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

1       2       3       4      
5
       end
  

Archive 2017 · canon 2x III owners, are you satisfied?

  
 
speedmaster20d
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.5 #1 · p.5 #1 · canon 2x III owners, are you satisfied?


that's exactly what I was saying, adjusting beyond precision or tolerance of the system has little impact on your keeper ratio for such dynamic subject as birds in flight, in the field you can't take 100 shots and then average them, it is only one frame that matters.

To be honest, from what I have seen from my clients and friends, almost 99% of the time the focus issues are from operator error rather than equipment issues with focus calibration....



Sep 27, 2017 at 02:53 PM
armd
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.5 #2 · p.5 #2 · canon 2x III owners, are you satisfied?


You say that precision is fixed. Is that factual? Can one determine how precise a given TC is? Is there variance of precision between samples as well as trueness? The fact that my 2xIII TC tends to FF suggests that it is an issue of trueness, but since it doesn't consistently FF it is in keeping with my concerns of precision.


Sep 27, 2017 at 03:48 PM
speedmaster20d
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.5 #3 · p.5 #3 · canon 2x III owners, are you satisfied?


My suggestion is to send your equipment to CPS for a check up, only they can tell if the AF meets the spec or not. If it has an issue they will fix it for you.


Sep 27, 2017 at 04:13 PM
Vancouver47
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.5 #4 · p.5 #4 · canon 2x III owners, are you satisfied?


speedmaster20d wrote:
There is some tolerance in every camera body, no camera is perfect or even near perfect including the 1DXII. I sure wish the focus was dead on 100% of the time but it's not just in case, but If you use software-based focus adjustment it takes multiple readings to average out the noise/variation so it reports the same value every time, but that doesn't mean a small value will make a visual difference in the output. One servo step barely even moves the focus element to make any difference. The only lens that I have MA'ed is my 70-200
...Show more

Have you had your bodies and lenses calibrated by CPS? I ask because the only MFA body that I've ever had that provided 0 MFA was a calibrated 1D MkIV and 300mm f/2.8IS and it was close to 0 with the other lenses I had then.

I have only found one other at 0 MA 1DxII and 600 f/4 II + 1.4 IIITC (go figure)

Presently only one of my body lens combinations have 0 MA's most are between -3 and +12, but typically less than +5 MA.



Sep 28, 2017 at 02:48 PM
arbitrage
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.5 #5 · p.5 #5 · canon 2x III owners, are you satisfied?


Vancouver47 wrote:
Have you had your bodies and lenses calibrated by CPS? I ask because the only MFA body that I've ever had that provided 0 MFA was a calibrated 1D MkIV and 300mm f/2.8IS and it was close to 0 with the other lenses I had then.

I have only found one other at 0 MA 1DxII and 600 f/4 II + 1.4 IIITC (go figure)

Presently only one of my body lens combinations have 0 MA's most are between -3 and +12, but typically less than +5 MA.


I found that when you did detailed testing, most times you'd come up with a value that wasn't zero. Although I also had some combos that came to zero like 600/4 on 1DX and 300/2.8 on 1DX and 400DOII on 1DX2. However, I've gone away from doing MFA on all my new lens/body combos unless I can notice some constant front or back focus error. Over time I've come to realize what Arash is talking about (helped by reading his article way back) that when shooting dynamic subject, often handheld there are just so many other variables that throw off AF here and there by more than any of the +/-10 MFA adjustments will. Lately I just haven't bothered doing MFA on my new combos just for the sake of doing it. I've had some weird atmospheric conditions that temporarily required -20MFA shooting off of cliffs but those weren't issues that persisted in regular shooting of the same combo.

The other issue is MFA values will change over different distances, different temperature and over time with use of the equipment. It is a lot of variables to keep on top of. If you can see a repeatable problem all the time then go through the exercise but for me I'm not wasting my time anymore doing it regularly.



Sep 28, 2017 at 05:01 PM
speedmaster20d
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.5 #6 · p.5 #6 · canon 2x III owners, are you satisfied?


