Canon TC questions

pmaxwellpmaxwell Registered Users Posts: 129 Major grins
edited December 13, 2011 in Accessories
I'm looking to add some reach to my 70-200 2.8 MkII. I have done a lot of searching on the 1.4 vs the 2.0, particularly looking at the effect on image quality.

I have found that in the MKII line that the 1.4II was much better than the 2.0II, but I can't seem to find anything on the 2.0III. Did the MKIII improve the 2.0 version enough?

Any help or experience would be appreciated.

Thanks,
Pete
Google+ - Facebook - SmugMug

Pete

Comments

  • pmaxwellpmaxwell Registered Users Posts: 129 Major grins
    edited December 10, 2011
    Anyone have the Mark III version?

    Did I post in the right section?
    Google+ - Facebook - SmugMug

    Pete
  • ziggy53ziggy53 Super Moderators Posts: 24,133 moderator
    edited December 10, 2011
    I don't have the MKIII, but here is a link to a comparison between the 70-200mm, f2.8L IS II at 200mm with the 2x II converter and 2x III converter (with mouse-over):

    http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=687&Camera=453&Sample=0&FLI=5&API=2&LensComp=687&CameraComp=453&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=7&APIComp=0

    Feel free to plug in different aperture settings, if you wish.
    ziggy53
    Moderator of the Cameras and Accessories forums
  • pmaxwellpmaxwell Registered Users Posts: 129 Major grins
    edited December 11, 2011
    Thank you Ziggy, I hadn't found that little piece of the internet.

    Is it just me or is the MKII actually better in the center?
    Google+ - Facebook - SmugMug

    Pete
  • ziggy53ziggy53 Super Moderators Posts: 24,133 moderator
    edited December 11, 2011
    pmaxwell wrote: »
    Thank you Ziggy, I hadn't found that little piece of the internet.

    Is it just me or is the MKII actually better in the center?

    Remember that this is a single sample and that the differences are relatively small. I agree that the MKII looks slightly sharper in the center, but the MKIII has a slightly more consistent, sharpness across the field.

    To get much better you would resort to a prime lens.
    ziggy53
    Moderator of the Cameras and Accessories forums
  • Manfr3dManfr3d Registered Users Posts: 2,008 Major grins
    edited December 11, 2011
    Not sure if it helps, but I find the image quality of the 70-200 II with the 2.0x TC Version II
    very acceptable on full frame. In fact it is my default zoo combo. A3 prints look just fine (didn't try A2).
    “To consult the rules of composition before making a picture is a little like consulting the law of gravitation before going for a walk.”
    ― Edward Weston
  • pmaxwellpmaxwell Registered Users Posts: 129 Major grins
    edited December 12, 2011
    Based on the mkII and other feedback I decided to get the 1.4 converter. Hopefully I'll get to try it on some birds this week.


    Thanks for the help all
    Google+ - Facebook - SmugMug

    Pete
  • Manfr3dManfr3d Registered Users Posts: 2,008 Major grins
    edited December 13, 2011
    Good luck. I just sold my 1.4 TC I hope that wasn't a mistake :D
    “To consult the rules of composition before making a picture is a little like consulting the law of gravitation before going for a walk.”
    ― Edward Weston
  • pmaxwellpmaxwell Registered Users Posts: 129 Major grins
    edited December 13, 2011
    Nothing special here in the scene, but there is a pond beside the bank and I couldn't wait to try the combo out.

    part of me wants to get the 2.0 and do my own shoot out.

    70-200 2.8 iS II & 1.4mkIII

    IMG3691-XL.jpg
    Google+ - Facebook - SmugMug

    Pete
Sign In or Register to comment.