70-200 F2.8 GM II sample shots with TC 2x?

SimonV · Jan 26, 2025

Has anyone here ever tested their 70-200 F2.8 GM II lens to see how it works with TCs? I've read and watched a lot of content about it but one thing reviewers rarely do is take the same exact subject with and without the converter and compare the cropped version to the TC one. It's hard to compare if the non-TC shot is of a tree and the TC-version of a bird.

I did one such experiment when comparing the 100-400 GM and the 70-200 GM II without a converter (I'm currently considering purchasing a 2x TC since the 1.4 TC is such a small difference), and after upscaling the 70-200 @ 200mm was as sharp if not a bit sharper than the 100-400 @ 400mm.

From past experience every 2x TC degrades the image too much, even with lenses like the Nikkor 300mm F2.8 VR II which is touted as one of the best lenses to use with TCs. I've heard talk about the newer mirrorless TCs being even better though, so I'm curious. I'd be using the TC mostly for wildlife photography so it would make the 70-200 even more versatile.

However, I find that spoken opinions rarely helps with things like this, so if anyone has any samples they've taken with the 70-200 2.8 GM II + 2x TC I'd be interested in seeing them! Even better if they're at full resolution, images that are at most 2000px don't really help when judging image quality.

UncleVanya · Jan 26, 2025

I’ll be interested as well. I own the lens and the 1.4x.

Impulses · Jan 27, 2025

SimonV said:
Has anyone here ever tested their 70-200 F2.8 GM II lens to see how it works with TCs? I've read and watched a lot of content about it but one thing reviewers rarely do is take the same exact subject with and without the converter and compare the cropped version to the TC one. It's hard to compare if the non-TC shot is of a tree and the TC-version of a bird.

I did one such experiment when comparing the 100-400 GM and the 70-200 GM II without a converter (I'm currently considering purchasing a 2x TC since the 1.4 TC is such a small difference), and after upscaling the 70-200 @ 200mm was as sharp if not a bit sharper than the 100-400 @ 400mm.

I find that surprising tbh, curious to peep that if you've shared it anywhere...

SimonV said:
From past experience every 2x TC degrades the image too much, even with lenses like the Nikkor 300mm F2.8 VR II which is touted as one of the best lenses to use with TCs. I've heard talk about the newer mirrorless TCs being even better though, so I'm curious. I'd be using the TC mostly for wildlife photography so it would make the 70-200 even more versatile.

However, I find that spoken opinions rarely helps with things like this, so if anyone has any samples they've taken with the 70-200 2.8 GM II + 2x TC I'd be interested in seeing them! Even better if they're at full resolution, images that are at most 2000px don't really help when judging image quality.

If upscaling the 70-200 works so well, would you be looking up upscale and use the 2x TC together or...? Just curious!

SimonV · Jan 28, 2025

Impulses said:
SimonV said:

Has anyone here ever tested their 70-200 F2.8 GM II lens to see how it works with TCs? I've read and watched a lot of content about it but one thing reviewers rarely do is take the same exact subject with and without the converter and compare the cropped version to the TC one. It's hard to compare if the non-TC shot is of a tree and the TC-version of a bird.

I did one such experiment when comparing the 100-400 GM and the 70-200 GM II without a converter (I'm currently considering purchasing a 2x TC since the 1.4 TC is such a small difference), and after upscaling the 70-200 @ 200mm was as sharp if not a bit sharper than the 100-400 @ 400mm.

Click to expand...

I find that surprising tbh, curious to peep that if you've shared it anywhere...

Impulses said:

From past experience every 2x TC degrades the image too much, even with lenses like the Nikkor 300mm F2.8 VR II which is touted as one of the best lenses to use with TCs. I've heard talk about the newer mirrorless TCs being even better though, so I'm curious. I'd be using the TC mostly for wildlife photography so it would make the 70-200 even more versatile.

However, I find that spoken opinions rarely helps with things like this, so if anyone has any samples they've taken with the 70-200 2.8 GM II + 2x TC I'd be interested in seeing them! Even better if they're at full resolution, images that are at most 2000px don't really help when judging image quality.

