# Canon 2X extender : Mk2 vs Mk3 on 70-200 f/2.8L IS USM



## bonvoyage (Feb 14, 2013)

I Have 70-200 f/2.8L IS USM, and i need to extend the zoom range
Is it worth buying 2x EF Extender III over a used 2x EF Extender II

I have read in reviews that Mk3 offers gud IQ vth IS2 lens (70-200 f/2.8L IS II USM) where I couldn't find any reviews of Mk3 attached on IS lens.



Body: 5D Mark III

Please provide your valuable suggestions.

Thank you


----------



## East Wind Photography (Feb 14, 2013)

It should work fine..maybe slightly better IQ. However a Canon tech told me that the 2XIII was designed for the newer MKII lenses. Will work with the older ones though.

Personally I would get the MKIII extender. It's better built with more screws on the mount plate.



bonvoyage said:


> I Have 70-200 f/2.8L IS USM, and i need to extend the zoom range
> Is it worth buying 2x EF Extender III over a used 2x EF Extender II
> 
> I have read in reviews that Mk3 offers gud IQ vth IS2 lens (70-200 f/2.8L IS II USM) where I couldn't find any reviews of Mk3 attached on IS lens.
> ...


----------



## R1-7D (Feb 14, 2013)

I too am curious about the difference in IQ between the Extender II and III, and whether or not it is worth it for me to upgrade to the III.


----------



## photo212 (Feb 14, 2013)

I did not find much difference of the 2x II versus III on my older lenses.

First of all, the IQ with the 2X is not great. Good, and it serves a purpose, but not great. I prefer using the 1.4X and cropping. I believe this provides superior IQ to the 2X.

I had hopes the 2X III would be an noticeable improvement on my older 70-200mm f/2.8L IS, 300mm f/2.8L IS, and 500mm f/4L IS - all the original, no Mk II. 

Sadly, the 2X converters see almost no use for me. I suggest you get the 1.4X III and crop when needed.


----------



## rs (Feb 14, 2013)

Comparison of the two TC's:

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

When I had the mk I version of this lens, I had both the 2x II and the 1.4x II. Even tripod mounting the lens and using remote live view to manual focus it, at no apertures was the 2x combo sharper than the 1.4x hand held and cropped. I sold the 2x before I upgraded to the 70-200 II, but I suspect the extra sharpness of the new lens will largely negate that effect. However, don't underestimate the power of cropping with a 1.4x TC compared to being too ambitious with TC's.

With the 1.4x TC, the 70-200 II is bristling with detail wide open at any zoom setting.


----------



## Rienzphotoz (Feb 14, 2013)

I know this does not answer your question and your requirement for an extender is probably based on having a small size solution ... I considered buying the 1.4x III extender but gave up the idea because, I feel that with just a little more money I can get a DSLR that will give me better reach (1.6 vs 1.4) + an added bonus of having an extra body as back up. The 1.4x III extender costs $470 ... but for $50 more, one can get a T3i.


----------



## Lnguyen1203 (Feb 14, 2013)

I had the 2X II and the 2X III with a 300 f2.8 IS, the 2X III is marginally better. Now I shoot with the 500F4 II and the image with the 2X III is quite good, perhaps as good as the 300f2.8 IS with the 1.4x II, which is quite good.

I have also shot with a borrowed 70-200f2.8 IS with a 2x II and the IQ is quite acceptable. If you are trying to save money, buying a used 2x II is not a bad idea me think.


----------



## vmk (Feb 14, 2013)

2x iii image quality isn't that good.
several people suggested 1.4x


----------



## ChilledXpress (Feb 14, 2013)

I've own both but rarely use them... they are last ditch effort items. Regardless of mkII or III, I have never enjoyed the images from either of them. The difference between II and the III is marginal at best. I only use them on the 300mm f/2.8 now and I hate to even use it on that lens. It is one of them few that can take the hit and still look acceptable.


----------



## RMC33 (Feb 14, 2013)

ChilledXpress said:


> I've own both but rarely use them... they are last ditch effort items. Regardless of mkII or III, I have never enjoyed the images from either of them. The difference between II and the III is marginal at best. I only use them on the 300mm f/2.8 now and I hate to even use it on that lens. It is one of them few that can take the hit and still look acceptable.



