Billbobboy42 Loc: Center of Delmarva

I am interested in purchasing a Canon 1.4 Teleconverter, but would like to know what is the difference between vs.ii and vs.iii. Vs.iii new cost $400+, while a near mint used vs.ii can be had(eBay) for around $200-225. I have not yet found for sale a new vs.ii. KEH did not have one, new or used, when I checked yesterday. I faintly remember a discussion on this a few years ago in which there was some restriction or capability with vs.iii that was not a problem with vs.ii. Bottom line is what improvement is there in vs.iii to justify twice the price?

Blurryeyed Loc: NC Mountains.

Well, you should read some reviews on it, it is chipped with software that helps it work better with Canon's new lenses, it is weather proofed, and optically there may or may not be a little bit of an enhancement. Personally I just got mine from KEH a couple of weeks ago and it is much too soon for me to weigh in on it.

The reason that I purchased the III instead of the II is because it is designed to work with Canon's new line of telephoto lenses like my 100-400 mk II, it is supposed to aid in the speed of focusing these lenses, and shooting at f/8 I felt the need to have the extender made for that lens. I still have not decided how well it works, I used it once for eagles in flight, the results weren't stellar but I am not so sure that it was the extender, I added 160mm to my lens and was reduced to center focus which is far different than how I had been using the lens, I think that it best to get used to shooting with it before I pass judgement.

Billbobboy42 Loc: Center of Delmarva

Thanks for the reply. The lens I would be using it with is the ef 70-200 4.2L which is about 4 yrs old. So, would I still benefit from the newer version?

rmorrison1116 Loc: Near Valley Forge, Pennsylvania

Basically the version III has a more advanced microprocessor, some moderate lens upgrades, better coating, stronger mount, slightly heavier and is a slightly different color than the version II, and is compatible with the series II image stabilization.

If you don't have any newer compatible L series lenses and don't intend to get any and if you can find a 1.4 II go for it. If you do have newer compatible L series lenses or are planing or acquiring them in the future, get the 1.4 III extender.

rmorrison1116 Loc: Near Valley Forge, Pennsylvania

If that's the only lens you intend to use the 1.4 extender on then get the series II.

Billbobboy42 Loc: Center of Delmarva

Thanks. Looks like I will bite the bullet and get the newer version since I cannot predict what I will buy in the future.

rmorrison1116 Loc: Near Valley Forge, Pennsylvania

That's the one I have, the III, I just wish it worked on all L series lenses but no... oh well, Canon had their reasons.
Best of luck with the 1.4 extender. I actually find myself using it far more often than I thought I would.

Dr.CalebRodriguez

I am pretty much in the same boat. Although I currently own a 2x cañon teleconvertor II. I do not use it much and that is why I am looking for the 1.4. I have found that if you use a canon teleconvertor with a non canon lens it will not communicate well. Maybe it is me????

amfoto1 Loc: San Jose, Calif. USA

As mentioned, the III has a different chip or software... designed to slow down AF by about 25% and improve accuracy.

And the added "weather sealing" is a rubber o-ring on the bayonet mount.

The II is still quite good, but hadn't been made in some years now, so I'm pretty sure all new old stock will have sold out by now... you'll only be able to find it used.

ALL Canon TC's have a protruding front element that limits the lenses they can be used upon. The front protrusion has to fit inside the rear of the lens. For example, I don't think they can be fitted onto any of the 70-300mm (maybe the L).

They will fit on 70-200 and 100-400mm. However, in order to be able to autofocus the latter, you need an "f8 capable" camera when using a 1.4X on the 100-400 (because it's an f5.6 lens already... f8 cameras are 7DII, 5DIII, 5DS or 1DX among the current models).

Canon recommends using their TCs on 135mm and long telephotos and they work best on primes. I've occasionally used my 1.4X II on 70-200/2.8 and 70-200/4... but more often on 135/2, 300/4, 300/2.8 and 500/4. I won't use my 2X II on any zooms... too much loss of image quality. (The 70-200/2.8 Mark II and 2X Mark III supposedly work pretty well together). I mostly use the 2X with 300/2.8 and 500/4.

