Who here uses a Canon 2X televonverter?

[scottcolbath]

I have a line on one which is in mint condition for $275. I'm on the fence about grabbing it. I had been pondering a 1.4 but didn't want to drop the cash yet.

How say you?

S.C.

[Ned Harris]

Scott: I own the new Series III Canon 2X telextender and am thrilled with it. I was never happy with any of the earlier models.

[Jay Beckman]

Same opinion as Ned but based on my experience with the Series II 2X.

It's an "emergency reach" thing for me.  In fact, despite how outstandingly good the 300mm f/2.8L IS is, it was using it with the 2XTCII as a quasi-600mm that made me decide to get the 500mm.

YMMV, but to me, it was too much of an IQ hit...

[Paul Dumm]

Question About Televonverter.   Your use it on a f/2.8 and you then get a f/5.6 (2X telie), I heard the the DOF will still be at f/2.8 is that true?

[FelipeG]

Hey Jay,

Do you have the 1.4x to compare it with too? I've heard from one or two people who have both that there is quite the difference between the 2x and the 1.4x.

I have the 1.4x (use it with my 70-200 f4L) and I feel it's pretty nice, great for traveling because I can switch depending on what I need, but other than that I prefer to use my 80-400 OS.

[Jay Beckman]

I won't hesitate to use my 1.4X TCII on either my 300 or my 500.

My only kvetch about using it with the 500 is that I sometimes get some soft images.  It may need to be MFA'd and it's my own damn fault that I haven't taken the time to do it.

[Jay Beckman]

Question About Televonverter.   Your use it on a f/2.8 and you then get a f/5.6 (2X telie), I heard the the DOF will still be at f/2.8 is that true?

Don't think this is correct Paul...

f/stop is a ratio of aperture to focal length so adding a TC actually increases the focal length which should (AFAIK) affect the ratio.  There is a trick where you can put tape over a couple of pins on some TCs (Kenko, I think) which makes the TC "Non Reporting"

IOW, the camera doesn't know it's there and continues to report native apertures even though they aren't accurate.

[scottcolbath]

Great info. Thanks guys.

S.C.

[Paul Dumm]

Thanks Jay, It was a few years ago that I heard this and I'm not getting any younger. 

[jslugman]

I had three versions of the 2x TC and finally gave up on them; softer than a (insert your own painfully obscene euphemism here). I've heard rave reviews on the new version and it is on "the list" for acquisition. I do have the 1.4 TC and use it regularly with minimal softening problems (but they're there).

[Jeff D. Welker]

I had three versions of the 2x TC and finally gave up on them; softer than a (insert your own painfully obscene euphemism here). I've heard rave reviews on the new version and it is on "the list" for acquisition. I do have the 1.4 TC and use it regularly with minimal softening problems (but they're there).

I have the 2x TC version III and it works very well on the right lenses. It is my experience that using the 2x on any lens with a maximum f-stop smaller than f/4 is sometimes problematic. I've tried it on my 100-400L and was not happy with the images. It is my understanding that version III of these TC's is mainly designed for better communication with the new Canon lenses (i.e. electronic data transfer from camera body to lens). My 1.4x gets 95% of the use. The last time I used my 2x was when I rented a 300 f/2.8 lens and it seemed to work OK - nothing spectacular.