Anyone used a 2x extender before?

**mesodan** · 06-02-2011, 05:24 PM

Have just got the Canon 1.4x, and although the auto-focus is twice as slow, is not really noticeable (unless the subject is up close).

Am now tempted to get the 2x, but AF will be 4 times as slow. Has anyone tried one before? Is it really noticeable?

Name: IMG_3460s.JPG
Views: 95
Size: 48.6 KB

Name: IMG_3460s.JPG
Views: 95
Size: 48.6 KB

**rjd** · 06-02-2011, 05:36 PM

I've a sigma 2.0ex, it hits quality too much to use, focus seems OK speed but it realy depends on how much light you have anyhow, I'd expect it to be woefull in dim/low light.

Canons new 2.0tcIII is supposed to be quite good and worth finding over the II.

**mesodan** · 06-02-2011, 05:57 PM

Thanks rjd. The 400mm would be quite handy for outdoor stuff. I was shooting f7.1-8 at the airshow on the weekend, so the f5.6 with the 2x shouldn't be too much of an issue.

The III is about $200 more than the II here. Not sure if it is worth it, but I'm pretty sure that I would get buyers remorse if I didn't get the latest version

.

**duncanm** · 06-02-2011, 06:03 PM

I had the 2x II. Far too soft for my liking so I sold it on Trademe. (Got back almost what I paid for it). I stick to the 1.4 now - much sharper.

Cheers
Duncan

**Mark Vuleta** · 06-02-2011, 06:28 PM

TC's are really designed for the supertele's.

Like Rob, I have the Sigma versions, don't notice a difference with the 1.4 on the 300mm, 2.0 slows down a little but not a big IQ hit.

Use the 2.0 a lot for cricket, perfectly acceptable.

I even got a bit board the other day & stacked them. Still af's in reasonable light/contrast with a crop body.

Control tower is 9.87km away, not cropped, 300 2.8, stacked TC's (840mm focal length). Late on hot day last month, hence the haze.

**Desmond** · 06-02-2011, 08:39 PM

I used a 2X on my 70-200 lens for a while and realized that I would rather crop the image than lower the aperture rating of my lens and degrade the image quality .

**mesodan** · 06-02-2011, 08:50 PM

Originally Posted by Desmond

I used a 2X on my 70-200 lens for a while and realized that I would rather crop the image than lower the aperture rating of my lens and degrade the image quality .

Although that 300f2.8 that Mark has would be a nice combo with the 1.4 to get 400+mm

.

weka2000 · 07-02-2011, 06:32 AM

DO NOT use the 2xTC on anything that has a zoom. As Mark said it is for BIG WHITES ONLY.

**SteveB** · 07-02-2011, 07:19 AM

Originally Posted by weka2000

DO NOT use the 2xTC on anything that has a zoom. As Mark said it is for BIG WHITES ONLY.

You make it sound like he'll explode.

**randomguy** · 07-02-2011, 08:27 AM

Originally Posted by weka2000

DO NOT use the 2xTC on anything that has a zoom. As Mark said it is for BIG WHITES ONLY.

source: www.discovery.com

**Mark Vuleta** · 07-02-2011, 05:28 PM

Maybe this is the way to go: Be interesting at least!

http://www.dpreview.com/news/1102/11...on200400mm.asp

**SteveB** · 07-02-2011, 05:44 PM

If you click on the picture it turns into a speedlight. Now that's versatile. Not even a Pentax can do that.

**rjd** · 07-02-2011, 05:46 PM

Noes that cant be real!?

It'll be super expensive if it is!

weka2000 · 08-02-2011, 11:53 AM

I just get tired of people complaing about the IQ they get when using a 2xTC on a Zoom for which it was never designed.

I used mine all the time but I never expected the same qualtiy as when I used it on a 300F2.8 or 600F4

duncan · 08-02-2011, 09:17 PM

Originally Posted by weka2000

I just get tired of people complaining

you don't get anything for nothing - horsepower costs, one way or another...

**rjd** · 08-02-2011, 09:20 PM

AFIK sigma 'designed' there 2.0tc for the 70-200. Not sure what special designing they needed to do for that over just any ol lens.

My 70-200+2.0tc is usable, just, at a pinch.