# Looking for a good bang for buck extender with a focus on image quality.



## jdramirez (Apr 26, 2013)

I just bought a 70-200mm f/2.8L is mkii so my coffers are starting to run dry, but with what little is left I'm upgrading my 60D to a 5d mkii. So in my arsenal, I will have a 24-105, a 100mm f/2.8L IS Macro, a Rokinon Fisheye and a 50mm f/1.4. I'm probably going to ditch my 50mm and upgrade to the sigma 35mm f/1.4 in the after the body upgrade and after the extender purchase. 

OK... now with all of that out of the way, I'm looking at pairing my 70-200 with an extender with a focus on image quality. Based on that alone, the Canon 2x extender is out of the running. I'm seriously considering the Canon Extender EF 1.4x II. I read from DP review or some online presence that the II is roughly the same quality as the III, but different build quality.

I've heard of Kenko and I've been told there is additional functionality with more lenses... but I'm otherwise entirely ignorant of the piece.

So is the consensus bang for buck the 1.4 ii? Or is there another option that yall would suggest?


----------



## expatinasia (Apr 26, 2013)

The Kenko works with a lens like the 70-300L but does not have weather sealing.

The Canon does have weather sealing.

I also have heard that for the lenses you have there is very little difference between the Mark II and Mark III. That said, the Mark III is newer technology and the build is supposed to be a little better than on the II. Personally I would go with the Mark III. I have one and am very happy with it, but to be very honest, I rarely use it.


----------



## Rienzphotoz (Apr 26, 2013)

jdramirez,
What a coincidence, I was thinking about asking pretty much the same question ... so thanks for doing the work for me  ... I too would like to know more about the Kenko extender, specifically the Kenko Teleplus PRO 300 DGX 2x AF Teleconverter when used on EF 70-200 f/2.8 L IS II lens ... I will be using it mostly for bird photography (birds that are perched on a tree etc - not when they are flying) ... another question is will it work on Sigma 150-500 OS?
Thanks in advance


----------



## expatinasia (Apr 26, 2013)

Rienzphotoz said:


> I too would like to know more about the Kenko extender, specifically the Kenko Teleplus PRO 300 DGX 2x AF Teleconverter when used on EF 70-200 f/2.8 L IS II lens



Reports are not all that positive for the Kenko 2X you have mentioned. The 1.4X is supposed to be very good, and has the benefit of working with the 70-300L - which the Canons do not, but as I said to jdramirez, it is not weather proofed, which the Canon TCs are.

I would recommend the Canon 1.4X Mark III.

I have no idea about your Sigma question.


----------



## Frodo (Apr 26, 2013)

I recently had a similar question with an extender for my 200 f2.8L II (for use with a 5DmkII and 7D). I already have a 400 f5.6L, so did not need a 2x extender. I mainly wanted an extender to give me the option of a 280mm f4 when travelling, when I would just take my 24-105 and 200. And this is why I didn't want a 300 f4L.

There are few comparative objective reviews of extenders. One of the best seems to be here: http://www.traumflieger.de/objektivtest/open_test/telekonverter/overview.php
Its in German, but it should be clear what it means. I can translate it if you want.

In the end I bought a Canon 1.4x mkI in excellent condition for a great price. There is apparently no difference in the optical formula of the three versions of the Canon 1.4x extender. The mkI does not have weather sealing (but neither does the 200) and apparently has less effective blacking of the edges of the elements (but it looked darn good to me).

The results? Well first of all make sure your AFMA is spot on if checking out the lens wide open! Secondly there is a noticeable amount of chromatic aberration when pixel-peeping, but this is very easily and effectively removed with Lightroom 4. Finally, there is a bigger difference between the in-camera jpg and a well processed RAW file than there is between the lens with and without extender. Crispness improves one stop down, but I would have no reservations using the extender wide open if I wanted shallow DOF or if I struggled with light.

