| Accept Cookies | Customize | Refuse Cookies |
|
The following opinions have been automatically translated with Google Translate.
  | sent on 18 Ottobre 2022 Pros: Construction, weight. Cons: Huge, at least on my specimen, drop in sharpness, MAF difficult at extreme focal lengths. Opinion: I don't know, but I bought it to pair it, when needed, to the 80-200 Tokina AF AT-x pro. Precisely on this there is a huge decrease in sharpness and increase in aberrations, indeed, it seems that it does not really focus, despite the camera indicating the occurred AF with halos everywhere on the frame. On fixed lenses, and not 2.8 zoom all this is non-existent. I repeat as above at least on my specimen, I think I took a failed version or with problems, maybe not compatible with the Tokina. |
 | sent on 08 Gennaio 2021 Pros: Compatibility on Canon Eos 5D MK III and 6D MK II bodies with all the optics of my kit, imperceptible loss of sharpness, light and compact. Cons: I didn't find any Opinion: Looking for the Pro 300 1.4 DGX on the used market, for the pros illustrated by multiple reviewers, I found a seller who was selling in bulk with the Pro 300 DGX 1.4x also the Pro 300 2x DGX of which I was a little skeptical. Given the favorable price I took them in pairs and I did not regret it because I have to say that for both are worth the same pros and to date no cons, with the optics with which I use them, especially Canon 100mm f2.8 Macro USM and Canon 70-200 f4 L IS USM. Concerned about possible incompatibilities with the 6D MK II complained of by other reviewers, I have to say that with mine he did not manifest any problems. Over-recommended |
  | sent on 13 Novembre 2020 Pros: Compactness, lightness, price, value for money, AF and IS maintenance even with > f.4.0 Cons: I haven't found any so far Opinion: I had the Canon Extender 2x II and, mounted with the 70-200 L f.4 IS USM, did not keep the AF, but only stabilization (as indicated by the House), and not only that: it was bulky and heavyer and only enthipped to this goal, among other Canon EF that I have in my kit. I decided to take this multiplier, bought used in excellent conditions in the physical store and with a guarantee of one year for 100 euros and immediately surprised me: lightness and footprint to a minimum, quality, combined with the 70-200 above, comparable to the original Canon II, and above all maintenance of the AF and stabilization. To my great satisfaction I also noted that it also engages all the other objectives with EF grafting while maintaining all the automatisms with these too. Obviously the Canon Extender 2x II I resold it to a guy who had the 300mm. f. 2.8 and the 70-200 f.2.8 with which it works excellently. |
 | sent on 30 Ottobre 2020 Pros: Value for money, comfort in travel/excursions, Robustness Cons: Normal sharpness drop but certainly not so marked Opinion: I have had it for years and those who buy it know what to expect as pros and cons. I believe that the people are in favour of choice. I also use it with the 70/200 F4 and outdoors it does not miss a beat despite the loss of stop and, honestly, I did not experience any particular problems of sharpness or anything else. I also used it with the 150/600 G2 with easel to photograph the moon and I cannot complain, despite the actual decrease in sharpness found; I'm going to post a picture soon in order to let the picture itself speak. If you travel a lot, I recommend it for sure! |
  | sent on 18 Giugno 2020 Pros: value for money, doubling of focal point, construction Cons: Sharpening, autofocus not always ready, not tropicalized... Opinion: Now I use it frequently, especially in this period when I am approaching birds having a hawthorn that only reaches 200mm. Lights and shadows, the lights I would say that are greater: it is well built and reliable, the doubling of focal is very useful and in photos with good/excellent light the shots that you get are satisfactory; the shadows are partly physiological and that is the closing of at least one stop and more that means starting at least from a lens of f 2.8 if you photograph in discreet light, the problems come when the light begins to run out. If the light is inadequate everything gets complicated both for the autofocus that struggles to take the subject and the general yield that tends to dull everything a bit. The real shadow however is in general the loss of sharpness on the whole photo, which is attenuated by closing the diaphragm but only if you can (i.e. if we are in excellent light). Summing up I can say that I am satisfied if we consider that I paid 150 euros and that in some cases it becomes indispensable, that if the light there is in abundance the shots suffer very little from the drop in sharpness. Until I can afford a beautiful long native focal, I keep it tight! |