Vancouver47 wrote:
Have you had your bodies and lenses calibrated by CPS? I ask because the only MFA body that I've ever had that provided 0 MFA was a calibrated 1D MkIV and 300mm f/2.8IS and it was close to 0 with the other lenses I had then.

I have only found one other at 0 MA 1DxII and 600 f/4 II + 1.4 IIITC (go figure)

Presently only one of my body lens combinations have 0 MA's most are between -3 and +12, but typically less than +5 MA.



I have had only a wide angle lens that I had focus issues with, sent it to CPS with my 5D4, they found that the one of the elements was misaligned and fixed it. besides that I haven't had any issues with any of my lenses or bodies (1D and 5D).

if you send your gear for cleaning they also check and confirm focus, it's usually stated in their report.





Sep 28, 2017 at 05:41 PM
Greg Lavaty
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.5 #7 · p.5 #7 · canon 2x III owners, are you satisfied?


What I have seen with my 300mm f/2.8 and 500mm f/4 when used with the 2x III is that the precision definitely suffers with the TC in place. When it hits the pictures are sharp and detailed but it doesn’t hit as often as the same lenses do with the 1.4x III or with no TC mounted. I can also report that with AFMA I can increase my hit rate with the 2x III suggesting that the issue isn’t simply “user error” I know that it is an attractive proposition that everyone simply doesn’t know what they are doing but my personal experience suggests that we aren’t all quite that incompetent.

After re-reading what I wrote here I realized that this might come off as suggesting something negative about Ari which is certainly not my intention. Instead I don’t agree that there is no benefit to making sure cameras/lenses are dialed in using AFMA. I know from my time on the rifle team back when I was in school it certainly paid to site in your rifle even though there were many variables at play.



Sep 28, 2017 at 06:10 PM
speedmaster20d
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.5 #8 · p.5 #8 · canon 2x III owners, are you satisfied?


Hi Greg,

If you are using series I lenses or older bodies (prior to 1DX ) the AF will not be as accurate. Only series II super-tele lenses can "talk" to the CPU in the series III TC's. I remember I didn't like my old 500 MKI and 2X TC that much either.

Canon calibrate the each series III extender in factory and store the calibration numbers in the CPU in the TC itself. Series II super-tele lenses + 1DX or later bodies can then use these values to internally correct AF for TC optics and aberrations . In my experience with such combo the AF is pretty darn accurate, I just shot some action frames at 1200mm last week will share some on the nature forum...



best




Sep 28, 2017 at 07:08 PM
Greg Lavaty
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.5 #9 · p.5 #9 · canon 2x III owners, are you satisfied?


I am using 7D mk2 and 80D so not the latest or most sophisticated AF system. My 300mm f/2.8 is the II, I have both the series I and II of the 500. Logic would indicate that one should expect lower precision with a 2x TC than with a 1.4x or no TC so my findings don't surprise me at all. In the past I have sent bodies and lenses in to the service centers for calibration with mixed results and I have largely lost confidence in them to take the issue seriously so I only use them as a last resort. I have had VERY good success using the AFMA feature. Thankfully I rarely need 1000mm of focal length so I'm not terribly concerned about the performance of the 2x. I can't justify the cost of the 1Dx II so I guess I will just have to way for that AF system tech to trickle down. I saw your harrier shot on the nature forum and it is a pretty shot but seems to lack the fine detail in the feathers that I typically see in shots at shorter focal lengths and presumably closer subject distances. Not to say that the shot doesn't look nice but probably is pushing the limits of the gear and technique.


Sep 28, 2017 at 08:40 PM
armd
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.5 #10 · p.5 #10 · canon 2x III owners, are you satisfied?


That’s good information to know. I’ve been wrestling a bit with the whole circumstance. On the one hand none of my lenses from a 16-35 up have any significant MA with the exception of an older 70-200 f/2.8 which ranges between -3 W to +5T. That’s why I was a bit surprised by the 2x III. Generally, I don’t get too excited about MA as there are enough other variances with light, temperature, contrast etc. which affect AF. A few years ago, I had some sigma lenses which focused ok at first but then developed wide variances in AF performance. No amount of MA overcame their AF failures and I abandoned their lenses in favor of OEM. Anyhow, we’ll see what cps says.


