Home · Register · Join Upload & Sell

Moderated by: Fred Miranda
Username  

  New fredmiranda.com Mobile Site
  New Feature: SMS Notification alert
  New Feature: Buy & Sell Watchlist
  

FM Forums | Canon Forum | Join Upload & Sell

  

Archive 2014 · 70-300L + Kenko MC4 VS PRO VS III! (edited a bit)

  
 
skibum5
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #1 · p.1 #1 · 70-300L + Kenko MC4 VS PRO VS III! (edited a bit)


OK, so I finally got around to doing this test! That I had first said I'd probably do within two weeks.... almost a year ago . I only tested center frame and extreme edges, not mid-frame, nor corners. I only tested wide open f/8 and I only tested paired with 70-300L and not my 300 2.8 IS as well. Why? Because accurate lens testing is a major pain, you have be so precise and do so many trials and refocuses and etc. etc. it literally started making my skin crawl it was such a tedious pain (of course humidity and a couple bugs that got in and crawled on me didn't help that any ).

But I finally bothered to the mess of a precise lens test.

Results, again this is for paired with 70-300L only (using a super-tele that is much sharper might show up greater differences or perhaps even interact with the TCs slightly differently), a single copy of each tested only (no clue how much copy to copy variation there may be when it comes to TCs) and shot on a 5D3 and with the 70-300L set to 300mm f/5.6 only (for a total of 420mm f/8).

Center frame:
Wow, incredibly close between the Kenko DGX MC4 and the Kenko DGX Teleplus PRO, too close for me to bother trying to call. The Canon 1.4x TC III appears to do just a touch better, it's a relatively subtle difference though. I'd say that puts the Kenkos fully the match for the older Canon 1.4x TC II then.

Extreme left edge:
The MC4 is worse than the other two at the extreme FF edge here, it's not radical but it is reasonably noticeable at 100%. Shockingly the PRO actually appears to have done a trace better than the III! Safe to say that the PRO would do better here than the old Canon 1.4x TC II then. The MC4 would probably do similar here to the older TC II, just a rough guess though from memory.

Extreme right edge:
The MC4 pretty clearly did worse here than the other two, a bit larger difference than I saw on the left side. The other two definitely do deliver a clearer extreme edge here. It's a pretty instant difference to spot at 100% view. The III does just a little bit better on this edge than the PRO.

Extreme upper right corner: not really tested, but peaking at the images (which were not refocused for that, etc.) it appears likely that the PRO and III hold up in similar fashion in extreme corners, not sharp as a tack but not pure mush by any stretch, the MC4 in the extreme corners appears likely to go to pure mush on FF though.

I didn't test mid-frame so I'm not sure when the MC4 starts falling more noticeably behind the others (EDIT: perhaps a bit earlier than expected, maybe by mid-frame on FF not quite 100% sure though and it's probably not enough to bother about until a bit farther out than that, maybe not until once you start getting just past what an APS-C crop out of FF would be). Certainly for a subject reasonably near the center frame it does a reasonably close job to the other two I'd say, lots of birds, at only 420mm, might end up sitting mostly in the central part of the frame.

If you care about getting towards the edges or corners though on FF, that is where the MC4 does fall behind the other two. Maybe even the outer mids on FF if you get super picky.

Overall the TC III is probably the best, but the PRO is surprisingly close (and I'd dare say it is better than TC II without question). The MC4 can struggle a bit at FF edges, and even more extreme corners where it is mush, compared to the other two, but does surprisingly well right center frame, quite close to III and so close to PRO that it's too hard to really call it and even out to APS-C it appears like it would hold up pretty reasonably.

On an APS-C crop body I wonder if the MC4 manages to hold up better at the edges? APS-C crops a lot of edges out. Although maybe the higher photosite density stresses it more?

Anyway with a super-tele delivering ultra clean signal, maybe there is a larger difference between them all in the center? I might do a very quick test on 300 2.8 IS just to see if that separates them more center frame.





Edited on Jun 28, 2014 at 12:47 PM · View previous versions



Jun 27, 2014 at 11:41 PM
Kathy White
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #2 · p.1 #2 · 70-300L + Kenko MC4 VS PRO VS III! (edited a bit)


Thanks Skibum5 for taking the time to do this. Nice to know I didn't waste my money buying the Pro version of the Kenko.


Jun 27, 2014 at 11:45 PM
skibum5
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #3 · p.1 #3 · 70-300L + Kenko MC4 VS PRO VS III! (edited a bit)


more quickly:

70-300L set to 300mm f/5.6 wide open (for 420mm f/8 total) on a 5D3 ONLY (crop, super tele, etc. may give different results):

center frame:
pretty close with the Canon TC III just a little better. Other two are similar to Canon TC II I'd guesstimate (MC4 maybe falling behind starting around half way out from center, but probably not too noticeable until you get past aps-c borders).

extreme long edges: MC4 definitely falls behind the other two, surprisingly the PRO seems to hold its own with the TC III (maybe a trace worse short far edges oddly).

extreme corners: PRO and III actually likely relatively similar, MC4 far behind and mush on FF.

Only the Kenkos allow for AF in this particular scenario and the Kenko also allow you to not have to keep the lens extended all the time when attached. For pairing with 70-300L they are the way to go.

If the subjects will be mostly in the center frame area the MC4 might be better buy over the PRO (I didn;t quite check out mid-frame performance enough to be 100% sure), maybe in general if on APS-C body instead (assuming the tighter pixel pitch doesn't make some resolution difference between the two more apparent).

