 |
Page: 1 · 2 · 3
|
|
|
|
MarioPro
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jun 22, 2004
Location: Portugal
Posts: 9
|
|
Review Date: Aug 31, 2004
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $264.95
| Rating: 8
|
|
Pros:
|
Good construction, easy to use
|
|
Cons:
|
Loss of two stops, some picture degradation
|
|
|
I've been working with the 2x II Extender on my EF 70-200 f/2.8 L IS USM and noticed some image degradation, besides loosing two stops. Hopefully I don't use it oftenly in low light situations (most of my work) but when used it gives good results, not excelente but good.
The construction is very good and the Extender's contacts have been working nicely (if kept clean).
A good solution for those who don't have budget to buy greater zoom lenses. If you do... forget the Extender!
I'm happy with my purchase for the purpose I bought it and though I recommend it with caution.
|
|
 Aug 31, 2004
|
|
DavidSchneider
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Nov 5, 2002
Location: United States
Posts: 87
|
|
Review Date: May 22, 2004
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 6
|
|
Pros:
|
It's a lot easier to own and use than a 400mm lens.
|
|
Cons:
|
Image quality, focusing speed reduction.
|
|
|
The 2xII is somewhat better than it's replacement, but quality wise, it doesn't equal the old 1.4x convertor or the 1.4xII convertor.
I have used it for sales of sports and equine shows, but if I can use my old or new 1.4x convertors, I much prefer to do that because I know I'll have better, saleable images a much higher percentage of the time.
There's a reason the 1.4x convertor costs more than the 2x. It's a better product. If you are going to purchase only one convertor, you'll be happier with the 1.4xII.
The 2x is great to have in camera bag. It works well with 70-200L 2.8 lens. Just don't expect as sharp an image as 1.4x.
-David Schneider
|
|
|
May 22, 2004
|
|
chansi
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Feb 17, 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 144
|
|
Review Date: Apr 1, 2004
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $265.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Great extender for the L lenses. IS and AF function still works when attached to the lens. Weather and dust proof. Awesome images when stop down to f8.
|
|
Cons:
|
Lose 2 stops and lose a little bit fine detail. But you have to really look closely to notice
|
|
|
No question about it. It is the best extender for your Canon L lens. If you wouldn't mind losing 2 stops, this extender gives you a very good reach. Very light to carry around. Well build, AF and IS functions still works on most of the lenses.
|
|
|
Apr 1, 2004
|
|
Bmeister
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Oct 20, 2003
Location: United States
Posts: 465
|
|
Review Date: Oct 20, 2003
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $289.00
| Rating: 8
|
|
Pros:
|
Very good sharpness
NO noticeable AF slow down
Light weight
Stackable with Canon II-series converters
|
|
Cons:
|
Mild loss of color/contrast even when stopped down
Expensive
|
|
|
I bought this 2x-II to use on my 200/f1.8 for in-the-field versatility so I didn't have to carry 2 different lenses; I'm not disappointed. With the 2x I get a 400/f3.5 but I usually stop it down 1/3 (f4) and have had great results shooting daytime soccer and football. It is NOT as good as a 400/f2.8, but with some PhotoShop contrast and color enhancement I can hardly tell the difference in 8x10 prints.
NOTE: The 100-400IS has better color/contrast at 400mm wide open than the 200/f1.8+2x-II.
With the 2x alone on the 1D-s, there is more noticeable quality loss in the corners, but with the 10D 1.6 crop it's fine. The image quality is a bit better on the 400/f2.8. I think the 2x was made for LONG telephotos rather than short (i.e. 200mm and shorter) ones.
As far as autofocus, the TCs supposedly slow down the AF, but I never noticed this either on the 1D-s or 10D using Servo focus. I tried the 2x-II stacked with the 1.4x-II on both the 200/f1.8 and 400/f2.8 with acceptable results (stacking causes AF Servo to hunt quite a bit).
The 2x-II is a very good TC and yields very good results on long "L" lenses.
|
|
|
Oct 20, 2003
|
|
danks
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Apr 6, 2002
Location: Canada
Posts: 289
|
|
Review Date: Aug 4, 2003
|
Recommend? no |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 4
|
|
Pros:
|
Well, it works but . . .
|
|
Cons:
|
Softens and destroys contrast.
|
|
I use this thing sparingly. I ran tests to confirm what I already knew . . . this converter may be as good as 2X converters get, but you pay a very significant price in terms of sharpness and contrast whenever you use it. I use it on both the EF300/2.8L IS and the EF600/4L IS lenses. I find, invariably, a whole lot of USM masking in Photoshop is necessary to try to restore sharpness.
This is markedly different to the 1.4X Canon converter which seems pretty darn good in test shots carefully compared to those without a converter. With the EF2X II, there is no doubt. You can readily see the degredation. Not to be too negative, on occasion I have to use it and it works. An example is the full frame great blue heron at:
http://danks.netfirms.com/1200heron.htm
Still, I caution anyone selecting a lens, even an excellent fixed focal length lens, thinking they can use this converter as a matter of routine and get sharp results. Not only do the optics of the 2X muddify things, you also lose two full stops. You must resort to either shooting the lens wide open or longer shutter speeds than would be the case otherwise. This all conspires against getting good images.
Buy one, by all means. But keep it for occasional, not habitual use.
|
|
|
Aug 4, 2003
|
|
Jack Flesher
Offline
[ X ]
Registered: Oct 23, 2002
Location: United States
Posts: 3489
|
|
Review Date: Apr 1, 2003
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $300.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
2x magnification, works VERY well with my 500/4IS
|
|
Cons:
|
Fairly large
|
|
|
This converter seems to work better on some of my lenses than it does others. For example, it performs exceptionally well on my 500/4 IS, very well on my 70-200/2.8 IS and 300/4, yet only marginally so on my 135/2 L and my 300/2.8. However, it is a great way to extend the versitility of nearly any lens in your bag when you want to travel light.
|
|
|
Apr 1, 2003
|
|
dbarthel
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Dec 13, 2002
Location: United States
Posts: 788
|
|
Review Date: Mar 30, 2003
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $300.00
| Rating: 8
|
|
Pros:
|
Works well with long primes
|
|
Cons:
|
|
|
|
Used with a 300f2.8, and stopped down to f8, results are very good. Actually watched Artie Morris regularly stack two 2x converters on his 600 F4. Does the 300 & 2x compare to a 600? No, but cost and weight make this an attractive alternative.
|
|
|
Mar 30, 2003
|
|
John MacLean
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jan 11, 2002
Location: United States
Posts: 390
|
|
Review Date: Mar 30, 2003
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $329.00
| Rating: 6
|
|
Pros:
|
works in a pinch
|
|
Cons:
|
as always - 2 stop loss
|
|
|
I've only used it with my 70-200 2.8 IS. Wide open there is a lack of sharpness that gets better by stopping down 2 stops, to an effective f11. So 400mm @ f11 isn't a winning combo if you want shallow DOF and high shutter speeds with ISO 100 or 200. Not a replacement for a 400 2.8 IS, but it sure weighs and costs a lot less and fits in my backpack easier!
|
|
|
Mar 30, 2003
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reviews
|
Views
|
Date of last review
|
|
40
|
118647
|
Mar 1, 2012
|
|
|
Recommended By
|
Average Price
|
|
83% of reviewers
|
$289.88
|
|
|
Build Quality Rating
|
Price Rating
|
Overall Rating
|
|
9.45
|
8.14
|
8.1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
