Home · Register · Join Upload & Sell

Moderated by: Fred Miranda

New fredmiranda.com Mobile Site

New Feature: SMS Notification alert

New Feature: Buy & Sell Watchlist

FM Forums | Canon Forum | Join Upload & Sell

2 3 end

Archive 2016 · 2x Extender: II vs III for my setup?

Colin F
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #1 · p.1 #1 · 2x Extender: II vs III for my setup?

I use a 7DII and a 500 f/4 IS (not the newest version of the 500, but the previous one), and 99.9% for birds.

I own the 1.4 III extender, and am looking at getting a 2x

There is a used 2x II in my area right now, so wondering what would be the downsides with the II compared to the III with my particular body & lens. From what I gather, the III will perhaps offer only a slightly better image quality, but what about focusing communication between the 7DII and 500 IS?

Any & all pros & cons would be appreciated. (The III would be double the price).

Nov 14, 2016 at 11:01 PM

Liquidstone
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #2 · p.1 #2 · 2x Extender: II vs III for my setup?

I have both the 2x II and 2x III. My 2x II copy must've been a good one because I can't see any appreciable difference in IQ vs. the 2x III.

Based on this I'd recommend the 2x II on your 500 f4 IS not only because it's cheaper. More importantly, you can stack your 1.4x III behind it and go 1400 mm.

Nov 15, 2016 at 01:48 AM

jcolwell
Online
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #3 · p.1 #3 · 2x Extender: II vs III for my setup?

I upgraded from the 2x II to 2x III when the III first shipped. I found the 2x III offers worthwhile improvements (on my EF 500/4L IS) with sharpness at the image edges and corners, and with lower CA. Here's some relevant threads.

2x II vs. 2x III,
Version III extenders and version I L lenses, https://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1296858/0#12372013

Extender 2x Mk II vs. 2x Mk III, https://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1002804

2x Teleconverter for Canon 500mm F4 IS (version 1), [2x II vs III] https://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1334727/1#12733577

2x III photos,
https://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1296858/0#12372013

Nov 15, 2016 at 05:47 AM

Colin F
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #4 · p.1 #4 · 2x Extender: II vs III for my setup?

Liquidstone wrote:
I have both the 2x II and 2x III. My 2x II copy must've been a good one because I can't see any appreciable difference in IQ vs. the 2x III.

Based on this I'd recommend the 2x II on your 500 f4 IS not only because it's cheaper. More importantly, you can stack your 1.4x III behind it and go 1400 mm.

Yes, I've become aware that you can't combine the version III extenders, but would a person ever get any keeper images with two extenders stacked?

Nov 15, 2016 at 07:56 AM

Colin F
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #5 · p.1 #5 · 2x Extender: II vs III for my setup?

jcolwell wrote:
I upgraded from the 2x II to 2x III when the III first shipped. I found the 2x III offers worthwhile improvements (on my EF 500/4L IS) with sharpness at the image edges and corners, and with lower CA. Here's some relevant threads.

2x II vs. 2x III,
Version III extenders and version I L lenses, https://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1296858/0#12372013

Extender 2x Mk II vs. 2x Mk III, https://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1002804

2x Teleconverter for Canon 500mm F4 IS (version 1), [2x II vs III] https://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1334727/1#12733577

2x III photos,
https://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1296858/0#12372013

Thanks for the links. One of those classic situations where one does get some slight improvements, but at double the price.

Nov 15, 2016 at 08:00 AM

jcolwell
Online
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #6 · p.1 #6 · 2x Extender: II vs III for my setup?

Colin F wrote:
... would a person ever get any keeper images with two extenders stacked?

Many of the moon images in this current thread are taken with stacked extenders/teleconverters.

The November 2016 Supermoon Thread, https://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1460120

Nov 15, 2016 at 08:45 AM

Tapeman
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #7 · p.1 #7 · 2x Extender: II vs III for my setup?

I found the newer version to be quite a bit better especially on Canon's version II lenses. I seldom would want to stack converters, so I can live without that.

Nov 15, 2016 at 11:47 AM

Colin F
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #8 · p.1 #8 · 2x Extender: II vs III for my setup?

Tapeman wrote:
I found the newer version to be quite a bit better especially on Canon's version II lenses.

Thanks. As I don't have the latest (II) lens, I am wondering if I will benefit from the improvements. I'm guessing that I would benefit from the ever-so-slight IQ improvements, but perhaps nothing in terms of AF performance, I dunno.

Nov 15, 2016 at 11:59 AM

jamato8
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #9 · p.1 #9 · 2x Extender: II vs III for my setup?

Colin F wrote:
Yes, I've become aware that you can't combine the version III extenders, but would a person ever get any keeper images with two extenders stacked?

