Kenko 2x Teleplus PRO 300. Any good?

Richee · 1 Apr 2013

I recently got myself a Canon 70-200 f/2.8 II and would like a 2x teleconverter for it.

Conventional wisdom is that I should get the Canon Extender EF 2x III but that is significantly more expensive than the Kenko. I've read some good reviews on the Kenko and I am thinking of getting it. Before taking the plunge, thought I'd ask in here for opinions.

TIA

Richee

Ben6 · 1 Apr 2013

The 1.4 is excellent but cant help with the 2x sorry.

vulcan2912 · 2 Apr 2013

I've owned and used both the tcons on a 70-200 Mk2 and preferred the images from the Canon.

Cheers
Gary

AHILL · 2 Apr 2013

With a nice bit of glass like the Canon 70-200 f/2.8 I think it would be silly to put on anything less than the Canon 2X mkiii.
I have both these teleconverters and the difference between the two is like chalk & cheese. both do a good job but the quality of the Canon 2X surpasses that of the Kenco in sharpness & IQ.
the only plus side of the Kenco is that it will fit other lenses and will allow stacking where as the canon will not.

modchild · 2 Apr 2013

When I bought a 70-200 f2.8 MkII I actually bought a Kenko Pro300 DGX 2x to go with it. Unfortunately the converter was faulty and wouldn't AF properly so I returned it. It did work on manual focus though and so I took a few shots to test it. TBH I'm not sure if it was me not focussing properly or whether the converter wasn't too good (more likely user error not used to MF) but I wasn't too impressed. I ended up getting the Canon MkIII 2x converter and I'm very pleased with that and would recommend it to anyone wanting a converter.

This was taken a few days ago with my 5D3 and 70-200 with 2x converter. Taken wide open at f5.6, 1/800, ISO100 and 400mm.

[/url][/IMG]

Richee · 3 Apr 2013

Thanks very much for the replies, Kinda disappointed, was hoping the Kenko would be good enough, but it looks to be a false economy.

Myrdhinn · 3 Apr 2013

The Kenko isn't bad really. The 2x isn't as sharp as the 1.4x. That said, the Kenko 2x is $269 USD while the Canon is $499 USD.... not surprising the Canon is better.

Richee · 4 Apr 2013

True it's not surprising, although there are occasions when you pay a premium for the name. I often hope that's the case and get to spend less of my hard earned on a comparable product which is just as or almost as good.