Canon 1.4X or2X Teleconverter?

bgarland

I shoot with a Canon 50D and I have a 70-200L 2.8 lens that I want to extend the range on for primarily wildlife shots. I understand the loss of F stops on TCs but I am more concerned about image clarity.<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" /><o:p></o:p>
<o:p></o:p>
I see a lot of photographers on here using 1.4X TCs but few mention the 2X TCs. If I stick to the Canon TCs made for my 70-200L lens is there any negative to using the 2X TC other than the loss of 2 F stops? What are the other pros and cons between the two TC options?<o:p></o:p>
<o:p></o:p>
Thanks.<o:p></o:p>

pathfinder

You will find folks who use the 1.4 and/or the 2x TC with Canon's 70-200 zooms.

But I consider TCs much more effective for good prime lenses.

You will have decreased resolution and increased flare with zooms plus TCs, even with Canon's great 70-200 L glass. The 2x will be worse than the 1.4 in this regard, which is why you rarely see the 2x used with zooms.

ziggy53

pathfinder wrote:

You will find folks who use the 1.4 and/or the 2x TC with Canon's 70-200 zooms.

But I consider TCs much more effective for good prime lenses.

You will have decreased resolution and increased flare with zooms plus TCs, even with Canon's great 70-200 L glass. The 2x will be worse than the 1.4 in this regard, which is why you rarely see the 2x used with zooms.

All true I'm afraid.

Nikolai

+1 with Path and Ziggy...
Image deterioration is stronger with x2 than it is with x1.4, so is the light loss...

pathfinder

TINSTAFL

cmason

I shot with the 2x on my 70-200 f4, and was not happy with it, in that it was much less sharp than I had hoped. Below are pics comparing the 70-200 f4 with and without the 2x. You need to pixel peep at Original size to really see the difference. For what it is worth, I am shopping for a 1.4x, not a 2x.

Shot with 2x: (these are identical location and conditions, but obviously diff cars)

(click for lightbox, then original)




Shot with 70-200 w/o 2x:

(click for lightbox, then original)

alaska42

I shot with the Canon 1.4X and 70-200mm 2.8 combo until I got my 100-400L. I had no problems with it. The Canon 2X was a different story and I ended up selling it last year. If the light was right the 2X worked well, but I found it to be too noisy in most conditions.

bgarland

Thanks for everyone's input. I love being able to tap into the wealth of knowledge and experience here.

So no 2X for me. I may go ahead and get the 1.4X just to squeeze out a bit more range.

It would be nice but I don't think the true quality super telephotos are ever going to be justified for me since this is just my hobby and not my profession.

vonvonvon

Light loss and increase in effective aperture: one stop with the 1.4x, two with the 2x. Image quality depends upon the lens used: given a high quality telephoto, results can be acceptable even with the 2x. Usual long lens technique becomes more critical with increasing magnification.

From time to time, I've been known to stack the 1.4x and 2x. Or, when I'm feeling really out there, to stack two 2x teleconverters! Gasp!

rpcrowe

Image Quality Deterioration
Image quality deterioration is the main reason I would not use a 2x TC, even if I shot with lenses which would accept a 2x TC and maintain auto-focus. However, even those f/2.8 lenses which could maintain A/F with a 2x TC would have that A?F severely impacted.

Yes, there are photographers who shoot with 2x TC's and even those who swear by the TC. All that I can say is that the 2x TC deteriorates the image far beyond my acceptable standards,

chrismoore

a little late to the party, but strongly agree with all above. I did a lot of research and comparison on this issue about a year ago and ended up getting the 1.4x. The 1 stop loss, in many cases, is not noticeable. The 2x on the other hand... unacceptable.