I feel the same way with my longer tele's too. Tossing the 1.4 on my 70-200 IS gave me images I would just toss. I have not tried on the MKII 70-200 yet but I will say I sold my 2x about a month after buying it because of the degradation to IQ.


----------



## jsavage21 (Feb 14, 2013)

In testing, the 2X mk3 converter offers substantial image quality improvements when attached to any Canon lens over the mk2 version. The auto focus improvements in the 2x mk3 are only on the new mk2 super telephotos however, not the 70-2002.8mk2. 

The 1.4X mk3 offers negligible improvement over it's mk2 predecessor, but it will offer the same auto focus improvements on the mk2 super telephotos.

I still use the 1.4 mk2, but have upgraded to the 2x mk3, and combined with my 300mm2.8 and 500mmf4, image quality is very good.


----------



## tron (Feb 14, 2013)

jsavage21 said:


> In testing, the 2X mk3 converter offers substantial image quality improvements when attached to any Canon lens over the mk2 version.


Can you please elaborate? Canon does not mention optical improvements.

Which lens did you use to compare EF2X II with EF2X III ?

Did you test wide open?

Did you compare the quality at the center, the edges or both?

Sorry for so many questions but I have EF2X II and if there is not much improvement in IQ I'd rather spend my money elsewhere.

Thanks


----------



## East Wind Photography (Feb 14, 2013)

So as I mentioned before the MKIII extenders were designed around the MKII lens optic design. The Mark II extenders were designed around the Mark I lens designs.

MKIII is not about optical improvement other than it was designed optically for the mkII series of lenses. So it would be safe to say that the Mkiii extenders will work better on MKII lenses than a mkII extender.



tron said:


> jsavage21 said:
> 
> 
> > In testing, the 2X mk3 converter offers substantial image quality improvements when attached to any Canon lens over the mk2 version.
> ...


----------



## jsavage21 (Feb 14, 2013)

Here's a great online review with some very good sample comparisons. I would say a very accurate review by Greg Brasco.

http://www.deepgreenphotography.com/2011/01/the-new-canon-teleconverters-image-quality-comparison/


----------



## ChilledXpress (Feb 14, 2013)

jsavage21 said:


> In testing, the 2X mk3 converter offers substantial image quality improvements when attached to any Canon lens over the mk2 version. The auto focus improvements in the 2x mk3 are only on the new mk2 super telephotos however, not the 70-2002.8mk2.
> 
> The 1.4X mk3 offers negligible improvement over it's mk2 predecessor, but it will offer the same auto focus improvements on the mk2 super telephotos.
> 
> I still use the 1.4 mk2, but have upgraded to the 2x mk3, and combined with my 300mm2.8 and 500mmf4, image quality is very good.



I beg to differ here...


----------



## bonvoyage (Feb 15, 2013)

Thnks indeed guys, u guys poured some highly informative responses.

I didnt even thnk of cropping the image 4 magnification. Thnks a lot 

But anyway I ve gotta used mk2 converter @ a negotiable price


----------



## greger (Feb 15, 2013)

Congrats on your purchase. I bought the 2X Mark ll Extender to use with my Canon 70-200 F4 IS USM. Even though the lens is now a F8 aperture lens I get good results with my 7D. Better than when I first bought it and used it on my 40D.
The lighting has to be optimal to get good results. Brightness and angle to the sun become more important than shooting without it. I can hand hold the lens and extender and get a good usable pic using manual focus at F8. Practice,Practice,Practice. I kept trying on occasion and got my best pics this past weekend shooting Eagles in the same tree as other days. but from the opposite side. Standing North and aiming south not South aiming North as on previous attempts. In camera the pics are sharper on the 7D than on the 40D so camera does play into the equation. My next step is to use this combo mounted on my tripod with a cable release. Mounted on your 5D lll you should have no probs.


----------



## Chris_prophotographic (Feb 17, 2013)

I have this combo 70 200 MKII and teh 2x III - much softer focus below F 8 but i was spoiled with the 70 - 200 mk II.


----------



## heptagon (Feb 17, 2013)

My experience with 70-200 L II IS and 2x III on a crop body is that you have stop down to f/8 or else the image will be too soft. Also hand-holding 400mm is hell. You need fast shutter speeds and with f/8 or f/11 you will need a lot of light. Direct sunlit subjects are best in this case.


----------

