<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" xmlns:taxo="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/taxonomy/" version="2.0">
  <channel>
    <title>topic Re: Lens (Extender) Question in EF &amp; RF Lenses</title>
    <link>https://community.usa.canon.com/t5/EF-RF-Lenses/Lens-Extender-Question/m-p/123249#M9752</link>
    <description>&lt;P&gt;&lt;EM&gt;"There is slightly better optics with the 1.4x III over the 1.4x II and most say noticeably&amp;nbsp;better optics with the 2x III over the 2x II ..."&lt;/EM&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;While what you say is probably true, after the print is made I doubt anyone except the most serious pixel peper will see a difference. &amp;nbsp;When it comes down to it, I suppose tele adapters have a place but, you are really saying which one makes the end product less poor. &amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;I do use the 1.4x II very sparringly.&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;However, I don't have any of the latest versions to test for myself.&amp;nbsp;&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;And, I have no intention of buying any version III's.&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
    <pubDate>Mon, 03 Nov 2014 14:21:39 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>ebiggs1</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2014-11-03T14:21:39Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>Lens (Extender) Question</title>
      <link>https://community.usa.canon.com/t5/EF-RF-Lenses/Lens-Extender-Question/m-p/122605#M9747</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Would any benefit be gained by using a series III extender (x1.4 or x2.0) on a series I lens opposed to a series II extender -&amp;nbsp;specifically an EF 500mm f/4 IS USM?&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 29 Oct 2014 21:01:29 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.usa.canon.com/t5/EF-RF-Lenses/Lens-Extender-Question/m-p/122605#M9747</guid>
      <dc:creator>ccougar</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2014-10-29T21:01:29Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Lens (Extender) Question</title>
      <link>https://community.usa.canon.com/t5/EF-RF-Lenses/Lens-Extender-Question/m-p/122631#M9748</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;The III is claimed to be slightly sharper, and the AD glass should reduce CA.&amp;nbsp; How much, and if it's noticable I cannot say.&amp;nbsp; It will not, however, speed up the AF.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;It's a very popular lens to use with an extender, I'm sure you can find someone doing a comparison online.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 29 Oct 2014 23:30:33 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.usa.canon.com/t5/EF-RF-Lenses/Lens-Extender-Question/m-p/122631#M9748</guid>
      <dc:creator>Skirball</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2014-10-29T23:30:33Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Lens (Extender) Question</title>
      <link>https://community.usa.canon.com/t5/EF-RF-Lenses/Lens-Extender-Question/m-p/122729#M9749</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;The series number of the "converter" is not related to the series of the given lens. &amp;nbsp;They are two seperate lenses.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;I don't care for adapters but I have about 6 or 7 of them. &amp;nbsp;I guess I can't justify that statement of not liking them!&amp;nbsp;&lt;img id="smileyfrustrated" class="emoticon emoticon-smileyfrustrated" src="https://community.usa.canon.com/i/smilies/16x16_smiley-frustrated.png" alt="Smiley Frustrated" title="Smiley Frustrated" /&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;I don't have the newest, III, version and I am not likely to buy any. &amp;nbsp;What I can't really get around is the f-stop penalty. &amp;nbsp;You usually use these things on a main lens that is fairly slow in the first place and can not afford to give up any light.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;That said I have used the 1.4x II on my 300mm f2.8 (first series) and it works very well. &amp;nbsp;Also the 1.4x II on my 70-200mm f2.8 &amp;nbsp;II zoom, very good, but in these cases you are only moving to f4.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 30 Oct 2014 14:20:15 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.usa.canon.com/t5/EF-RF-Lenses/Lens-Extender-Question/m-p/122729#M9749</guid>
      <dc:creator>ebiggs1</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2014-10-30T14:20:15Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Lens (Extender) Question</title>
      <link>https://community.usa.canon.com/t5/EF-RF-Lenses/Lens-Extender-Question/m-p/122739#M9750</link>
