lens or 2x multiplier

[cadevil]

I am considering a new lens for my D30, but I am debating between a 200-500 zoom and a 2x multiplier for my 28-200 lens. Any opinions?

[chris maddock]

See my reply to your same Q on DPReview.

KRs
Chris

[rkatz@pacbell.net]

I've played with the two Canon multipliers on my Canon 70-200 2.8 zoom. I ended up purchasing the 1.4 as the resolution on the other was, in my personal opinion, less than desirable.

Also, you have greater light loss with the 2x than the 1.4 so you'll need to shoot at slower speeds, wider apertures or faster film. My tests were on film but I have used the combo on a D-30 and the resulting images are very acceptable to me.

[D30man MI]

NO NO NO a 2x multiplier SUCKS.

Draw a 2'' by 3" rectangle on a piece of paper. now draw another rectangle on the bottem making it a 4" by 3" now draw another 4" by 3" on the right side. you will end up with a 4'' by 6''.

NOW... this is what the light is doing inside your lens. If you draw a new 2" by 3" box in the middle of you're 4'' by 6'' box you'll see that the 2" by 3" box is only 1/4 the size.

That's how you loose 75% of your light!!!! No more auto focus, and very slow shutter speeds.

Unless you are useing an F2 or F2.8 can you get away with it, and yeah i would only get a 1.4x that way you wouldn't loose as much light as a 2x.

I use a 135mm F2. which acts like a 216mm F2!! and a 1.4x which i would like to buy soon would make it a 302 f2.8!! NICE, or get the 200mm F2.8 and it will be a 320mm f2.8 with OUT all the extra pieces of glass. I love the 216mm i get with my 135mm f2, MMM BABY!

2x multiplier... BOOOOOOO!!!


Dave

ps what do you need that kinda zoom or anyway? looking at the hottie next door? haha jk