Sep 28, 2017 at 10:03 PM
speedmaster20d
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.5 #11 · p.5 #11 · canon 2x III owners, are you satisfied?


Greg Lavaty wrote:
I am using 7D mk2 and 80D so not the latest or most sophisticated AF system. My 300mm f/2.8 is the II, I have both the series I and II of the 500. Logic would indicate that one should expect lower precision with a 2x TC than with a 1.4x or no TC so my findings don't surprise me at all. In the past I have sent bodies and lenses in to the service centers for calibration with mixed results and I have largely lost confidence in them to take the issue seriously so I only use them as
...Show more

Hi Greg,

Thanks for clarifying. The 7D2 AF is not going to be great with the 2X, it's the body not the TC. I tried the 7DII a few times and each time I sold it after a week or two, the AF was just all over the place .... it is not going to give you ideal results no matter how much you MA. the camera body is as important as the lens when it comes to AF precision


As for the harrier shot I think this is the one you are talking about, but am not sure what lack of detail you are observing, it looks pretty good to my eyes on my 32" 4K NEC. BTW, I wasn't pushing any limits here, it was with the 1.4X which I use most of the time. I haven't posted any pics with the 2X yet but I will.

I have many harrier frames under my belt, I usually look at the facial disk, under wings and the base of the beak for fine details and this one doesn't look bad on my screen, it's not a closeup by any means but it isn't bad either




best









Sep 29, 2017 at 02:46 AM
Greg Lavaty
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.5 #12 · p.5 #12 · canon 2x III owners, are you satisfied?


Compared to other shots that you have posted I don't see as much detail in this one. Feel free to disagree.


Sep 29, 2017 at 10:03 PM
speedmaster20d
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.5 #13 · p.5 #13 · canon 2x III owners, are you satisfied?


Greg Lavaty wrote:
Compared to other shots that you have posted I don't see as much detail in this one. Feel free to disagree.


Do you remember which one? I want to compare, I really value your feedback, no disagreement at all, sometimes you do need a fresh pair of eyes and without critique there is no growth



Sep 29, 2017 at 11:07 PM
Greg Lavaty
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.5 #14 · p.5 #14 · canon 2x III owners, are you satisfied?


I really don't want to get into a silly debate when I show you one and you just come back and say no it isn't. I gave you honest feedback, you can take it or leave it, at this point the discussion seems to be getting to the point where it is tedious and not particularly useful in my opinion.


Sep 30, 2017 at 06:48 AM
Sdentrem
Offline

Upload & Sell: Off
p.5 #15 · p.5 #15 · canon 2x III owners, are you satisfied?


I shoot mostly birds and have used both 1.4x III and 2x III with the Canon 500 F4 II, 100-400 II, 7D II and 5D IV. Here's a link to a pic using the 2x on the 5D IV and 500 II. You'll see that it's sharp.

https://flic.kr/p/XnSBUd

I've done tests against the 1.4x and can confirm an increase in resolving power with all my lenses and both bodies, compared to cropping the bare lens or 1.4x further. That being said, the limitations are real:
- slower autofocus (in low light, slow to pick up, especially in flight)
- fewer AF points, especially with 100-400 II (or none with older bodies)
- your technique needs to be excellent to perfect.
- you need plenty of light and be open to stopping down from wide open for extra sharpness ( where the 1.4x on the 500 is tack sharp wide open).
- handholding it on a 500 or 600 is very hard, although I've done it. Keeper rate goes down.
- your field of view is less, so you may miss some quick movements or action.

My experience is that it's better with the 5D IV than the crop 7D II. I don't use it on the crop camera unless a static bird and great light, but very infrequently.

So, I use it with the 500 F4 and 5D IV with good light and a solid base (tripod or beanbag). In poor light or birds in flight or handholding, I prefer to stick to the 1.4x and crop. Maybe less resolution, but more keepers. I don't use it on the 100-400.



Oct 06, 2017 at 11:23 AM
1       2       3       4      
5
       end




FM Forums | Canon Forum | Join Upload & Sell

1       2       3       4      
5
       end
    
 

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.