Some people have found 1.4X or 2X useful on 45/2.8 Tilt Shift and some of the macro lenses. I have no need for that, so really haven't tried it.

No TC's I'm aware of from Canon or anyone else can be used with any EF-S lenses (not that there are many EF-S it would make much sense to use with a TC).



I disagree... Canon does optimize their TCs to work as well as possible with a number of their own lenses and are under no obligation to insure they work as well with third party lenses. However I think it goes too far to say they "aren't universal".

A TC is a TC. Not that big a deal. If it physically fits onto the lens... great. If the added optics happen to work well with the optical formula of a particular lens... great. A "weaker" 1.4X "costs" less light lost and in nearly all cases has less negative effect on image quality than a "stronger" 2X that costs twice as much light (not to mention 3X, which do exist but probably aren't worth the trouble).

Even the electronics are not really all that complex in modern ones... for the large part they just pass communication through to control AF and the aperture of the lens. The electronics also "register" with the camera, telling it that a TC is installed between the camera and the lens (in which case Canon designs their cameras to turn off AF when the combo exceeds the camera's rated capabilities). This is confirmed by the EXIF data, which reflects the effect of the teleconverter on both focal length and aperture... And that you can tape over a couple of the electronic contacts to fool the camera so that it doesn't "know" the TC is there and will still try to autofocus.

It's the physical design of Canon TCs... the protruding front element... that is the single biggest limiter of what lenses they can be used upon (and it's even possible to work around that... by putting a 12mm macro extension tube on the front of the TC... though some lenses might not be able to focus to infinity when that's done).

Same as Canon, no doubt Tamron and Sigma test their TCs with their own lenses and optimize them to work together. But they are generally usable on any other brand of lens, too. Kenko doesn't even make lenses... just a selection of TCs (although Kenko's parent company does own and make Tokina lenses and Hoya filters).

Besides the manufacturers' recommendations (i.e. Canon's suggested lenses to use with their TCs)... it's a bit of a guessing game. But it is possible to find combos that work well together... as well as combos that don't.

If considering getting a teleconverter and looking for info, be VERY specific what lens you want to use it upon and what teleconverter you've been looking at. Maybe you can find someone who has used that SPECIFIC combo and can tell you their impressions of the results it produces. Otherwise, you'll have to just hope for the best and might end up experimenting with different combos until you find one that lives up to your expectations.

rmorrison1116 Loc: Near Valley Forge, Pennsylvania

Canon teleconvertors are not universal, they are designed for Canon lenses only. Results are unpredictable when used with non-canon lenses, especially the version III units. The microprocessor in the extender contains data pertinent to the compatible canon lenses. Use one with a non-canon lens and the microprocessor knows.

It's best to use an extender made by the lens manufacturer, they design them to be compatible. For example, a Tamron SP extender is designed to work with Tamron SP lenses. It will work with other lenses but not as well. Same for Sigma TC-1401, it's designed for the Sport series lenses, specifically the 150-600, and will work on other Sigma lenses but use it on a non-sigma lens and results are unpredictable, it may work, it may not work so well but light will pass thru it...

markngolf Loc: Bridgewater, NJ

I had the 2x II, sold it and purchased the 2x III. It is much sharper and faster AF than the 2x II. I suspect comparision of the 1.4 II vs the 1.4 III is similar.
Mark

rmorrison1116 Loc: Near Valley Forge, Pennsylvania

Canon extenders are designed to work ONLY on specific Canon L series lenses. There are a few Canon zoom lenses the extender will mount to depending on zoom but you run the risk of glass on glass contact if you zoom too far. They will not mount at all on EF-S lenses. There are a couple universal extenders that will mount to an EF-S lens but why would one want to.

amfoto1 Loc: San Jose, Calif. USA

Interesting.

Here's what Canon's tech guru Rudy Winston said about the Mark III...

"Because AF systems are essentially computer-controlled to read and react to focus distance changes, the information must be modified so that the focusing movement (or sensitivity) compensates for the added presence of the extender. In the Canon EOS system, this is done by deliberately reducing drive speed when an extender is detected.