 | sent on 21 Novembre 2017 Pros: Quality, value for money, compactness, discretion Cons: Accentuates the difference in yield between the various aperture diaphragms multiplied (but perhaps it is normal) Opinion: I took it almost for gaming, in a well-known but trusted site, much less than the amazon price shown on the card. Otherwise I do not understand why it's relegated to out-of-production: it's still on the Kenko product page, as "premium 2.0x", while the HD DGX is referred to as "standard 2.0x" and is on the net new and available a little everywhere. Open and tested in the evening at home, on my 200 2.8 L old, for which I mainly took it: so terrible conditions for a first try, a 400 f5.6 equivalent in poor artificial light .. instead, already here and for this reason I immediately gained my favors. The AF is kept fine, certainly with little light and close distances, the AF can lose the bandwidth and make a couple of end of stroke. If the subject is not completely out of focus, focusing is quick and accurate as without the 2x . This is confirmed by the evidence then made in optimum light,Coupled 200 2.8 and 2x telescopes always get well and quickly the distance even close to the minimum, 1.5m, where the resulting 400mm becomes almost a macro. The machine (5d2 in my case) recognizes the lens, as if 2x was not there, but also automatically doubled the diaphragms, 2.8 to 5.6 and so on. RnThis is very advantageous because it means that functions are maintained they assume target recognition (vignetting correction, digital objective optimization, distortion, etc.) but at the same time there is no risk of error in the opening. rn I still could not verify if it actually loses less than 2 stops in true brightness, just I can eventually update it. The rendering seems great! To honestly, by comparing successful shots (correct focus and no microrose) at f5.6, f8 and f11, you can see that the 2x telescope slightly accentuates the difference between f2.8 and two stops following in the non multiplied objective. Result: While the 200 2.8 smooth af 2.8 & egravis; already very good, and gets great at f4 and excellent at f5.6, once doubled with this Kenko the goal becomes good at TA (= f5.6), certainly acceptable in the middle but a little less incisive than the self itself , and a soft thread at the edges, while at f8 and f11 the yield returns really great and excellent as the lens does not multiply, over the entire frame. Already in f6.3 - f 7.1, there is an improvement. In fact, I expect that I will use it mainly at f8, where the bottom off is still nicely, and the blur remains very nice. In contrast to the smooth optics, they dance at 3 speeds: 2 for the relative opening halved, and one for double focus. Inevitable then have to resort to 640-800 iso even in daylight. I imagine that with a stabilized canvas is another life. The Kenko 2x adds just over 40mm of boss and about 200g of weight, so, to say, my "400" f5.6L does not reach 18cm from the junction ( without haze), and is of a pelor under 1000gr without plugs: we are well below the 26cm and 1250gr of the compact yet 400 f5.6 "true". Okay, the current Sigma and Tamron 100-400 stabilized are just a little bigger and more heavy than my 400-kit, and they offer the versatility of zoom and stabilizer. However for me the advantage is in the bag, in addition to the excellent 200 f2.8 L (which renders the above zoom if they dream), if necessary a 400mm f5.6 of quality. All for just over 100 euros (with the 350 spent for the 200 f2.8 used yet I do not arrive at 500 in all ...) and with just 2 more on the bag.rn Chromosome then, and recommended! Ciaorn |
 | sent on 12 Agosto 2017 Pros: Price, sharpness Cons: I do not know Opinion: I bought it without wanting, that is, I was lending in a camera shop and not to make the store owner a problem for a return ..... I preferred to get a duplicator too (and here I did not know) if Not brand. But in the end, I am convinced of the opposite; On another occasion i borrowed two original duplicators of Sigma 1.4 and 2.00, but compared to the Kenko Pro 300 DGX, despite having tried only with Sigma fixed targets, I noticed a sharp abysmal difference and color for the Kenko.rnSoldi expended Well for those who do not want to faint with an original canvas. |
 | sent on 23 Giugno 2017 Pros: Price, robustness, sharpness ... "Made in Japan". Cons: ... maybe the fact that it is not tropicalized, but it is asking too much! Opinion: For the price paid, only positive opinions !!! rnPurchased new for € 128.00 June 2017, including shipping charges !!! rnOctually the end quality is a bit losing but nothing irremediable, if you snap with good light the result obtained is More than satisfactory, so more than satisfied! |
