f/2.8 is a still-respectable f/4 with the 1.4x, but after that can get dicey.

id go all out with the 2x that way ull have the max reach, yet if its too far you can always zoom back out. shooting wildlife probably means youll be shooting with good light...and im going to take a chance and say that youll be tripod mounted(?). if you dont like the 2x, and if you get a canon one, it should hold its value...meaning you can sell it for the 1.4

btw, congrats on the new glass. i cant wait till i save enough to get one!

kaitanium wrote in post #4233020
btw, congrats on the new glass. i cant wait till i save enough to get one!

Took me over a year and jsut about killed me to spend it! But I think I am gonna love it!

klmigut wrote in post #4233047
Took me over a year and jsut about killed me to spend it! But I think I am gonna love it!

well if you dont, send it over my way =P. i rented it once and it puts my sigma to real big shame.

Way too much loss in IQ for a 2X tc on a 70-200 2.8 IS. 1.4. If you need 400mm, buy something that is native 400mm

Mr. Clean wrote in post #4233078
Way too much loss in IQ for a 2X tc on a 70-200 2.8 IS. 1.4. If you need 400mm, buy something that is native 400mm

I agree
The 70-200 & 1.4 on my 20D gives me a reach of equivalent to 448mm with no appreciable IQ loss. If I needed anything longer I'd talk myself into a 400mm before I got a 2x. The IQ on the 70-200 2.8 IS is incredible, I wouldn't want to degrade it. Unfortunately I've not needed anything longer so there's no 400mm in my bag....yet

Oh, any you'll love the 70-200...congrats on the purchase - money very well spent!

Thanks, so glad I posted. I had myself talked into a 2x, sounds like thats not the way to go.

klmigut wrote in post #4233254
Thanks, so glad I posted. I had myself talked into a 2x, sounds like thats not the way to go.

The question you ask at that point is if it makes more sense to get the 100-400mm....

Canon 1.4x: $280
Canon 2x: $280
Canon 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 $1310

Ok, so it's not quite the same price range, and you can use the 1.4x and 2.0x with other lenses, but you get the point!

Right, but if he wants to shoot 200mm at 2.8, he's outta luck with the 100-400/5.6

So I have not even got my 70-200 home and now I am thinking 100-400 for my next lens. This forum is bad, bad, bad. I am glad I am married or I would be in debt!

klmigut wrote in post #4233430
So I have not even got my 70-200 home and now I am thinking 100-400 for my next lens. This forum is bad, bad, bad. I am glad I am married or I would be in debt!

Tell me about it! I'm still looking at the 10-22, 50/1.4, 85/1.8 (1.2 too rich for my blood, I think!), 100-400mm...

And of course, a 5D as a backup to the 40D (or is it the other way around?)

SO many lenses, so little time (and money!)

djeuch wrote in post #4233479
Tell me about it! I'm still looking at the 10-22, 50/1.4, 85/1.8 (1.2 too rich for my blood, I think!), 100-400mm...

And of course, a 5D as a backup to the 40D (or is it the other way around?)

SO many lenses, so little time (and money!)

i hope you guys are saving up for your retirement!!!

i would chime in to get the Kenko TCs, the 1.4 + 2.0 can be had from HK vendors for less then 1 of the Canon options!!