A Site for Photographers by Photographers

Community > Forums > Canon EOS > EOS Lenses > Canon 2x Teleconverter (or)...

Featured Equipment Deals

GoPro HERO3 and the Search for Monomoy Wildlife Read More

GoPro HERO3 and the Search for Monomoy Wildlife

See what ocean wildlife the GoPro HERO3 Black Edition was able to capture while searching for the big fish: Katharine the Great White!

Latest Equipment Articles

Triggertrap Mobile Review Read More

Triggertrap Mobile Review

Triggertrap is a great alternative to a camera remote that will turn your smartphone into a sophisticated shutter release. Read more about its many triggering modes!

Latest Learning Articles

Portrait Photography: Fixes and Tips in Lightroom (Video Tutorial) Read More

Portrait Photography: Fixes and Tips in Lightroom (Video Tutorial)

This video tutorial teaches you how to use the tools in Lightroom to enhance a portrait while also ensuring your subject still looks natural.


Canon 2x Teleconverter (or) 100 - 400mm f5.6L IS Lens

Sreehari Sundararajan , Mar 06, 2010; 08:23 p.m.

I've 70-200mm f2.8L IS lens and wondering whether the quality of the image with 2x converter would be the same when compared to the output of 100-400mm f5.6 L Anyone has extensively tested the outcome with 2x TC. Pl let me know both pros and cons if any. Thanx in advance for your time.

Responses


    1   |   2     Next    Last

Juergen Sattleru , Mar 06, 2010; 08:33 p.m.

The 2x has a noticeable negative impact on image quality. You will NOT get the same results as from the 100-400.

Diana D. , Mar 06, 2010; 08:52 p.m.

This topic has been discussed many times before, and some people will swear by the 2X mounted on 70-200 f2.8 (as being optically very good).

I do not have the 70-200 F2.8, but I do have the 2X (which I use with the 300mm F2.8 prime), and the 100-400mm. The 100-400mm is an excellent lens, very sharp. The 2X however degrades the image quite a bit, especially when the light is not perfect. I only use it when there is enough light and the conditions are perfect. Otherwise the photos taken with the 100-400mm (cropped accordingly) are much better.

Ed Kubacki , Mar 06, 2010; 11:27 p.m.

I have only had the 2X extender since Christmas and I've only used it a few times, but I haven;y found it to be as bad as many people have said it is.

I have the 70-200mm f2.8L IS, which I got last summer. I traded my 100-400 towards it. I got the 2X to help replace it and so far I think it's a good replacement.

Ed


Ft Macon NC 70-200mm F2.8L IS w/ 2X Extender

Elliot Bernstein , Mar 07, 2010; 06:23 a.m.

This thread may be of interest to you:

http://photo.net/canon-eos-digital-camera-forum/00SH1K

I agree with Ed. Canon's 2x extender is excellent and the only device I have ever used that doesn't seem to compromise IQ like other TCs, especially when used on the 70-200mm. I have even tested the 2X with the 100-400mm with very positive results.

Most who put down Canon's extender have never used it - I highly recommend it as an excellent alternative to those who don't have the funds to purchase the 100-400mm. While it is not exactly equal in IQ or convenience to the 100-400mm, the 2x extender is a very affordable option that give excellent IQ and AF when used with Canon's 70-200mm f2.8 lens.

Eric Merrill , Mar 07, 2010; 09:07 a.m.

Sreehari:

The 100-400 will be sharper, have higher contrast, and focus faster than the 70-200/2.8.

That said, you may find that using a 2x suits your needs. Buy one used, and if you don't like it, you can sell it for almost what you paid. Or, rent one for a week. They're fairly cheap to rent.

Eric

Otan Slatco , Mar 07, 2010; 12:01 p.m.

You might find this tool useful. A word of advice, go with Eric's suggestion: try before you buy anything.

Sreehari Sundararajan , Mar 07, 2010; 01:09 p.m.

Thanks for all your responses..

Richard "Dick" Tope , Mar 07, 2010; 02:18 p.m.

Some time back 'luminous-landscape.com' tested this exact combination. The results are here -

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/lenses/400v400.shtml

William W , Mar 07, 2010; 02:19 p.m.

"I've 70-200mm f2.8L IS lens and wondering whether the quality of the image with 2x converter would be the same when compared to the output of 100-400mm f5.6 L"

As you already have the EF70 to 200F/2.8L IS USM, I assume that one reason for asking this question is you are considering buying the 100 to 400. If this is so, then I think the first question to ask “how often will you use FL 200mm to 400mm and under what conditions will you be shooting and for what purposes the images are to be used.”

The reason I advise to think this way, is because the "difference" might be acceptable, or not to you - as decided upon the above.

That said and in answer to your question: Yes, I have made extensive tests of the 70 to 200F/2.8L USM with the both the x1.4MkII and the x2.0MkII individually attached. (yes and I have played with the teleconverters, stacked also).

I have used the 100 to 400. I did not buy this lens mainly for two reasons
> It is too slow
> It is too soft from about 300mm to 400mm, used wide open.

So therefore I have NOT made direct A/B comparison tests with the 100 to 400.

My bottom line is that the EF70 to 200F/2.8L USM + 2.0MkII is capable of providing professional & publishable results, here are some:
http://photo.net/photodb/folder?folder_id=944717
http://photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=9193632

It seems (by most lab tests) to be only an insignificant IQ difference (in theory) between my 70 to 200 and your IS model - so I expect that your lens could do the same with the x2.0MkII Teleconverter.

WW


70 to 200 + 2.0MkII at 400mm: F/6.3 @ 1/1600s @ ISO250 Head-On Motion - Hand Held

    1   |   2     Next    Last

Back to top

Notify me of Responses