Click to expand...

If upscaling the 70-200 works so well, would you be looking up upscale and use the 2x TC together or...? Just curious!

I will post samples once I find the time to make some more comparisons, the couple I have now aren't conclusive but an indication. Granted, the 100-400 is usually better in optimal conditions, but F5.6 easily degrades IQ when it forces higher ISO, which can impact what we see as sharp.

I also didn't own the lenses at the same time so I can't make 1:1 comparisons, which might make the experiment moot. But I will have to wait for similar lighting conditions to see if I can get a closer side-by-side comparison.

The 100-400 is definitely sharp, but often seems to lack that critical sharpness that the 70-200 seems to have. I don't doubt that the TC will make it worse on the 70-200, but I will have to try it for myself to see how much degradation there is.

ray_burnimage · Jan 28, 2025

UncleVanya said:
I’ll be interested as well. I own the lens and the 1.4x.

I own this combo too, and I’m also interested….

jayboo · Jan 28, 2025

I have the 70-200 GMII and use it with the 1.4 and x2 TC's, I will add some samples if they are any help but I have no comparison shots. For my use I have found the x2TC perfectly fine, to the point that for me I saw no need or purpose to get the 100-400. On the A7RV and A7CR with 61mps I use the TC's and crop mode for extra reach and have recently added the 300GM for when I want longer, again to use with the TC 's. I've been really impressed and happy with the x2 TC on that lens. Use of both lenses for me is mostly sports but shots shared are just general shots mostly around home.

View attachment 8d057855b2be4de3b4d214e6adc8b039.jpg

Sorry, I gave up trying to add full size images after the first, you don't have to live with our almost dial up internet. Last image of the Robin was shot at an angle through a window and picked up some odd reflections and is a huge crop, but to me still shows the quality of the lens plus TC.

Jayne
https://www.flickr.com/photos/jayneboo/

SimonV · Jan 28, 2025

jayboo said:
I have the 70-200 GMII and use it with the 1.4 and x2 TC's, I will add some samples if they are any help but I have no comparison shots. For my use I have found the x2TC perfectly fine, to the point that for me I saw no need or purpose to get the 100-400. On the A7RV and A7CR with 61mps I use the TC's and crop mode for extra reach and have recently added the 300GM for when I want longer, again to use with the TC 's. I've been really impressed and happy with the x2 TC on that lens. Use of both lenses for me is mostly sports but shots shared are just general shots mostly around home.

View attachment 8d057855b2be4de3b4d214e6adc8b039.jpg

Sorry, I gave up trying to add full size images after the first, you don't have to live with our almost dial up internet. Last image of the Robin was shot at an angle through a window and picked up some odd reflections and is a huge crop, but to me still shows the quality of the lens plus TC.

Jayne
https://www.flickr.com/photos/jayneboo/

Thanks for sharing some samples! They look very very good to my eye, nothing like the TCs I've seen previously on DSLRs, very little degradation if any.

UncleVanya · Jan 28, 2025

I misread it. I own the 70-200/4 g II. Not the 70-200/2.8 gm II.

SimonV · Jan 28, 2025

I did a very quick comparison, it gets very dark at this time of year so I used what I had at the moment, will have to do more when there's bright outside.

Here's three shots at 400mm F5.6, 200mm F2.8 and 200mm F5.6 upscaled. All taken at ISO 100, on a tripod with a 10 sec timer.

Note: It says "+ 2X teleconverter" on all shots, probably because I overlaid and aligned the images in Photoshop using the original 200mm + 2X converter as the base layer. The actual info is in the captions.

With 2x TC, 400mm @ F5.6mm

200mm F5.6

200mm F2.8

And some close crops:

With 2x TC, 400mm @ F5.6mm

200mm F5.6

200mm F2.8

Not the most controlled experiment, but it already illustrates well how there's clearly more detail with the 2x TC attached, and a clear IQ advantage vs. upscaling the 200mm. I will do more "real life" scenarios when there's more sunlight.

