Extenders : how do they affect the image?

[aeroshots2003]

Hi all,

since I'm new on this forum, a small intro :
I've been active in aviation photography for quite some years and as time went by I managed to buy one thing after the other (cfr. equipment list below). As a result my camera bag - Lowepro Photo Trekker Classic - has become a real burden, especially since I have to haul it along all day long during a photoshoot. Sometimes I use the Omnipro bag instead of the backpack, since it's more accessible while walking around. The downside is that this bag is not big enough for all the equipment.


http://home.tiscali.be/at.press/photo/3.jpg


I'm considering to replace part of my equipment (75-300mm, 400mm and 70-200mm f/4) by Canon's Mother of all zooms : EF 70-200 f/2.8L IS USM and combining it with a 2X extender to have the same reach as I do now.

*** extender 2X ***
Could anybody comment on how much the use of this extender affects the quality of image? I'm afraid that this combination would result in unsharp and dark edges... How big is the difference between 2X and the new 2X II?

*** EF 17-40 f/4 vs EF 17-35 f/2.8 ***
On the wide angle side, I would like to replace the 20-35mm by one of the above. Any ideas why I should prefer and pay more for the 17-35mm?

I am considering moving to digital, yet the current 10D does not the required resolution I want. The new 1Ds MkII would be sufficient, yet the price tag is way beyond my budget. I'm waiting for a +8 Mio pixels DSLR within the $2.500 price range. Only then will I cross over (partially) from wet film. Currently I use 3 bodies, since I work with different types of slide film (50/100/400 ASA). A DSLR would make this far easier, since settings can be changed constantly.

Any advice is welcome.

Greetings,



Johan

[RedShoesGirl]

Hi all,

since I'm new on this forum, a small intro :
I've been active in aviation photography for quite some years and as time went by I managed to buy one thing after the other (cfr. equipment list below). As a result my camera bag - Lowepro Photo Trekker Classic - has become a real burden, especially since I have to haul it along all day long during a photoshoot. Sometimes I use the Omnipro bag instead of the backpack, since it's more accessible while walking around. The downside is that this bag is not big enough for all the equipment.
...

I'm considering to replace part of my equipment (75-300mm, 400mm and 70-200mm f/4) by Canon's Mother of all zooms : EF 70-200 f/2.8L IS USM and combining it with a 2X extender to have the same reach as I do now.

*** extender 2X ***
Could anybody comment on how much the use of this extender affects the quality of image? I'm afraid that this combination would result in unsharp and dark edges... How big is the difference between 2X and the new 2X II?

*** EF 17-40 f/4 vs EF 17-35 f/2.8 ***
On the wide angle side, I would like to replace the 20-35mm by one of the above. Any ideas why I should prefer and pay more for the 17-35mm?

I am considering moving to digital, yet the current 10D does not the required resolution I want. The new 1Ds MkII would be sufficient, yet the price tag is way beyond my budget. I'm waiting for a +8 Mio pixels DSLR within the $2.500 price range. Only then will I cross over (partially) from wet film. Currently I use 3 bodies, since I work with different types of slide film (50/100/400 ASA). A DSLR would make this far easier, since settings can be changed constantly.

Any advice is welcome.

Greetings,

Johan

Hi there,

Here is a site that has several reviews of the items you are thinking about by photographers that have used the gear.

http://www.fredmiranda.com/reviews/

In general the 2x is not as good as the 1.4. I have the 1.4 on a 300 f4 IS and wow, very amazing.

I also use the 17-40 and find it to be an excellent sharp lens...and $500 cheaper than the 2.8. Since I have been able to hand hold that lens to 1/5 second I don't think I really need the extra stop. Others have reported much the same thing - sharper than the 17-35 and much sharper than the 16-35.

Supporting it is a bit different than supporting a prime because it is just bigger.

I am still using an older 80-200 2.8 which is a great lens, even without IS. Sharper than the new version. :)

You can also do a search on dpreview and see what they are saying or on rob galbraith's site.

lara

[CyberDyneSystems]

Hi Aeroshots!

Welcome :)


70-200mm f/2.8 IS with 2X MkII
Especially given the limited room you have to work in,. as well as I am assuming the awkwardness of trying to change a lens in flight :shock:

I think you may be on to a workable solution.

