Canon 70-200 F4 IS II USM Lens: I have wanted this lens for a while now so I bit the bullet and bought it new from a local authorized Canon dealer. I have a question? Would a Canon 1.4...

authorizeduser Loc: Monroe, Michigan

I have wanted this lens for a while now so I bit the bullet and bought it new from a local authorized Canon dealer. I have a question? Would a Canon 1.4 EF II teleconverter benefit me with this lens? I believe an F4 becomes an F5.6. Have no idea what it would do to performance and IQ.

LFingar Loc: Claverack, NY

authorizeduser wrote:

I have wanted this lens for a while now so I bit the bullet and bought it new from a local authorized Canon dealer. I have a question? Would a Canon 1.4 EF II teleconverter benefit me with this lens? I believe an F4 becomes an F5.6. Have no idea what it would do to performance and IQ.

Since the Mk III works with your lens, I assume that the Mk II will also, but, to be absolutely sure you should check.
You will see some degradation of IQ, but, with a lens that sharp it should be minor. The auto-focus may slow down a slight bit but I doubt it will be noticeable. I have a 1.4x III that I used on my EF 70-200 f/2.8 L II with both a 7DII and a 5DIV several time with very good results. I only noted slight differences in IQ and auto-focus performance. What camera body will you be using it on?

authorizeduser Loc: Monroe, Michigan

LFingar wrote:

Since the Mk III works with your lens, I assume th... (show quote)

I have the Canon EOS 80D

CHG_CANON Loc: the Windy City

A mark II extender will work, optically, but you'd be better off with the mark III extender, especially if you need responsive auto focus performance for wildlife or action, even for an airshow.

authorizeduser Loc: Monroe, Michigan

CHG_CANON wrote:

A mark II extender will work, optically, but you'd be better off with the mark III extender, especially if you need responsive auto focus performance for wildlife or action, even for an airshow.

Thanks for the info. If the mark II teleconverter is going to degrade the lens performance to a level of questionable performance then I will just use the lens as is. Being the Canon 80D is a crop sensor camera, the 200mm already acts like a 320mm. I simply can not justify $420 for the mark III teleconverter since it is most likely something which will only be used here and there thus sitting in my bag most of the time. I have read the difference between the mark II and III is primarily optics but since I have never used either teleconverter, I do not know what performance degradation I will experience.

CHG_CANON Loc: the Windy City

authorizeduser wrote:

Thanks for the info. If the mark II teleconverter... (show quote)

No, the difference is the electronics, not the optics that are the same in the vII and vIII. The weakness of an 1.4x extender is that on a shorter lens, this 40% increase moves just from 200 to 280mm which really isn't much of an increase at all. Yes, then there's the crop factor. If in the stands for a HS soccer game, these tools combined can help give a clear image of players at midfield, a usage of this type of configuration I've used in the past (with more cropping). But, the reality is that the 1.4x extender just doesn't add that much, the loss of 1-stop of light being somewhat more impact than the increase in the effective focal length.

authorizeduser Loc: Monroe, Michigan

CHG_CANON wrote:

No, the difference is the electronics, not the opt... (show quote)

Thanks for the comeback. Like I said, seems like the cons out weight the pros in this instance. I can pickup a Canon 1.4x mark ii used for $195 but I just spent $1200 on this Canon 70-200 F4L IS II lens and it does seem like an injustice to the lens to use a device which will degrade performance while returning little.

CHG_CANON Loc: the Windy City

authorizeduser wrote:

Thanks for the comeback. Like I said, seems like the cons out weight the pros in this instance. I can pickup a Canon 1.4x mark ii used for $195 but I just spent $1200 on this Canon 70-200 F4L IS II lens and it does seem like an injustice to the lens to use a device which will degrade performance while returning little.

I use both the 1.4x and 2x extenders a lot, just not on the 70-200 lenses. I've only done testing to confirm the image quality is acceptable for a 70-200, but with the limited oomph as discussed above. Keep an eye out for used versions. They have no moving parts, so they're little risk of finding one damaged in the secondary market.

Notorious T.O.D. Loc: Harrisburg, North Carolina

I use the 2x Extender III with my 70-200 f/2.8 IS II and find the results acceptable. The 1.4x doesn’t add enough to this lens in my opinion. You might want to save up for a 100-400 version I that can be found in fine condition in the $700-$800 price range. Assuming you really need the long end range.

LFingar Loc: Claverack, NY

I see from another post that you returned the lens to the dealer, so, I assume you no longer need an extender. I have a like new EF 1.4x III that I was going to offer you at a very good price. I never use it anymore, and, I rarely used it anyway. I have a 100-400 L II and now that I have gone to an EOS R I can use my EF 2x III with it. If you ever have need for a 1.4x just PM me.

JimRPhoto Loc: Raleigh NC

I have the same lens, and also the 1.4x Canon teleconverter. It gets you to nearly 300mm. I have used it to capture people on things like a high roller-coaster ride, and so I must use a fast shutter speed. I have seen no noticeable degradation in IQ. In fact, I usually frame the photo to bring in the faces even more, and it is so sharp, you would not notice any degradation at all in the final image. Now I’d expect that others with a more technical way of evaluation might be able to demonstrate degradation. My point is that in practice, it is a great combination and I have no regrets about buying the lens or teleconverter. And it is great to use because everything is fully functional. Good luck with your decision. JimR

hrblaine

authorizeduser wrote:

I have wanted this lens for a while now so I bit the bullet and bought it new from a local authorized Canon dealer. I have a question? Would a Canon 1.4 EF II teleconverter benefit me with this lens? I believe an F4 becomes an F5.6. Have no idea what it would do to performance and IQ.

Wouldn't help any, that's for sure. I've had the 70-200 for years and have never used it with an extender. It's a great lens, the images are sharp with great color. If you need more reach, see if you can find a 70-300 on eBay. I haven't checked but you might find a lightly used one at a decent price. Harry

hrblaine

" If you need more reach, see if you can find a 70-300 on eBay. I haven't checked but you might find a lightly used one at a decent price. "

Just checked. There's one for under $100.00 and several for under $200.

DeanS Loc: Capital City area of North Carolina

authorizeduser wrote:

I have wanted this lens for a while now so I bit the bullet and bought it new from a local authorized Canon dealer. I have a question? Would a Canon 1.4 EF II teleconverter benefit me with this lens? I believe an F4 becomes an F5.6. Have no idea what it would do to performance and IQ.

Suggest you ck out some of the eagle phots posted by Regis. Virtually every one of his eagles he has shot with a 5DSr and the 100-400 with a 1.4 t/c and sometimes a combo of t/c setup. His eagles are second to none.