Yes. And keep in mind that the image looses some contrast and sharpness when loaded here. I don't over sharpen to compensate for this issue but on my desktop using the 2XII and the 1.4III work well on the 100-400II, if needed.

Nov 15, 2016 at 02:59 PM

Colin F
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #10 · p.1 #10 · 2x Extender: II vs III for my setup?

OK, so a friend loaned me his 2x II yesterday, so this morning I did a quick test. I set my 7DII with 500 f/4 on a tripod, and shot at an item about 50' away. 10 second delay, ISO 800 f/8

First shot with no extender.
Second shot with 1.4 III
Third shot with 2x II
Fourth shot with 1.4 III and 2x II stacked

In ACR, I zoomed into the same portion of the shot on all. To my surprise, the one with no extender was the cleanest. Does that make sense - that even when heavily cropped, having no extender will result in a better image (of a bird say)? I always thought that the more pixels on the subject the better.

http://i160.photobucket.com/albums/t172/Paddywacked/Fred%20Miranda/7D__4843_zpsj3c1igvf.jpg

Nov 16, 2016 at 01:37 PM

arbitrage
Online
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #11 · p.1 #11 · 2x Extender: II vs III for my setup?

One new reason to invest in the MKIII TCs no matter what IQ/AF gains they may or may not provide over the MKIIs is that the new bodies (1DX2 and 5D4) that support all point f/8 focusing require the use of the MkIII TCs to get all those points. I realize you don't have one of those bodies now but I think it is safe to assume that future bodies like the 7D3 will also support more f/8 points and also require the MkIII to use them. So that is a bit of future proofing and may be worth the extra $$.

Nov 16, 2016 at 02:33 PM

Colin F
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #12 · p.1 #12 · 2x Extender: II vs III for my setup?

^^^Yes, future-proofing was kinda in the back of my mind too. Thanks.

Nov 16, 2016 at 02:47 PM

Liquidstone
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #13 · p.1 #13 · 2x Extender: II vs III for my setup?

Colin F wrote:
OK, so a friend loaned me his 2x II yesterday, so this morning I did a quick test. I set my 7DII with 500 f/4 on a tripod, and shot at an item about 50' away. 10 second delay, ISO 800 f/8

First shot with no extender.
Second shot with 1.4 III
Third shot with 2x II
Fourth shot with 1.4 III and 2x II stacked

In ACR, I zoomed into the same portion of the shot on all. To my surprise, the one with no extender was the cleanest. Does that make sense - that even when heavily cropped, having no extender will...Show more →

To compare apples to apples, you should equalize the crops when comparing.

Try it this way:

1. stacked TCs - 100% crops, no down or up sizing.
2. 2x TC - upsize to 140%, then 100% crop
3. 1.4x TC - upsize to 200%, then 100% crop
4. bare lens - upsize to 280%, then 100% crop

Objects in all the crops shoud appear the same size after equalizing. If you did the shooting right (AF and shake control) with the 7D II + 500 f4 IS, number 1 should yield the most detail.

Here's a similar test of my 400 2.8 IS plus up to 4x worth of TCs. The one with 4x TC captures more detail than the ones with less or no TC. Use of TCs is not free of course - AF takes a hit, shake control is even tougher, and the loss of light will force you to use higher ISO in less bright conditions.

http://www.pbase.com/liquidstone/image/131920218/original

Nov 16, 2016 at 04:17 PM

Colin F
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #14 · p.1 #14 · 2x Extender: II vs III for my setup?

^^^ Thanks. So using that method, I have found that the 1.4 III perhaps slightly edged-out the bare lens, and the 2X II was worse, and the stacked worse again.

It was done using a Wimberly II gimbal head, but with not additional supports, so there could have been some shutter slap, I dunno. Should I do these test shots in live view?

These results have me wondering why anyone would use an extender at all.

Nov 16, 2016 at 05:26 PM

Tapeman
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #15 · p.1 #15 · 2x Extender: II vs III for my setup?

Let's face it you get the latest version now or later.

Nov 16, 2016 at 05:49 PM

Liquidstone
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #16 · p.1 #16 · 2x Extender: II vs III for my setup?

Colin F wrote:
^^^ Thanks. So using that method, I have found that the 1.4 III perhaps slightly edged-out the bare lens, and the 2X II was worse, and the stacked worse again.

It was done using a Wimberly II gimbal head, but with not additional supports, so there could have been some shutter slap, I dunno. Should I do these test shots in live view?

These results have me wondering why anyone would use an extender at all.