The 2X will darken what you see through the viewfinder.. but it does not need to darken the actual images as the exposure should compensate.

The 2X MkII is supposed to be a good deal improved over the MkI

There is some image degradation,. but only you will be able to judge how tolerable it is. Many are very happy with the results,. others are not. (I find it does wonders in a pinch,. but it certainly is no match for the prime)

I say go with this combo,. and get the 1.4X T-con as well.. as RSG points out,. the 1.4X is amazing! With the 1.4 X I truly can not discern any difference in quality most of the time.

RE: Wide zoom

Again I agree completely with RedShoesGirl about the 17-40mm f/4.
Here I think you can save a little cash by going with the f/4
Unless you feel you need the extra aperture, the image quality of these two lenses are other wise on equal footing.

Consider this

Sell your 75-300 and 70-200 f/4.. BUT HOLD ON TO THE 4000mm Prime :)

Get the f/2.8 IS and BOTH T-cons. Then see what YOU think of the 2X (I know you'll keeep the 1.4X :) )

You may very well decide the 2X offers a workable solution,. but I say keep the 400mm prime for thoise times when you now all you will need is your longest lens.

Save a little on the wide end by getting the 17-40mm f/4 this will go a long way towards your 70-200mm f/2.8 IS investment.. especially if you hang onto the 400m prime for the time being.
Hope this helps,..

Looking forward to you getting some digital images to post for us! I love the aircraft pics! :)

[CyberDyneSystems]

Hmmm,. just saw that your 400mm prime is the Sigma... I have no experience with this particular lens. It will not work with a Canon digital camera without being "re-chipped" by Sigma (99% sure it is old enough to need this surgery)

Sigma will do this for you for free.

For some reason I assumed the 400mm was the Canon f/5.6... Actaully I will be very curious to here wat your impression of the 70-200 with 2X is compared to the Sigma.

[aeroshots2003]

Hmmm,. just saw that your 400mm prime is the Sigma... I have no experience with this particular lens. It will not work with a Canon digital camera without being "re-chipped" by Sigma (99% sure it is old enough to need this surgery)

Sigma will do this for you for free.

For some reason I assumed the 400mm was the Canon f/5.6... Actaully I will be very curious to here wat your impression of the 70-200 with 2X is compared to the Sigma.



Muchas gracias for the swift reply CDS and Lara,

I already had my mind set on the 17-40mm, yet wanted to hear a third party in this matter.

About the 400mm, indeed a Sigma. With some 23cm/9,05inch it's quite bulky in the bag, but far worse is that I'm not impressed by the quality. :? I've dedicated my shots more to the 50 to 200mm range. That's why I bought the 70-200 f/4 a few years ago.

I always used to make far-away shots, as the aircraft action was always at >300mm range. Now I concentrate more on the pilots, that's why my most recent acquisitions were the 15mm fisheye and the 20-35mm. Amazing what images you can make at such close range.

Because of the above-mentioned object distance criteria, I decided to concentrate my money on the lens range up to 200mm. Thus, beyond this I want to make to with extenders. This also downsizes package : chuck the 75-300 and 400 out, replace the 70-200 by its bigger brother (since f/4 + 2X is a no-go) and add one or two T-cons (as you call them so lovely). :wink:

I would like to stick to Canon (not that the compatible brands are bad Q) because in the near future I want to cross to digital. In this respect, I've heard that combination Canon digital with older third-party lenses may give unpleasant surprises :oops:



Recuerdos,


Johan

[aeroshots2003]

I just saw on the fredmiranda.com page that the extenders 2x and 1.4x can also be used with slower lenses in autofocus mode.

In the D30/D60 Tips and Techniques article they state that by placing some tape over part of the converter pins should do the trick. Anybody done this with the 70-200mm f/4 in combination with 2X extender?

Seems to be an interim solution in my case...

TIA,


Johan

[CyberDyneSystems]

I can't speak form experience on this particular combo,. but that would be f/8.....

Usually when this works your somewhere closer to the needed f/5.6... like f/6.3 or something. But it might work... since you will be getting the 2X anyway,. you could just alter your buying order and get that first.. see what happens.