Finally, autofocus speed is great. I must say I can't tell the difference with the extender and the original lens is very quick.

The biggest issue is the protruding elements from the front of the extender. This means that you should not put it down face down, and I've noticed a little wear of the flocking at the back of my 200. And some may grizzle that I have a white extender sandwiched between a black lens and a black body. Not me. I'm too happy with optical and focussing performance.


----------



## Rienzphotoz (Apr 26, 2013)

expatinasia said:


> Rienzphotoz said:
> 
> 
> > I too would like to know more about the Kenko extender, specifically the Kenko Teleplus PRO 300 DGX 2x AF Teleconverter when used on EF 70-200 f/2.8 L IS II lens
> ...


Thanks. Have you, by any chance, used the Kenko 1.4X with the 70-300L? if yes, any advice? ... coz I've been thinking of that lens (70-300L) for a very long time but keep putting it off for some reason or another (I guess its mainly bcoz I have 3 zoom lenses that almost cover that range ... but if the performance of 70-300L + Kenko 1.4X is good I might just get it as the small form factor will be very handy.


----------



## jdramirez (Apr 26, 2013)

Frodo said:


> I recently had a similar question with an extender for my 200 f2.8L II (for use with a 5DmkII and 7D). I already have a 400 f5.6L, so did not need a 2x extender. I mainly wanted an extender to give me the option of a 280mm f4 when travelling, when I would just take my 24-105 and 200. And this is why I didn't want a 300 f4L.
> 
> There are few comparative objective reviews of extenders. One of the best seems to be here: http://www.traumflieger.de/objektivtest/open_test/telekonverter/overview.php
> Its in German, but it should be clear what it means. I can translate it if you want.
> ...



Thanks. I hadn't even given the mki a thought. I'll look in to that one as well. I don't plan on using it a lot, so if I can save money and not be affected... that's fine with me.


----------



## expatinasia (Apr 26, 2013)

Rienzphotoz said:


> Thanks. Have you, by any chance, used the Kenko 1.4X with the 70-300L? if yes, any advice? ... coz I've been thinking of that lens (70-300L) for a very long time but keep putting it off for some reason or another (I guess its mainly bcoz I have 3 zoom lenses that almost cover that range ... but if the performance of 70-300L + Kenko 1.4X is good I might just get it as the small form factor will be very handy.



No, because while I do have a 70-300L and the 70-200 f/2.8 ii that your previous question referred to, I do not have the Kenko, only the Canon 1.4X iii, and that does not work with the 70-300L (though some say it does if you first push the lens out to 300 - but that is not something I am willing to even try).

I have read extensive reviews about the Kenko Pro 300 DGX 1.4X and they are all very positive. I got the Canon because it is weather sealed whereas the Kenko is not.


----------



## Rienzphotoz (Apr 26, 2013)

expatinasia said:


> Rienzphotoz said:
> 
> 
> > Thanks. Have you, by any chance, used the Kenko 1.4X with the 70-300L? if yes, any advice? ... coz I've been thinking of that lens (70-300L) for a very long time but keep putting it off for some reason or another (I guess its mainly bcoz I have 3 zoom lenses that almost cover that range ... but if the performance of 70-300L + Kenko 1.4X is good I might just get it as the small form factor will be very handy.
> ...


IC ... thanks


----------



## Canon-F1 (Apr 26, 2013)

i have the kenko 1.4x 300 PRO DGX (blue dot) and the canon 1.4x III TC.

i can say i see no difference in IQ in real world situations.
im not a testchart shooter but even fine details like bird feather are rendered perfectly fine with the kenko. 

AF speed is at the same level. 
again, experience from shooting with it, not doing lab tests with a stopwatch. 

now the canon cost more than twice as much as the kenko.
so i would not buy the canon TC again for my lenses.

maybe above 400mm the canon TC will have an edge.. i don´t know.