I've used a 500 f4 IS for years, and detail captured increases up to at least a 2.8x TC, using any decent set of TCs. But doing the test to show this is not easy - you have to execute precise focus (CD AF can be done in LV even with with a 2.8x) and tame shake (IS off and use of remote switch recommended).

Also, you need to take many shots and just select the sharpest of the lot at each setting. This is to exclude variables (shake and misfocus) other than optics to cloud the results.

No offense intended, but if you can't get a sharp shot with more detail with a 2x TC II over a 1.4x TC III on the 500 f4 IS under controlled conditions, then perhaps you're not ready yet for a 2x TC of any flavor. A doubler is even more difficult to use well in the field.

Nov 16, 2016 at 06:14 PM

Colin F
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #17 · p.1 #17 · 2x Extender: II vs III for my setup?

Liquidstone wrote:
No offense intended, but if you can't get a sharp shot with more detail with a 2x TC II over a 1.4x TC III on the 500 f4 IS under controlled conditions, then perhaps you're not ready yet for a 2x TC of any flavor.

Erm, not offended, but that's an odd thing to say. How does one get "ready" for a 2X extender?

Nov 16, 2016 at 07:08 PM

Liquidstone
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #18 · p.1 #18 · 2x Extender: II vs III for my setup?

Colin F wrote:
Erm, not offended, but that's an odd thing to say. How does one get "ready" for a 2X extender?

It's essentially learning good long lens technique - placing precise focus, and taming shake at 1000 mm in the field. Many unsharp shots from a 2x TC + a big white are blamed on the optics, but most of these are actually caused by camera shake, misfocus, and sometimes subject motion because the loss of light will bring down shutter speeds.

I suggest you practice nailing the focus and shake control at easy targets first, before going afield with the 1000 mm combo.

Using a doubler now is actually much easier with the advent of Live View, which allows CD AF at f/8 or f/11, or precise MF in magnified view.

Before the advent of LV, I had to manually focus through the dim VF, then monitor the bird's pose with binoculars on one hand. The other hand holds the remote switch, ready to trip the shutter once I see a promising pose in the binoculars. It was tough then, but I had to do it to bring distant small birds closer.

This one was such a capture. The bird, no longer than 6" from tip of tail to tip of bill, was perched in the canopy. I had to go 1600 mm to bring it closer, no LV and no IS/OS.

350D + Sigmonster (Sigma 300-800 DG) + 2x II, 1600 mm, f/18, 1/50 sec, ISO 400, major crop:
http://www.pbase.com/liquidstone/image/72483366/original.jpg

Nov 16, 2016 at 08:07 PM

Colin F
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #19 · p.1 #19 · 2x Extender: II vs III for my setup?

Liquidstone wrote:
It's essentially learning good long lens technique - placing precise focus, and taming shake at 1000 mm in the field. Many unsharp shots from a 2x TC + a big white are blamed on the optics, but most of these are actually caused by camera shake, misfocus, and sometimes subject motion because the loss of light will bring down shutter speeds.

I suggest you practice nailing the focus and shake control at easy targets first, before going afield with the 1000 mm combo.

Using a doubler now is actually much easier with the advent of Live View, which allows CD AF...Show more →

As I've been using the 500 with a 1.4 extender for some time now, with a bazillion bird shots, I fail to see why you feel that I have "something to learn" with using a 2X.

Nov 16, 2016 at 08:16 PM

Liquidstone
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #20 · p.1 #20 · 2x Extender: II vs III for my setup?

Here's a couple of samples to give you an idea what IQ to expect from a 2x II.

From the 500 f4 IS:

Oriental Honeybuzzard (Pernis ptilorhynchus )

Shooting Info - Bacsil Ridge, San Fernando, La Union, Philippines, August 31, 2012, Canon 7D + EF 500 f4 IS + 2x TC II, 1000 mm, f/10, ISO 400, 1/320 sec, 475B/516 support, manual exposure in available light, uncropped full frame resized to 1500x1000

http://www.pbase.com/liquidstone/image/145804734/original.jpg

From the wide open 400 2.8 IS:

Lowland White-eye (Zosterops meyeni)
Shooting info - Bacnotan, La Union, Philippines, July 22, 2012, Canon 1D MIV + 400 2.8 IS + Canon 2x TC II, 800 mm, f/5.6, ISO 1600, 1/320 sec, 475B/516 support, manual exposure in available light, near full frame.

http://www.pbase.com/liquidstone/image/144892044/original.jpg

100% crop:
http://www.pbase.com/liquidstone/image/146201228/original.jpg

Good luck with your choice.

Nov 16, 2016 at 08:36 PM

1 2 3 end
FM Forums \| Canon Forum \| Join Upload & Sell 1 2 3 end

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