FS: canon mk2 1.4x and 2x tc's

marlinspike

SOLD

Since I'm selling my 70-200 2.8L, it makes sense to sell my tc's too. I have both the 1.4x and 2x, both are canon mk2. $250 each shipped.

caroline

marlinspike wrote:

Since I'm selling my 70-200 2.8L, it makes sense to sell my tc's too. I have both the 1.4x and 2x, both are canon mk2. $250 each shipped.

Hi
I'm in the Uk and was just about to post and ask if anyone had experience of using these and what results were like. If you could give me your views on them it would be much appreciated. I think shipping would make it too costly to buy from you though (
Caroline

claudermilk

Do some searches, this has been discussed at length recently.

I wish I could throw an offer for the 1.4, but I have a moratorium on new photo gear for a while. :cry

caroline

claudermilk wrote:

Do some searches, this has been discussed at length recently.

I wish I could throw an offer for the 1.4, but I have a moratorium on new photo gear for a while. :cry

Thanks Chris, I had already done that and am more interested in your personal view

Caroline

marlinspike

Well, for the most part (i.e. except for the one time a photog loaned me his 300 2.8) I used these on a 70-200 2.8L. On the prime telephotos, the 1.4 results in such little image degradation you can still use it wide open. On the 70-200 2.8L I stopped it down at least 1/3 stop when using the 1.4x, preferably 2/3 stop. With the 2x I would stop it down at least 2/3 stop preferably 1 full stop on the 70-200 to get decent image quality. The image degradation, even with the 2x, isn't all that noticeble with objects like a car (my use for the 2x was motorsports), but on people it was. Stopped down a full stop though it was fine with people sports.

caroline

marlinspike wrote:

Well, for the most part (i.e. except for the one time a photog loaned me his 300 2.8) I used these on a 70-200 2.8L. On the prime telephotos, the 1.4 results in such little image degradation you can still use it wide open. On the 70-200 2.8L I stopped it down at least 1/3 stop when using the 1.4x, preferably 2/3 stop. With the 2x I would stop it down at least 2/3 stop preferably 1 full stop on the 70-200 to get decent image quality. The image degradation, even with the 2x, isn't all that noticeble with objects like a car (my use for the 2x was motorsports), but on people it was. Stopped down a full stop though it was fine with people sports.

Thanks for the helpful reply, my conclusion is that it isn't going to resolve my dilema at the moment. I was looking for a lightweight alrenative to carrying a big lens around but this isn't it.

Caroline

marlinspike

caroline wrote:

Thanks for the helpful reply, my conclusion is that it isn't going to resolve my dilema at the moment. I was looking for a lightweight alrenative to carrying a big lens around but this isn't it.

Caroline

Well...a 300 2.8 + 1.4x is better than 400 2.8 weight wise, can be used at f/4, and is very close in image quality (well...it's basically the same difference as you see between the 300 2.8 and 400 2.8)