----------



## Canon-F1 (Apr 26, 2013)

Frodo said:


> There are few comparative objective reviews of extenders. One of the best seems to be here: http://www.traumflieger.de/objektivtest/open_test/telekonverter/overview.php
> Its in German, but it should be clear what it means. I can translate it if you want.



well i would not give TF much credit. :
they say for example the 24-70 f4 completely sucks and they are very dissapointed with the lens.

now the 24-70 f 4 is sure not as good as it´s f2.8 brother.. but ist not as bad as they make it either.

there are other inconsistencies in their tests and strange naiv opinions.

the 6D AF is great because professionell photographers use the center AF point most of the time etc. :

and china ballheads they sell are regulary tested better then RRS.... :


----------



## Random Orbits (Apr 26, 2013)

expatinasia said:


> No, because while I do have a 70-300L and the 70-200 f/2.8 ii that your previous question referred to, I do not have the Kenko, only the Canon 1.4X iii, and that does not work with the 70-300L (though some say it does if you first push the lens out to 300 - but that is not something I am willing to even try).
> 
> I have read extensive reviews about the Kenko Pro 300 DGX 1.4X and they are all very positive. I got the Canon because it is weather sealed whereas the Kenko is not.



It's true that the Canon 1.4x works with the 70-300L but only at the longer focal lengths (I tried it). The rear element moves forward as the focal length gets longer. If you have the 70-200L II and the 70-300L, then it is better to get to 400mm with the 70-200L II + 2x. It'll be sharper and a stop faster than the 70-300L + 1.4x.

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=687&Camera=453&Sample=0&FLI=7&API=2&LensComp=738&CameraComp=453&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=5&APIComp=0


----------



## jdramirez (Apr 27, 2013)

Tamron and Sigma also make a 1.4x... so does anyone have an opinion about them?

http://www.amazon.com/Sigma-Teleconverter-Canon-Mount-Lenses/dp/B000CD8BGU/ref=sr_1_5?s=electronics&ie=UTF8&qid=1367033823&sr=1-5&keywords=canon+1.4x+ef

http://www.amazon.com/Tamron-Teleconverter-Canon-Mount-Lenses/dp/B0007YZLJ4/ref=sr_1_3?s=electronics&ie=UTF8&qid=1367033823&sr=1-3&keywords=canon+1.4x+ef


----------



## expatinasia (Apr 27, 2013)

jdramirez said:


> Tamron and Sigma also make a 1.4x... so does anyone have an opinion about them?
> 
> http://www.amazon.com/Sigma-Teleconverter-Canon-Mount-Lenses/dp/B000CD8BGU/ref=sr_1_5?s=electronics&ie=UTF8&qid=1367033823&sr=1-5&keywords=canon+1.4x+ef
> 
> http://www.amazon.com/Tamron-Teleconverter-Canon-Mount-Lenses/dp/B0007YZLJ4/ref=sr_1_3?s=electronics&ie=UTF8&qid=1367033823&sr=1-3&keywords=canon+1.4x+ef



I personally would not touch them, but that is just my opinion. When you research TCs you generally hear great things about the Canons and the Kenko 1.4 Pro DGX. I think you should choose between those two and not complicate it with the other brands. Just my 2p. Off to the pub now for a lunch time pint. Cheer. ;D


----------



## jdramirez (Apr 27, 2013)

expatinasia said:


> jdramirez said:
> 
> 
> > Tamron and Sigma also make a 1.4x... so does anyone have an opinion about them?
> ...



You're right. Those two only got 3.5 stars... versus canon and kenko which were 4.5... I don't like seeing depreciation in my gear... so I'm going to have to wait for a deal before I jump on it... but football season isn't for another 4 months... so that gives me time.


----------



## MSP (Apr 27, 2013)

I've owned both the Canon 1.4x II and 1.4x III extenders and there's virtually no difference in IQ. If you don't plan on buying a new generation super telephoto lens in the foreseeable future then find a used version II for around $200. At around half of the version III's price it's a much better bang for your buck and fairly easy to resell if you ever decide to upgrade.


