5D MKIII w 70-200 2.8II using a 1.4x vs 2x extender

[Axilrod]

I am quite disappointed with the performance of this exact combination.

Yes, the results from the optical magnification of the 1.4X III converter are better than interpolating the image to larger resolution. However, it noticeably diminishes image quality and contrast. Perhaps resolution might be fairly high, but the punch just isn't there for me. For an equivalent, I would say that the 7D with the 70-200 mm II is just as good as the 5D3 with the 70-200mm II + 1.4X. That's not supposed to be a positive comparison. I used both combinations for thousands of photos just a few days ago.

It's better if possible to just get closer with the 200mm lens and forgo the 1.4X converter. The 1.4X III converter does amazing things with a lens that is far sharper to start with like the $5,000+ exotic lenses.  But the 70-200 II lens with its huge number of elements doesn't exceed the camera's resolution by a sufficient margin to maintain its quality when combined with a teleconverter. Only the lenses like the 300mm f/2.8, etc., can do that.

Kind of off topic, but I was curious what you shoot that requires 9 camera bodies and 2 copies of so many lenses?  It seems like you could buy some really wicked stuff if you got rid of the duplicate lenses and got rid of a couple of your 7D's, the 60D, and the Rebels.

[scrappydog]

I use my 70-200 2.8II and Extender 1.4x III a lot with my 60D.  I was expecting a significant degradation in the image quality, but truthfully, I don't notice a difference in the IQ.  The only difference I have noticed is a slower AF speed.

[Razor2012]

Hi, picked up a 70-200 2.8II with my 5DIII and was wondering what your thoughts were using a 1.4x vs 2x extender?  Thanks!

I've used the 2x on the same lens with a 1D IV and the results were quite honestly appalling, the pictures were unusable both due to loss in IQ and because AF became so sluggish that nothing remotely in motion could lock/track. The 1.4 I've used and that worked ok on a 1D II, I think. But the 2X is terrible. I returned it the next day and proceeded to rent a  400 2.8 when I needed it  

So, my advice don't get the 4X.

I've had my doubts about the 2x right from the beginning, so if I get any extender it will be the 1.4III.

You will end up with both.   

Heh, well you might be right.  It seems that there are people that like both.

[sublime LightWorks]

Following up on my prior message, here are some images:

This was shot with a 7D and the 70-200mm f/2.8 IS L II + 1.4x TC III at f/4, 1/1000 sec, ISO 400 at 280mm:

http://www.imagicphotography.com/Photography/Preview-Gallery/12384118_G8pMWH#!i=1240165276&k=GELoj&lb=1&s=A


Here is a shot with just the that 70-200mm at f/2.8, 1/1600 sec, ISO 250, with a circular polarizer:

http://www.imagicphotography.com/Photography/Preview-Gallery/12384118_G8pMWH#!i=1255559047&k=dWxFzLm&lb=1&s=A