A Site for Photographers by Photographers

Community > Forums > Canon EOS > EOS Lenses > Canon Extender 1.4 X VS. 2.0X

Featured Equipment Deals

Wedding Photography Tips: Capturing the Scene Setters Read More

Wedding Photography Tips: Capturing the Scene Setters

When photographing a wedding, don't forget the details: the scene setters. Celebrity wedding photographer, Donna Newman, shares key tips to shooting these key non-portrait wedding shots.

Latest Equipment Articles

Sun Position Tracking Apps Read More

Sun Position Tracking Apps

These 5 apps, ranging in price from free to $8.99, are our top picks for tracking sun (and moon) light. Also ranging in complexity, some help you keep tabs on the ideal lighting of the day while...

Latest Learning Articles

Basic Image Development in Lightroom: Color Editing (Video Tutorial) Read More

Basic Image Development in Lightroom: Color Editing (Video Tutorial)

Learn basic HSL (hue, saturation, and luminance) color adjustments as well as split toning (adjusting color in highlights and lowlights) in this next video.


Canon Extender 1.4 X VS. 2.0X

Park Trot , Mar 28, 2010; 09:03 p.m.

Hi,
I am a semi-pro photographer and am interested in purchasing a extender tube for use with my Canon 70-200 IS USM 2.8 and my Canon 7D. I am looking at this primarily for personal use and not for my professional work. More specifically, I am looking to use it to do wildlife photography at my cabin (relatively bright conditions). I haven't used an extender tube since my days in film and was wondering if anybody had any experience with either of these tubes. I am also interested in any other thoughts anybody might have on the topic.

Thanks in advance!

Responses


    1   |   2     Next    Last

John Crowe , Mar 28, 2010; 09:44 p.m.

Generally I prefer cropping from images made with a 1.4x over using a 2x. However some situations, like my kids' soccer games, lend themselves to using the 2x to get even more reach while maintaining the flexibility of a zoom. For wildlife I would still prefer using a 1.4x until I could afford a long telephoto prime, like the 300/4 L or 400/5.6 L. There are times when the longest lens you have is still not long enough and there is no point in always using a zoom at it's longest setting. This is when it is time to buy a telephoto prime.

Jack Nordine , Mar 28, 2010; 09:57 p.m.

The 1.4X will allow for better image quality than the 2X.

Rubo Aristakesyan , Mar 28, 2010; 10:40 p.m.

OT: Am i correct in my calculations that a 200mm lens on a 1.6x crop body + 1.4x extender would yield a 400mm equivalent focal length?

Marco Mariano , Mar 28, 2010; 11:38 p.m.

Rubo -> 200 x 1.6 x 1.4 = 400!?... should be 448 right?

Philip Wilson , Mar 29, 2010; 12:10 a.m.

I have both and the 2x is very poor (I have used it on my 300 F4, 70-200 f2.8 non IS and 70-200 F4 IS) with the 2x and an F4 lens you essentailly lose AF except on a 1 series body. In addition while the IQ from the 1.4 x is reasonable the 2x is not good. Indeed I cannot remember the last time I used the 2x. While the 1.4x is quite acceptable it is not in the same league as a prime or zoom. For example the 70-200 f2.8 non IS plus 1.4x is not in the same league for IQ as the 300F4. Also even with the 1.4x AF speed suffers a lot.

Scott Ferris , Mar 29, 2010; 12:17 a.m.

Rubo,

Not really, it (a 200+1.4TC on a 1.6 crop camera) will give you the same field of view as a 448mm lens on a FF camera. But that is not quite the same thing. The image is exactly the same if you mount the lens TC combo onto a FF camera and crop it.

Anyway, whilst most people are fairly dismissive of the 2x TC on the zooms there are a few that get on with it very well. One person is a member here, William W, he even has a folder of images just for threads like these. One difference might be that he uses the non IS version of the lens, but I doubt it. Almost everybody that uses the 1.4 TC seems happier with the results though.

Marco Mariano , Mar 29, 2010; 01:02 a.m.

i have both Kenko 1.4X & 2X TCs, 1.4 is definitely has less IQ degradation than 2X. if "moment" is more important than IQ, im not hesitating using 2X on my 70-200 2.8 IS. and besides, 5D2 has more room for correction.

Dave Holland , Mar 29, 2010; 01:38 a.m.

There is a review on photo.net comparing the two, looking at eagles in a nest. Bottom line is to use the 1.4, ditch the 2X. My experience as well. I shot the moon with both, but the 2X was inferior to a 1.4X plus cropping.

Sreehari Sundararajan , Mar 29, 2010; 03:06 a.m.


    1   |   2     Next    Last

Back to top

Notify me of Responses