If you want the FF edges and corners to hold up better then the PRO does seem to deliver that better than the MC4 for sure, it's a pretty noticeable difference.

MC4 maybe good enough on aps-c, might be OK on FF if wildlife are not frame filling and relatively centered and you'd be doing some cropping even on F; $$$ for PRO would get you the corner and edge performance on FF.


Edited on Jun 28, 2014 at 12:48 PM · View previous versions



Jun 27, 2014 at 11:46 PM
skibum5
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #4 · p.1 #4 · 70-300L + Kenko MC4 VS PRO VS III! (edited a bit)


Looking over the pics, although they were not set up for this, it seems the MC4 starts dropping off just a bit compared to the others some more than past the half way point across the short side of the frame and just a bit before the half way point across the long side of the frame (a bit earlier than expected, although unless really peeping it's not really that big of a deal until you get closer to the long edge) So you could actually probably tell it apart at the edges even on APS-C, but all the same, on APS-C enough of the frame would make up the good zone and for wildlife that is often cropped even on a crop when only using 420mm it's probably good enough for APS-C coverage.

It seems like the III holds up a touch better along center top thirds of the short sides of the frame than the PRO, they actually seem fairly comparable in the corners, surprisingly good showing from the PRO to manage that. Neither actually ever goes to pure much, not even extreme corners, the MC4 does go to pure mush in the far corners though. With my copies PRO just a trace better on extreme left edge and a little worse extreme right edge than the III and just a little worse central top and bottom.

PRO does a surprisingly good job for being so small and light and all compared to TC III (at least paired with 70-300L, I may go and do a quick 300 2.8 IS test just to see how the PRO fairs vs III in that scenario).



Jun 28, 2014 at 12:09 AM
skibum5
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #5 · p.1 #5 · 70-300L + Kenko MC4 VS PRO VS III! (edited a bit)


I could only compare using in cam jpgs since Photoshop started squawking about how it was not allowed to process files containing images of U.S. paper currency. I don't exactly see how an image at this res could work for counter fitting, but I guess they decided to be crazily over cautious.

I wonder if almost the entire delay in opening images in PS is not due to having to do advanced scanning of all images and comparing to large database of all U.S. paper currency. I'm surprised they don't take much longer to open if this is what it has to do on every file access.



Jun 28, 2014 at 12:33 AM
schlotz
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #6 · p.1 #6 · 70-300L + Kenko MC4 VS PRO VS III! (edited a bit)


Ski,

I had followed the original thread with great interest. Really appreciate you coming back around to complete the testing to the point of understanding the practical capabilities of the two Kenko's on the 70-300L.
Your work has provided me with the answer on which to purchase.

Thanks

Matt



Jun 28, 2014 at 07:47 AM
Imagemaster
Online
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #7 · p.1 #7 · 70-300L + Kenko MC4 VS PRO VS III! (edited a bit)


Good enough for me.

Kenko C-AF 1.4X MC4







Jun 28, 2014 at 09:41 AM
JimLittle
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #8 · p.1 #8 · 70-300L + Kenko MC4 VS PRO VS III! (edited a bit)


Imagemaster wrote:
Good enough for me.

Kenko C-AF 1.4X MC4


My view in a nutshell....in practice the MC4 serves really well...for me.




Jun 28, 2014 at 09:50 AM
Jeff Donald
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #9 · p.1 #9 · 70-300L + Kenko MC4 VS PRO VS III! (edited a bit)


Very helpful as I'm considering which TC to use with my Tamron 150-600mm. Because I also shoot a little motor sports I'll pop for the Pro version for the slightly better edges and extreme corners.

Tony's example also helps to demonstrate how sharp the center is with the MC4 and if I was only shooting birds, I could save a few $$.



Jun 28, 2014 at 10:46 AM
skibum5
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #10 · p.1 #10 · 70-300L + Kenko MC4 VS PRO VS III! (edited a bit)


I think I will do a center frame f/2.8 only test on 300 2.8 IS just for kicks. I wonder if that will separate the performance more. If not, then I could just about say that, so long as you are not really picky, you might almost get away with the PRO for all scenarios, not just to get 5D3+70-300L AF, since it's so similar at farthest edges and corners and only just a little worse short edges and center region on 70-300L as far as IQ goes and if it holds up the same in the center on a super tele too.... If you are really picky and want that last little bit extra out of the middle of the frame, maybe the III still brings just a touch more, and once you are using super-tele you might be just that picky, but if you aren't quite that picky, maybe you can save a lot of money and use just PRO and not III plus a Kenko and just use the PRO for everything and not just when paired with 70-300L.

The Kenko optics are more impressive than I had expected, they are so small and light compared to the Canon.

I wonder how AF for sports compared between Kenko and III though. At the moment I don't have any good opportunities to test that. I can compare the speed at least, it's possible Kenko might even allow for more speed, who knows about precision though.



Jun 28, 2014 at 12:56 PM
UCSB
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #11 · p.1 #11 · 70-300L + Kenko MC4 VS PRO VS III! (edited a bit)


Adorama has a 4th of July special sale on the PRO converter for $164 (regularly $187). You have to find it in their 4th specials and use that link. I tried to post a direct link, but it only works from their specials page link below.

http://www.adorama.com/pages/July-4th-One-Day-Sale?emailprice=t&j=Email070414July4OneDay-LC&utm_term=Other&utm_medium=Email&utm_campaign=Email070414July4OneDay-LC&utm_source=RSYS



Jul 04, 2014 at 09:10 PM





FM Forums | Canon Forum | Join Upload & Sell

    
 

You are not logged in. Login or Register

Username       Or Reset password



This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.