Before you immediately conclude that this is a problem, understand that this reduction in drive speed now corresponds to the effective speed you would achieve with the same EF lens alone. It compensates, automatically, for the reduced distance lens elements in the lens’s focusing group(s) need to move to refocus on a subject, with either EF Extender in place. Accordingly, overall AF performance remains essentially unchanged with an EF Extender attached, versus the lens’s AF speed without an extender."

According to Canon's own literature at the time the Mark III TCs were released, the reduction in AF drive speed was 25%... which would be virtually imperceptible in lenses that are already very fast focusing and, according to Winston's explanation above, really shouldn't appear to perform any slower or faster in real world use.

Besides, the original poster is asking about the 1.4X versions and many folks feel the 2X saw more dramatic image quality improvements going from the II to III versions. If shooting with one of the Mark II super telephoto lenses, the Mark III teleconverters that were introduced at the same time as those lenses would very likely be a better choice. There are new coatings on the Mark III, including fluorine on the exterior surfaces of the front and rear element to make them easier to clean, too.

Original poster might want to check out http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-Extender-EF-1.4x-III-Review.aspx (I just learned there that the Canon TCs won't physically fit the 70-300L, which I didn't know.) At that website you can compare sample images made with the TCs on certain lenses and see for yourself how they effect IQ. Unfortunately though you can't compare the two different TCs on the exact same lens... you can see how the 2001 Mark II works on lenses from the same time frame, such as the original 300/2.8L IS... Or how the 2010 Mark III works on the 300/2.8L IS Mark II... But you can't get sample image showing both versions of TC on either lens. At least you can find how a TC can be expected to work on your particular lens. If planning to use the lens/TC combo on a crop sensor camera, you also can choose to see sample images from one of those instead of a full frame models (might not find tests on your particular camera, but likely can find one that uses a similar sensor).

I tried out the 1.4X III and didn't see the value for my purposes, so I didn't buy it and am still using the Mark II. But I'm also still shooting with earlier versions of 70-200/2.8L IS, 300/2.8L IS and 500/4L IS... not the Mark II versions of any of these.

Also the 1.4X II and III are pretty similar at the center of the image area and I'm using my longer lenses mostly on APS-C cameras. I might be more inclined to upgrade if using them on full frame, because the 1.4X III is a little sharper in the corners and at the edges (in other words, better throughout the FF image area).

The III also has less chromatic aberration. With CA, it depends upon the lens to some extent. The lenses with fluorite elements that have very low CA themselves, it's not really all that different. But with other lenses, particularly those with more elements such as zooms, CA shows up more in the older TC. I don't know why it's better... maybe improved coatings or the change from 5-elements to a 7-element optical formula. However, the CA from the 1.4X Mark II is pretty easily fixed in post-processing... In fact since I use the lens profiles in Lightroom most of the time, which corrects CA automatically, I usually don't even notice the CA.

amfoto1 Loc: San Jose, Calif. USA

Correct. Specifically all the EF 70-200s and the 100-400s.



If true, that's not a concern because the protruding front element of the teleconverters prevent them from even being mounted onto inappropriate zooms.



That's correct.... No Canon TC can be used with any EF-S lenses. The lens won't even physically mount to the TC.



No there aren't any third party teleconverters that are able to mount a Canon EF-S lens. Third party TCs use the same EF mount as the Canon. Third party lenses might be able to mount on either Canon or third party TCs... because regardless of whether they are "crop only" or "full frame capable" all third party lenses for Canon use the standard EF mount. None use the EF-S mount.

There are macro extension tubes (including Canon's own Mark II) that are able to accommodate both EF and EF-S lenses. Sometimes those are confused with Canon's "Extenders" terminology for their teleconverters... but extension tubes are different and don't serve the same purpose.

Teleconverters or "extenders" contain optics that change a lens' focal length, while leaving a lens' minimum focusing distance the same.

Macro extension tubes contain no optics and reduce the lens' closest focusing distance, without changing it's focal length.

speters Loc: Grangeville/Idaho

The III version is optimized for Canon newer lenses, so you would not benefit from using it on the 70-200/f4, which is more then 20 years old! But if you have a newer lens, it's worth the price differenece!