2X Tele-converter success?

[Bowhunter]

I was wondering if anyone was having good success taking wildlife pics using a 2x tele-converter?

[RikWriter]

Depends on the lens and the available light. I've gotten some okay shots using the 2X with the 300 2.8 and the 500 f4. Didn't do so well with the 70-200 f2.8 though.

[scot079]

Same here. A nice lens like the 300 2.8 IS + 2x TC gives VERY decent results.

[Dave 1942]

Me too.. I use my 2X tele on my 300 f2.8 and my 500 f4 with great results..

Dave

[Larry Weinman]

The 2X works well on my 300mm f 2.8 especially if I can stop down to f 8 but even at f 5.6

[wayne_eddy]

works well in the right conditions on my 400 f/5.6

I have my 2x Siggy for sale if anyone is interested, I rarely use it and need funds for just about everything it seems ($5000 car repairs, two knee operations, new hot water system and a few other things.)

[samsen]

I am happy with every lens I used it on (Physically it is a bit bigger than for eg Sigma's 2x TC and wont fit physically on lenses with shorter rare element clearance, but Sigma does better here).
It's sometimes hard if not impossible to say if TC was on or not just by looking at IQ. I love it. Only drawback IMO is that few stops you loss so if light is plenty, it worth using it quite well.

Wayne; My full sympathy for you. Please someone buy his tools for a decent price! Even one of the things you mentioned are such a crushing pain that don't know how you are doing with all in once.

[Tom Reichner]

I guess I'm the exception. I have the 2x and used it quite a bit on my 400 2.8. I hate it. When you use it on a 2.8, the AF is still supposed to work. Well, it does focus, but only after an enormous delay of 2 to 5 seconds. In my opinion, if AF takes more than a second to lock in, then it doesn't work. I can't even imagine using the 2x TV on a 5.6 or an f4, as some of you have mentioned. The subjects I photograph are constantly moving. MF just simply isn't an option. Even if a bird is perched on a branch, you want to focus on it's eyeball. Not the spot on the head just behind the eye, not the base of the bill. The eyeball. If you MF on the eye, what happens if the bird turns his head ever so slightly between the time when you achieve focus and when you release the shutter? Now your point of focus is not on the eyeball itself, and the image is unsuccessful. So the way I shoot, the 2x is only a valid option if used on a 2.8 lens. But then the AF takes so long to lock in the opportunity is over by time you are focused. I challenge any of you to find a full-time, professional wildlife photographer who uses one of these things and claims that IQ doesn't suffer tremendously. So, anyone want to buy my 2x TC? If you all are happy with it, then I'm sure someone else would be, too.

[BradM]

Got to argue with you a bit here Tom. Artie Morris, Adams Jones and plenty of others at the top of the wildlife & bird shooting use the 2X with very very good success.

Spent the weekend with Adam and we discussed some of the toughest shooting one can do and what equipment he uses and recommends. He is regularly doing Africa photo safaris for pro photographers with Joe Van Os.

Adam is one of Canon's Explorers of Light and has access to all of their equipment for use. He also believes crop is a dirty word and doesn't do it to his images.His regular kit in Africa is the 500mm f/4 with the 1.4x and 2x in front of a 1Ds Mk2. The shots he gets are spectacular regardless of what extension he is using.

We spent two hours over dinner looking at some of his images on his laptop of the big predators in action shot with the 500mm and 2x, you can't get much faster than a Cheetah on the tail of an Impala in full stride and his shots at full frame were incredible. And dozens of others we went through were just as good if not better.

To say that these pros aren't using them and not getting great results just isn't quite right. They will tell you that IQ does take a hit but for the distance one is shooting or one can get to the subject is limited by circumstances or law you cannot do any better.

Adam's shots of lion kit's at 1000mm is pulling out each whisker and eye brows at the full frame, it works and it works well enough these guys are selling shots every single day and even better filling their seminars with people wanting to learn how they are doing it which is where the real money is.

[Tom Reichner]

Originally Posted by BradM

th Joe Van Os.

Adam is one of Canon's Explorers of Light and has access to all of their equipment for use. He also believes crop is a dirty word and doesn't do it to his images.His regular kit in Africa is the 500mm f/4 with the 1.4x and 2x in front of a 1Ds Mk2. The shots he gets are spectacular regardless of what extension he is using.

Brad, Did Adam say what he does to get AF to work with the 2x, and work rapidly, at f4? It's been my understanding that if you use a 2x the AF will only work at f2.8. Even on my 400 2.8, the AF is extremely slow to find what it wants and lock in. Without any converter on it, it rapidy finds what it wants and locks in instantaneously. For many types of wildlife shooting AF must be very, very fast. Shooting birds in flight is something you can forget about if AF is not rapid. If he's doing anything to get the AF to work the way it was designed to with the 2x on there, please let me know - I could really use this thing if AF would lock in rapidly, especially at the closer distances where I want to fill the frame with portrait/head shots of big game animals that are on the move. Thanks, Tom

[BradM]

He is using a 1Ds mk2 body which allows AF (all 1D bodies do so) to work up to f/8 albeit with only the center AF point. So with the f/4 lens it is "seen" as an f/8.

If you are using a xxD body then it would require a f/2.8 lens to allow the use of the 2x and keep AF. And while the AF system on the xxD's are good they are no way in the same class as the 1D's, it is a night to day difference.

This center point only limits the possiblities of the custom AF functions the 1D's allow. On my mk2 I have it set to expand to 11 additional AF points when using it AI servo but if I put the 2x on it only the center point is active.

He is shooting just like the rest of us, center point (though sometimes all enabled if the aperture restrictions don't apply) and AI servo. His technique for this was nothing new to me on any of my bodies nor I think probably to you.

[Tom Reichner]

Was it taking alot longer for AF to lock in for him with the 2x on there? Much longer than if there was no extender on it? When you use your 2x, do you have trouble with it taking longer to focus? That's my chief gripe with the 2x.

[scot079]

Tom, any lens/body combo will focus slower with a converter attached...but you're saving a few Gs by getting the reach of the 800/5.6 (in your case) without paying for it. Sounds like a good deal to me!

In all seriousness, I do notice a little sluggishness in AF with the 2x attached compared even to the 1.4x. Have a good one

[RikWriter]

Originally Posted by BradM

He also believes crop is a dirty word and doesn't do it to his images.

That seems very odd to me.

[BradM]

Originally Posted by RikWriter

That seems very odd to me.

I don't know why, if you can frame a shot as you want it why crop it?

Pixel density means less loss when going big, it also means if a client wants or needs an image cropped to fit their needs the density is still there to support it without interpolation.