EF 1.4X or 2.0 Extender

[Headshotzx]

I'm talking about the angle of viewing of 200mm, 320mm and 640mm.

A smaller angle of view on the same sensor will clearly magnify something faraway to be near, am I right?

The focal length won't change. Basically if fullframe lens coverage is one big box, the 1.6 crop bodies will only use the middle portions of this box. So, if you stretch the middle portion image to the same resolution/megapixel size, it'll be more telescopic ie 35mm equiv of a focal length.

 

[Srono]

I'm talking about the angle of viewing of 200mm, 320mm and 640mm.
The focal length won't change. Basically if fullframe lens coverage is one big box, the 1.6 crop bodies will only use the middle portions of this box. So, if you stretch the middle portion image to the same resolution/megapixel size, it'll be more telescopic ie 35mm equiv of a focal length.

When u r talking about "great for bird", i think you are talking about focal length because i don't see the reason why smaller angle of view is great.

A smaller angle of view on the same sensor will clearly magnify something faraway to be near, am I right?

Let's use the same sensor, your eye. If you use both hands to limit your angle of view, do you think it helps you to "magnify something faraway to be near"?

The focal length won't change. Basically if fullframe lens coverage is one big box, the 1.6 crop bodies will only use the middle portions of this box. So, if you stretch the middle portion image to the same resolution/megapixel size, it'll be more telescopic ie 35mm equiv of a focal length.

I don't think image size and stretching can simulate the difference in focal length.

Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong

 

[Headshotzx]

Hmm, then why would 10mm on 1.6crop camera and 16mm on fullframe cameras be the same? Doesn't make sense if the magnification is different right?

 

[calebk]

When u r talking about "great for bird", i think you are talking about focal length because i don't see the reason why smaller angle of view is great.



Let's use the same sensor, your eye. If you use both hands to limit your angle of view, do you think it helps you to "magnify something faraway to be near"?




I don't think image size and stretching can simulate the difference in focal length.

Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong

Think of it this way. Shooting with a 100mm lens on a FF camera gives you a subject that fills up x amount of space on the frame.

Assuming your crop camera is of the same resolution, you will get the FoV of a 160mm lens, with the same resolution. Your subject now fills up more of the frame.

 

[Milopok]

Now it appears like this:
70-200 f4 with IS & AF + (1.4x) becomes 98-280mm f5.6 - IS & AF both works.
70-200 f4 with IS & AF + (2x) becomes 140-400mm - IS works but AF don't work.
70-200 f2.8 with IS & AF + (1.4x or 2x) becomes 98-280mm - IS & AF both works.

Thank you all who responded.

 

[Lingkm82]

My advice... dun even try 70-200 F2.8 IS with 2x TC... sux... I owned this combination before...
2x TC is more suitable for prime telephoto lens...

 

[AhSeng]

I'm using the Kenko 1.4X for my 70-200 F2.8L. It's pretty good i would say. Bought it cos the Kenko can be used on all Canon lenses. Canon TC will only work with lenses that they said would work. Read from this link ->
http://www.usa.canon.com/app/pdf/lens/Lens_Extender_chart_new.pdf

"** Extensions EF 1.4x II and 2x II are for exclusive use with EF70-200mm f/2.8L, 70-200mm f/2.8L IS, 70-200mm f/4L, 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L, 135mm f/2L, 180mm f/3.5L Macro, 200mm f/1.8L, 300mm f/2.8 L, 300mm f/4L, 300mm f/4L IS, 400mm f/2.8L IS, 400mm f/4 DO, 400mm f/5.6L, 500mm f/4L IS, 600mm f/4L IS, and 1200mm f/5.6L (Manual focus only when EF 1.4x II is used with EF 100-400mm f/5.6L, 400mm f/5.6L, 500mm f/4.5L, 1200mm f/5.6L, and with 180mm f/3.5 Macro when focused closer than 2.6 feet; or with Extender EF 2x II when used with EF70-200mm f/4L, 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L, 180mm f/3.5L Macro, 300mm f/4L IS, 300 f/4L, 400mm f/4 DO, 400mm f/5.6L, 500mm f/4L, 500mm f/4.5L, 600mm f/4L, and 1200mm f/5.6L)"

 

[Milopok]

Couldn't find the release dates for the 1.4x and the 1.4x II or any review on the differences between the two.

Is the II supposed to be an improvement or we won't notice the difference?
What is the price difference between the two anyway?

 

[kencfk]

So, can the 1.4x II works on 100mm Macro at all? anyone who use this combination pls share your tots.

 

[rush.]

So, can the 1.4x II works on 100mm Macro at all? anyone who use this combination pls share your tots.

Ｃａｎ　２Ｘ　ＩＩ　ｗｏｒｋ　ｏｎ　１００　Ｍａｒｃｏ　？　

Ｉplan to bring in down underwater

 

[Headshotzx]

Ｃａｎ　２Ｘ　ＩＩ　ｗｏｒｋ　ｏｎ　１００　Ｍａｒｃｏ　？　

Ｉplan to bring in down underwater

:bigeyes:

:nono:

 

[dEthANGeL]

:bsmilie: most probably he has access to an underwater housing.

You got to see whether the housing can take the length or not is another.

Another factor you've got to deal with is the AF. AF will CRAWL.

So you've got to deal with the underwater currents PLUS the darkness (if its dark) and - believe me it will - the ability to AF will start to piss you off combining these 2 factors.

Slapping a 2x will degrade any lens' PQ IMO.