In dimmer conditions the plain 200mm will naturally be better for image quality, for instance when the F5.6 forces a 12800 ISO vs 6400 or 3200 or even lower on the 200mm @ F2.8.

fboss · Jan 29, 2025

When I had the 70-200 GM II, I rented both the 1.4 TC and 2.0 TC, and did a lot of testing. Overall the images from with 1.4x cropped were at least as good , and in some cases slightly better than with the 2x. I bought the 1.4x and used it a lot with this lens. (and ended up getting the 200-600mm which of course is in another league from 400mm )

SimonV · Jan 29, 2025

fboss said:
When I had the 70-200 GM II, I rented both the 1.4 TC and 2.0 TC, and did a lot of testing. Overall the images from with 1.4x cropped were at least as good , and in some cases slightly better than with the 2x. I bought the 1.4x and used it a lot with this lens. (and ended up getting the 200-600mm which of course is in another league from 400mm )

I assume you mean you upscaled the 1.4x images to match the 2.0x? You wouldn't happen to still have some sample shots? Would be really interesting to see.

fboss · Jan 29, 2025

SimonV said:
fboss said:

When I had the 70-200 GM II, I rented both the 1.4 TC and 2.0 TC, and did a lot of testing. Overall the images from with 1.4x cropped were at least as good , and in some cases slightly better than with the 2x. I bought the 1.4x and used it a lot with this lens. (and ended up getting the 200-600mm which of course is in another league from 400mm )

Click to expand...

I assume you mean you upscaled the 1.4x images to match the 2.0x? You wouldn't happen to still have some sample shots? Would be really interesting to see.

Yes I did.

Some quick examples (I can share the RAW files later this week, if you want).

I used a tripod and/or took multiple pictures for each and kept the best one.

280mm f/4.0

400mm f/8 (took the best of the series, with others at f/5.6, etc. )

280mm (1.4x) on the left, 400mm (2x) on the right

SimonV · Jan 29, 2025

fboss said:
SimonV said:

fboss said:

When I had the 70-200 GM II, I rented both the 1.4 TC and 2.0 TC, and did a lot of testing. Overall the images from with 1.4x cropped were at least as good , and in some cases slightly better than with the 2x. I bought the 1.4x and used it a lot with this lens. (and ended up getting the 200-600mm which of course is in another league from 400mm )

Click to expand...

I assume you mean you upscaled the 1.4x images to match the 2.0x? You wouldn't happen to still have some sample shots? Would be really interesting to see.

Click to expand...

Yes I did.

Some quick examples (I can share the RAW files later this week, if you want).

I used a tripod and/or took multiple pictures for each and kept the best one.

280mm f/4.0

400mm f/8 (took the best of the series, with others at f/5.6, etc. )

280mm (1.4x) on the left, 400mm (2x) on the right

Thanks! Indeed the 1.4x is clearly better here. I have heard that the Sony TCs can vary quite a bit from copy to copy, but how are you supposed to know when it's that, right?

The 2x definitely looks very smudgy and soft here, and strangely also like there's less in focus than the 1.4x even though it's at F8, maybe the extended focal length plays some part in that.

Thanks for the samples! I will have to do some more testing as well, hopefully soon we'll see some sunlight here.

Philex · Jan 29, 2025

The 2x TC has to be tested at distance - from like 20m onwards. That's where the IQ falls apart and will be at max on level with a cropped image of the native lens. As per my multiple experiences with 2x TC copies and various lenses. Plus you loose a lot of light.

Close-up performance is usually great, however.

SimonV · Jan 29, 2025

Philex said:
The 2x TC has to be tested at distance - from like 20m onwards. That's where the IQ falls apart and will be at max on level with a cropped image of the native lens. As per my multiple experiences with 2x TC copies and various lenses. Plus you loose a lot of light.

Close-up performance is usually great, however.

