Canon Extender EF 2x III review - at the bronx zoo

[kubelik]

hi everyone,

finally got to take my 70-200 f/2.8 L IS II and the Extender 2x III to do some shooting of live subjects at the bronx zoo:

http://teatrayinthesky.wordpress.com/2011/03/21/canon-extender-ef-2x-iii-review-leaping-lemurs/

pretty happy with the combination, and I'm open to any comments/critiques/questions anyone has.  thanks for looking!

[kubelik]

added the second part of the review today, where I take a look at how useful this combination is for birding on a 5D Mark II:

http://teatrayinthesky.wordpress.com/2011/03/22/canon-extender-ef-2x-iii-review-gone-birding/

the focus tracking on my 5DII with the 70-200 f/2.8 L IS II + 2x III is as good as, if not better than, I've seen with any of my other lenses.  the conditions were not excellent (backlighting and busy background) but it managed to pick up focus on the inca terns and held focus while I managed to keep the bird relatively centered in frame.  with small, darty animals that's not very easy to do.

I think, in the end, the limiting factor is the 5D II.  hopefully I'll be able to try this combination out on a body better suited for this type of work, such as a 7D or a 1D Mark IV.  the good thing to know is, as long as your AF is up the task, the image quality is definitely there.

let me know if you have this same combo and have tried it on a system with pro AF.

[acoll123]

Nice shots. I have the 70-200 2.8 L II and love using it on both the 5D II and the 7D. I was considering getting an extender but was worried about a drop in IQ but your photos look pretty good . . .

[branden]

Thank you! I was also curious about this combination, and your review is very straightforward and to the point.

Also, you mentioned in part I that you are planning a trip to the Galapagos. Oddly enough, that is also something I've been considering ... if you don't mind explaining, how are you planning your trip?

Thanks

[kubelik]

acoll, I understand your original hesitation.  I've seen shots using the original 70-200 f/2.8 L IS with extenders and the lack of resolution is fairly obvious and distracting.  if you're using a 7D, I'd consider just getting the EF 1.4x III as that will still get you up to a 448mm equivalent on full frame, and the sharpness at f/5.6 will be excellent.  one stop down from max aperture seems to do the trick with the new extenders.

branden, glad the review was helpful.  I'm basically planning the trip through a lot of research.  normally when I travel abroad I just get a guide book, plane tickets, and book a hotel.  since going to the galapagos is a bit more involving, my wife and I decided to stick to well-known tour operators.  we're using Gap Adventures (http://www.gapadventures.com/) since they're reasonably priced, a large outfitter, and allowed for a number of options in terms of how you structure your trip in terms of destinations and also pricing level.  I'm very excited about it, feel free to PM me if you have more questions.

[bluesman64]

I recognize that this is off point as it applies to the 2x extender, but I've done the Galapagos with GAP Adventures.  We, overall, had a fabulous time.  There were a couple of hiccups which were pretty significant - being told to get onto an earlier plane into the jungle and ending up 6 hours before our group in a pretty rural area of the Amazon - but that only happened to my wife and I, and we haven't heard of that happening to others. 

Once in Galapagos, the trips are all about the same (except for private groups), so we enjoyed the same experience as tours that paid 10x the price.  Very worth it and we saw some incredible things. 

We did have to speak to the operator on one occasion to ask to slow down a little bit for photos, but otherwise they were extremely accommodating.  We also grouped our trip with an excursion to Machu Piccu and Amazon jungle.  Here are photos from our Gap Adventures trip.

Galapagos:
http://marknicholas.smugmug.com/Personal-Photographs/Travels/Galapagos-2005/916003_WWDT6

Machu Piccu:
http://marknicholas.smugmug.com/Personal-Photographs/Travels/Machu-Picchu-Peru-2005/943099_KH22i

Amazon Jungle:
http://marknicholas.smugmug.com/Personal-Photographs/Travels/Amazon-Peru-2005/943248_jEt6g

[kubelik]

bluesman, thanks for the info, and the photos!

really enjoyed your photos of machu picchu, my wife and I are dying to go but we just don't have the time in our schedule to do it. 

[branden]

Wow, this is some good information, answers my questions. Thank you guys!

[nounours18200]

My main question is : is this version III better (much better ?) than the version II ?? same for the x1.4 TC version III.

I already own the II version, so given the price increase of the version III, I would like to learn more about the optic quality increase (if any) between the two versions !

[kubelik]

nounours, the answer to that is, that main difference lies in the 70-200mm f/2.8 L IS II.  the extenders have also improved a little, but not double-the-price-of-your version II extender.  so I'd say save the money to get the new 70-200, rather than shelling out for a new extender right away.

[nounours18200]

Thanks kubelink : I share you viewpoint....

[K3nt]

I have a question. Since I have the 7D and soon the 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM II, would buying a 2x Extender actually give me an effective focal length of 640mm? With the 1.6x crop factor and all? I think so, but I'm inclined to believe the crop effects are not totally linear but I may be wrong.

Anyone?

[epsiloneri]

I have a question. Since I have the 7D and soon the 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM II, would buying a 2x Extender actually give me an effective focal length of 640mm?

Yes, you are correct. 7D with a 2x teleconverter and 200mm lens gives a field of view equivalent to a 640mm lens on a full frame camera (e.g. 5D). This combination would likely outresolve the lens, however, resulting in a somewhat softer image at the scale of pixels.

[branden]

Yes, you are correct. 7D with a 2x teleconverter and 200mm lens gives a field of view equivalent to a 640mm lens on a full frame camera (e.g. 5D). This combination would likely outresolve the lens, however, resulting in a somewhat softer image at the scale of pixels.

I think you mean 640mm on a crop frame camera. On a full frame it would only be 400mm.

The "1.6x crop factor" is linear through all focal lengths.

[kubelik]

no, epsiloneri is correct.  400mm on an APS-C camera is commonly described as "640mm equivalent", meaning the equivalent of 640mm on a full frame camera.  grammatically, it assumes that you are equalizing the sensor sizes and just looking at reach.