 | sent on 20 Aprile 2016 Pros: Price, quality / strength Cons: tropicalization lack Opinion: I bought and used often with 5d mark III and 70-200 L is 2.8ii and 100 macro 2.8 L. I can not fault it. The ficus great car and the yield very good. In short, as mentioned in contrast, it is not tropicalization but its price is worth every penny and I do not think you could ask for more. I recommend it to everybody. |
 | sent on 20 Gennaio 2015 Pros: see opinion Cons: see opinion or when sincerely nothing Opinion: Upon arriving I did a simple test ... I mounted on my 1DS Mark 2 in conjunction with the Tamron 24/70 2.8- PERFECT NO PROBLEM. The autofocus locks perfectly even under difficult conditions today was a rainy and gray and I photographed from the window of the house at full apertura.rnMa difficie we tested, the one that I wanted to più.rnSempre Mark 2 (full frame so) and Tamron 150 / 600- maximum extension for a total of 1200 mm! rncavalletto, mirror raised f 6 Original (hence twice) 1/40 second, I photographed an earthenware pot-holder on the balcony of the house which is one gnomo.rnL'autofocus does not hook, but the light was really little, I's focused hand smoothly iso 1200.rnPostero the photos in my gallery test objectives, for those interested can make us jump, do not know how to put it into this recenzione.rnIL MIO JUDGEMENT AND 'ABSOLUTELY POSITIVOrn |
 | sent on 12 Settembre 2014 Pros: Good image rendering, robust build quality more than proportionate to the price, AF responsive and secure, lightweight. Cons: It is not weather sealed; the body does not have the quality of Canon lenses (white series). Opinion: This afternoon after just two days after ordering, I got the two multipliers of Kenko (1.4x and 2x DGX PRO 300) .rndopo a bit of test shots (5D Mk III and EF 200 f2.8 L) first impressions are positive .rnPremetto that I can not make any comparison with other multipliers, but only a comparison of the quality and the speed of AF, with and senza.rnIn principle there is no sensation or degradation of the difficulties in the use of AF. rnNell'uso cascade (1.4 + 2) AF had some uncertainty about just "subjects" special. I am referring to white clouds and dark areas heavily (in the evening) .rnAppena it returns to the 1.4 or 2, you do not feel even those uncertainties nell'AF.rnLa picture quality is about the same. Obvious that losing one or two stop the effect will be different from f2.8 bouquet. Let us also that the light passes through an additional group of lenses. On balance "the game worth the candle!" RnPer the record with the 1.4x from f2.8 to f4 switches; while with the 2x f2.8 you switch tof5.6; both (1.4x and 2x) moves from f2.8 to f8.rnSulla the 5D Mk III AF problems whatsoever, whether individually mounted is fast and has no uncertainty! |
 | sent on 14 Giugno 2013 Pros: Price, sharpness at TA. Cons: No tropicalization, maf in low light. Opinion: This opinion is made combining the Canon EF 300mm f/4L IS USM and the 5D mark III.rnSono was absolutely impressed by the value for money of this Teleconverter (I purchased it in the UK for 150 euro new). The sharpness is excellent at room temperature and baked files are free from vignetting or aberrations. My example requires a 1-stop underexposure to get the best results, but I consider it a virtue and not a defect, since the gain obtained. The maf in low light conditions can be inaccurate, while it is fast and reliable with normal light, on all cross-type points of my reflex.rnIn conclusion that TC does very well the work for which it is purchased and even if it is not the Canon III, to which only the envy tropicalisation, represents the best possible compromise to 1/3 of the costo.rn |
 | sent on 01 Maggio 2013 Pros: Good value for money, lightweight, excellent clarity and sharpness wide open, no vignetting and chromatic aberration. Cons: At the time I found no flaw for the use that I do, maybe I would have preferred the case cordura zipper as the Sigma 2X, this faux leather bag cheap I do not like. Opinion: This 2X teleconverter Kenko Teleplus Pro 300 I was suggested by a friend photographer but I did not listen to him and I did my own thing. When I got to try it and compare it with my Sigma 2X I had to change my mind: in particular light conditions I find it more than 2X Sigma. Do not be fooled by the low price compared to the expensive and famous Canon teleconverter that gets along very well, I'm glad I bought it. |
JuzaPhoto contains affiliate links from Amazon and Ebay and JuzaPhoto earn a commission in case of purchase through affiliate links.May Beauty Be Everywhere Around Me