      <description>&lt;BLOCKQUOTE&gt;&lt;HR /&gt;&lt;a href="https://community.usa.canon.com/t5/user/viewprofilepage/user-id/3485"&gt;@ebiggs1&lt;/a&gt; wrote:&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;P&gt;The series number of the "converter" is not related to the series of the given lens.&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;HR /&gt;&lt;/BLOCKQUOTE&gt;&lt;P&gt;That's not exactly correct.&amp;nbsp; In fact I believe Canon even advertised that you need the new "Series II" Super Telephotos in order to benefit from the increased AF speed.&amp;nbsp; When Canon released the Series III extenders they also updated the 300mm, 400mm, 500mm, and 600mm primes to a Mark II, specifically to work with the Series III extender and provide faster AF speeds.&amp;nbsp; I'm sure they did these 4 lenses since these are the ones usually used with extenders.&amp;nbsp; The new AF technology wasn't backwards compatible with older models (most of which where Mark I), but new models such as the 70-200 II would have the new electronics.&amp;nbsp; So in a sense there was a correlation between the Series III extender and Mark II telephotos.&amp;nbsp; I assumed this is what the OP was referring to.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 30 Oct 2014 14:47:04 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.usa.canon.com/t5/EF-RF-Lenses/Lens-Extender-Question/m-p/122739#M9750</guid>
      <dc:creator>Skirball</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2014-10-30T14:47:04Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Lens (Extender) Question</title>
      <link>https://community.usa.canon.com/t5/EF-RF-Lenses/Lens-Extender-Question/m-p/123139#M9751</link>
      <description>&lt;BLOCKQUOTE&gt;&lt;HR /&gt;&lt;EM&gt;Skirball wrote:&lt;/EM&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BLOCKQUOTE&gt;&lt;HR /&gt;&lt;/BLOCKQUOTE&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;EM&gt;That's not exactly correct.&amp;nbsp; In fact I believe Canon even advertised that you need the new "Series II" Super Telephotos in order to benefit from the increased AF speed.&amp;nbsp; When Canon released the Series III extenders they also updated the 300mm, 400mm, 500mm, and 600mm primes to a Mark II, specifically to work with the Series III extender and provide faster AF speeds.&amp;nbsp; I'm sure they did these 4 lenses since these are the ones usually used with extenders.&amp;nbsp; The new AF technology wasn't backwards compatible with older models (most of which where Mark I), but new models such as the 70-200 II would have the new electronics.&amp;nbsp; So in a sense there was a correlation between the Series III extender and Mark II telephotos.&amp;nbsp; I assumed this is what the OP was referring to.&lt;/EM&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;HR /&gt;&lt;/BLOCKQUOTE&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;No, the Canon 70-200mm 2.8 IS II is not one of the&amp;nbsp;new "Series II" Super Telephoto lenses so it not compatible with the new AF technology designed into the Series III teleconverters.&amp;nbsp;&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;There is slightly better optics with the 1.4x III over the 1.4x II and most say noticeably&amp;nbsp;better optics with the 2x III over the 2x II so it still may be worth paying extra for the Series III with your older EF 500mm f/4 IS USM. &amp;nbsp;&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Sun, 02 Nov 2014 15:41:11 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.usa.canon.com/t5/EF-RF-Lenses/Lens-Extender-Question/m-p/123139#M9751</guid>
      <dc:creator>MikeSowsun</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2014-11-02T15:41:11Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Lens (Extender) Question</title>
      <link>https://community.usa.canon.com/t5/EF-RF-Lenses/Lens-Extender-Question/m-p/123249#M9752</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;&lt;EM&gt;"There is slightly better optics with the 1.4x III over the 1.4x II and most say noticeably&amp;nbsp;better optics with the 2x III over the 2x II ..."&lt;/EM&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;While what you say is probably true, after the print is made I doubt anyone except the most serious pixel peper will see a difference. &amp;nbsp;When it comes down to it, I suppose tele adapters have a place but, you are really saying which one makes the end product less poor. &amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;I do use the 1.4x II very sparringly.&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;However, I don't have any of the latest versions to test for myself.&amp;nbsp;&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;And, I have no intention of buying any version III's.&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 03 Nov 2014 14:21:39 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.usa.canon.com/t5/EF-RF-Lenses/Lens-Extender-Question/m-p/123249#M9752</guid>
      <dc:creator>ebiggs1</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2014-11-03T14:21:39Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

