> -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Tim Munro > Sent: Monday, June 09, 2003 5:25 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: EOS Another Lens Debate: 300 f/2.8 vs 100-400 IS > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > There's an analysis on the Luminous Landscape web site that concludes > > there's little photographic quality improvement between the > older 2.0X and > > the newer 2.0X II extenders. > > > Maybe so, but I could see the difference between the two as soon as I > upgraded - over 12 months ago. I was never keen to use the series > 1 extender > as I thought the images were just a bit too soft for a lot of my work, but > now I often use the 2xII with my 300/2.8IS with good results. It > seems to be > even better now that I'm using the 1Ds - probably something to do with the > work process with digital files. > > Regards, Tim
Hi Tim, I'm thinking of buying an EF 2X II to use with my EF 70-200 2.8L to see if it can produce images good enough for me to not have to buy yet another EF 300 4L IS. My thinking is that even though the difference between the series I and series II 2X converters while less than huge can make a noticeable improvement vs. the series I EF 2X. I also think that when the EF 2X II is used in combination with the EF 70-200 2.8L IS and the center 2/3 of the image circle in conjunction with Photoshop any shortcomings of the EF 2X and EF 70-200 2.8L IS combination would be effectively compensated for. Hmm, that was an awkward structure but you get the idea. What do you think Tim? Cheers/Chip * **** ******* *********************************************************** * For list instructions, including unsubscribe, see: * http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/eos_list.htm ***********************************************************
