Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

1.4 or x2

Collapse
X
Collapse
 
  • Page of 1
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
Previous template Next
    #1

    1.4 or x2

    Hey guys, after having to sell the 300 f/4 last week (complicated story) I am looking at Canon's 2 new converters the 1.4 mk3 and the x2 mk3.

    Has anyone tried both? Have read so many reviews that I seem to be getting confused as to which gives the best quality.

    Will 'mainly' be used on the 7D with the 200mm 2.8 prime so effectively a 280mm, although I would like to try it on the 100-400 as well.

    Thanks in advance

    .DAVID.
    Take nothing but photo's - leave nothing but footprints!

    http://www.davidstallardphotography.com
    Tags: None
    #2
    Re: 1.4 or x2

    The 1.4 on 200 F2.8 fits like a glove (I use it most of the time on my 7D), IQ is maintained, focus speed is slightly lower, but hardly noticeable.
    I've tried a 2X TC (Mk1 I think) and the quality drop off, although generally usable, was significant.
    Concentrate on equipment and you'll take technically good photographs. Concentrate on seeing the light's magic colours and your images will stir the soul. - Jack Dykinga
    Light makes photography. Embrace light. Admire it. Love it. But above all, know light. Know it for all you are worth, and you will know the key to photography- George Eastman

    Comment

      #3
      Re: 1.4 or x2

      Hi David,

      I can't comment on the newer Canon TC's. My x2 TC hardly ever gets used - Quality isn't to bad, its the AF speed that's really rubbish. I'll only use the x2 for motor sport. On the other hand x1.4TC is excellent. I use both with my 300mm f2.8, never tried either on the 100-400mil - something I must try in the near future.

      I believe the MkIII TC's are much superior to my MkII's, but I can't confirm that for definite.

      TTFN,
      Neil
      Neilly's Flickr Page
      http://www.flickr.com/photos/60833437@N08/
      Facebook
      https://www.facebook.com/pages/Neil-...67642190098333

      Comment

        #4
        Re: 1.4 or x2

        Hi David. I have tried both on the 200 2.8. Both are very good indeed a noticeable improvement over the mk11 versions but the 1.4 mk111 is in my opinion very, very good indeed. A slight drop off on AF speed but you will hardly notice. IQ I could see no difference at all. I tried both for 2 days but guess what.................. I brought a 17/40 instead or at least my wife did for my birthday.
        By the way stick with the no fags, you'll not regret it.
        Cheers
        Treff

        Comment

          #5
          Re: 1.4 or x2

          Thanks guys - Treff, yep sticking with it, I'm sure the 'good things' will start happening soon lol.

          So looks like it will be the 1.4 then. Mainly for Cory to use as she favours the primes but I may try it out on the mk4.

          Thanks again

          .DAVID.
          Take nothing but photo's - leave nothing but footprints!

          http://www.davidstallardphotography.com

          Comment

            #6
            Re: 1.4 or x2

            I have a Kenko Pro300 DGX 1.4x TC and I've used that with my 100-400 on both my 7D and my 5D2 and it retains AF with them both. I decided against getting a Canon TC as it was only compatible with my 70-200 f2.8 IS L and my 100-400. The Kenko is also compatible with my 50 f1.8, 100 f2.8 IS L macro and 24-105 f4 IS L and will retain AF with all of them. I have a Sigma 150-500 OS and while the TC is compatible with it on MF, it wont retain AF on this one but then it is a f4.5-6.3 anyway. There isn't a massive difference in AF speed or IQ when used with the 70-200, 24-105 and 100 macro either, but the 50 does seem to take a hit.

            Comment

            Previous template Next
            Working...
            X