----------



## AlanF (Apr 28, 2013)

I have the 1.4 and 2 TCs series III. I bought the Kenko DG 300 Pro 1.4 so I could focus at f/8. Unfortunately, it locked up my 5DIII with some lenses and I had to remove the battery to restart. So, I sold it. If you can afford it, get the series III for long term compatibility with newer Canon lenses. They are already essential for the series II telephoto lenses.


----------



## yogi (Apr 28, 2013)

I have the canon 1.4xlll and it is a great tc. As others have mentioned, it can depend on your future plans for lens purchases. I also have the sigma extenders, but use them only on my sigma 50-500os. What can you say about the 50-500? It is ok, but often i use a good bit of sharpening in ps6, especially using the tc(1.4-the 2.0 is not that sharp & i rarely use it). Interesting that i just bought the kenko 1.4 for my 70-300L because some posters here on CR said that it is a fairly decent tc, but have not had time to try it out.


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Apr 28, 2013)

jdramirez said:


> Tamron and Sigma also make a 1.4x... so does anyone have an opinion about them?
> 
> http://www.amazon.com/Sigma-Teleconverter-Canon-Mount-Lenses/dp/B000CD8BGU/ref=sr_1_5?s=electronics&ie=UTF8&qid=1367033823&sr=1-5&keywords=canon+1.4x+ef
> 
> http://www.amazon.com/Tamron-Teleconverter-Canon-Mount-Lenses/dp/B0007YZLJ4/ref=sr_1_3?s=electronics&ie=UTF8&qid=1367033823&sr=1-3&keywords=canon+1.4x+ef


The Tamron is the same as the Kenko, just rebadged, I think Sigma may be doing their own.

The issue with the Kenko is that it will lock up a 5D MK III with certain lenses unless you remember to first turn off AFMA. That's a poor solution, since a lens +TC combination almost always needs AFMA.


----------



## jdramirez (Apr 28, 2013)

Mt Spokane Photography said:


> jdramirez said:
> 
> 
> > Tamron and Sigma also make a 1.4x... so does anyone have an opinion about them?
> ...



Interesting. I didn't realize Tam and Ken were the same. Especially since their rating is quite different. And while I don't quite have a 5d mkiii today... I will tomorrow or maybe next month. So that eliminates that from consideration. That's just silly that you would ever turn off AFMA, unless you were manually focusing... ugh. Thanks for the heads up... I was leaning towards the kenko.


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Apr 28, 2013)

jdramirez said:


> Interesting. I didn't realize Tam and Ken were the same. Especially since their rating is quite different. And while I don't quite have a 5d mkiii today... I will tomorrow or maybe next month. So that eliminates that from consideration. That's just silly that you would ever turn off AFMA, unless you were manually focusing... ugh. Thanks for the heads up... I was leaning towards the kenko.


 
There used to be a note on the site that they used the same optics, but it doesn't mean the chip or housing is the same. You have to compare like series as well. Since the price is the same within $20 or so, I'd just get a Kenko. Resale value will be higher, since Tamron is often thought of as a low end brand.


----------



## jdramirez (Apr 28, 2013)

Mt Spokane Photography said:


> jdramirez said:
> 
> 
> > Interesting. I didn't realize Tam and Ken were the same. Especially since their rating is quite different. And while I don't quite have a 5d mkiii today... I will tomorrow or maybe next month. So that eliminates that from consideration. That's just silly that you would ever turn off AFMA, unless you were manually focusing... ugh. Thanks for the heads up... I was leaning towards the kenko.
> ...



The kenko is now off my radar screen... so, that's the end of that. I appreciate the response though. I know Tamron is a 3rd party lens manufacturer and their resale value isn't what it is for Canon, but I was of the opinion that their reputation was on par with Sigma. I might need to rethink that.


----------