Ok, thanks that's good to know. Do you know why it falls apart at further but not closer distances?

fboss · Jan 29, 2025

Philex said:
The 2x TC has to be tested at distance - from like 20m onwards. That's where the IQ falls apart and will be at max on level with a cropped image of the native lens. As per my multiple experiences with 2x TC copies and various lenses. Plus you loose a lot of light.

Close-up performance is usually great, however.

it's a good point, I didn't realize the quality was getting worse with the distance.

Just checked some other pictures taken with the 1.4x and 2x. At close distance (< 20m), the 2x is equivalent to the 1.4x cropped (same subject size). At a longer distance, the images with the 2x degrade and the 1.4x cropped has more sharpness.

Here is at < 20m where at 400mm (2x) it's about the same sharpness as at 280mm (1.4x) cropped.

280mm on the left / 400mm on the right

280mm f/4

400mm f/5.6

AeroPhotographer · Jan 29, 2025

I have a Sony 1.4x. It is inferior to upsizing my Sony 100-400 and 70-200 f4 macro. But it allows closer macro focus with the 70-200 and I find that worthwhile. Closes is 0.5x without and 0.75x with. And it increases macro working distance 1.4x, which is also worthwhile.

Alan

SimonV · Jan 30, 2025

Here are some more samples, this time with a bit more light and >20m, still not ideal but testing at ISO 100 from a stable surface. I'd say these are taken at somewhere between 30m and 40m.

There is still noticeably more detail in the 400mm shot after upscaling the 200mm, although a bit less contrast. Not so much that you can't get close with a little editing.

400mm @ F5.6, cropped

200mm @ F2.8, cropped

The following shot was taken accidentally at 356mm, the 70-200 GM II has a very light zoom ring in my experience. It's not quite as light as the manual focus ring but often still really easy to accidentally nudge it, is this normal?

356mm @ F5.6, cropped

200mm @ F2.8, cropped

ISO is the biggest factor from my tests so far, so I would probably leave the TC at home if going out at any other time than in bright light. When the lack of light leads to 12800 on the 200 + TC and 3200 on the plain 200mm, the difference is huge and there's no contest that even upscaling is better.

Arcimboldo · Jan 30, 2025

fboss said:
SimonV said:

fboss said:

When I had the 70-200 GM II, I rented both the 1.4 TC and 2.0 TC, and did a lot of testing. Overall the images from with 1.4x cropped were at least as good , and in some cases slightly better than with the 2x. I bought the 1.4x and used it a lot with this lens. (and ended up getting the 200-600mm which of course is in another league from 400mm )

Click to expand...

I assume you mean you upscaled the 1.4x images to match the 2.0x? You wouldn't happen to still have some sample shots? Would be really interesting to see.

Click to expand...

Yes I did.

Some quick examples (I can share the RAW files later this week, if you want).

I used a tripod and/or took multiple pictures for each and kept the best one.

280mm f/4.0

400mm f/8 (took the best of the series, with others at f/5.6, etc. )

280mm (1.4x) on the left, 400mm (2x) on the right

I absolutely came to the same conclusion back then - sorry, I have thrown away the test images. I suspect that people liking the 70-200 GM II with the 2x TC mainly shoot genres where you don't need border, let alone corner, sharpness. I do landscapes, and even the 1.4x is just acceptable.

FWIW, however, the 300 GM works great with the 2x, even in the corners. So, the takeaway is probably that zooms are a bit too weak for the 2x, although that might change when Sony finally comes out with a 2x Mk II.

CalvinBird · Jan 30, 2025

From Alpha Shooters, Sony 100-400 VS 70-200 F2.8 GM II With 2x Teleconverter at 400mm, FYI.

https://www.alphashooters.com/compare/sony-100-400-vs-70-200-ii-with-2x/

70-200 F2.8 GM II sample shots with TC 2x?

Leading Member

Senior Member

Forum Pro

Leading Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Leading Member

Senior Member

Leading Member

Forum Enthusiast

Leading Member

Forum Enthusiast

Leading Member

Well-known member

Leading Member

Forum Enthusiast

Senior Member

Leading Member

Leading Member

Active member

Similar threads

Keyboard shortcuts