Here are the Canon RF 1.4x and Canon RF 2.0x teleconverter specifications

Del Paso

M3 Singlestroke
Aug 9, 2018
1,190
1,262
Might be tempted to buy either the 600 or the 800 mm, but ONLY if IQ is really good !
 

Antono Refa

EOS R
Mar 26, 2014
1,292
425
The only way I can see the RF 70-200 2.8 working with a TC is if they release an alternate version of the TCs designed to work with lenses that have rear elements closer to the sensor. But I don't really imagine that happening...

The Sigma APO Teleconverter 1.4x EX DG hardly sticks beyond the mount, and Sony made teleconverters that didn't stick either.
 

Antono Refa

EOS R
Mar 26, 2014
1,292
425
I wasn't doubting the ability to create such a teleconverter, more just the impetus. How likely is Canon to release TWO sets of teleconverters, each compatible with different lenses?

Sounds reasonable enough. By the same logic, Canon is not likely to make another RF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM that is compatible with tele extenders.

Is the combo rare enough for Canon to pass? Weird.
 

Random Orbits

EOS 5D Mark IV
Mar 14, 2012
2,444
328
I mean, even if you could, why would you use a TC on the lower range when all it would do is decrease image quality?

Because it was easier to store without removing the TC every time you wanted to carry the camera/lens in your bag. If the situation is not convenient (or environmentally friendly to change lenses) because I might miss a shot, the TC stayed on.
 
  • Like
Reactions: highdesertmesa

fabao

R5 or R6?
Apr 26, 2019
29
49
I mean, even if you could, why would you use a TC on the lower range when all it would do is decrease image quality?
You have an interesting point. But if the subject of interest moves closer to you, there may be no time to remove the TC. I was looking for flexibility. And I found the 1.4TC to not really degrade the image quality much, as opposed to the 2X one.
 

Antono Refa

EOS R
Mar 26, 2014
1,292
425
There were EF teleconverters that worked with any EF lens also. I have one. The image quality is dreadful.

A) I don't know whether teleconverters that don't extend into the lens are, in general, dreadful.

B) Not having a 70-200mm f/2.8 IS that is compatible with teleconverters is a weird choice. A lens longer than 200mm will be bigger, heavier, and >4x the price of a 2x TC, and I'm not going to buy one.
 

jolyonralph

EOS R5 Mark II
CR Pro
Aug 25, 2015
1,419
921
London, UK
www.everyothershot.com
A) I don't know whether teleconverters that don't extend into the lens are, in general, dreadful.

B) Not having a 70-200mm f/2.8 IS that is compatible with teleconverters is a weird choice. A lens longer than 200mm will be bigger, heavier, and >4x the price of a 2x TC, and I'm not going to buy one.

I think you can assume by the fact that Canon didn't do the new TCs in a way that works with the RF 70-200 that to do so would have been an unacceptable compromise.
 

Antono Refa

EOS R
Mar 26, 2014
1,292
425
I think you can assume by the fact that Canon didn't do the new TCs in a way that works with the RF 70-200 that to do so would have been an unacceptable compromise.

Unacceptable to whom? At this stage, I'm waiting to see if Nikon's Z 70-200mm f/2.8 VR S will accept TCs or not.
 

Bert63

What’s in da box?
CR Pro
Dec 3, 2017
1,058
2,332
All I want is the new 1.4X teleconverter to be equal to or better than the one I currently own that is perma-mounted to my 100-400L II.

I have delusions that I could buy the 100-500L and slap on the 1.4X or (gasp) the 2.0X and have instant relatively cheap REACH which birders can never have enough of..
 

Eclipsed

EOS R5, "Hefty Fifty" and more.
Apr 30, 2020
143
147
Considering the fact that the TC's are white (and the 600/800 @f11 are not) we might expect tele lenses (with wide aperture) in a white lineup. Now the only white lens is the 100-500 that would be color-matching?
Not exactly. The R bodies have a brushed silver mount ring as does the rear of the 100-500 for a perfect match. The TCs don’t have this color so don’t match either.