Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 
Thread started 22 Nov 2009 (Sunday) 20:15
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

2x Teleconverter - How soft/bad is it really?

 
Bear ­ Dale
"I get 'em pregnant"
Avatar
4,866 posts
Gallery: 8 photos
Likes: 743
Joined Mar 2009
Location: Australia
     
Nov 22, 2009 20:15 |  #1

2x Teleconverter - How soft/bad is it really?

I have the 1.4x and I do like it. I've been considering getting the 2x and the few people that I've spoken to in person have looked at me like wtf?? are you thinking.

They say it's awfu, but I see lots of people have them listed in their gear sigs here.


Cheers,
Bear Dale

Some of my photos featured on Flickr Bear Dale (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
FlyingPhotog
Cream of the "Prop"
Avatar
57,560 posts
Likes: 148
Joined May 2007
Location: Probably Chasing Aircraft
     
Nov 22, 2009 20:16 |  #2

With which lens?

I won't hesitate to use it with my 300 f/2.8 but won't even consider it with my 100-400.


Jay
Crosswind Images (external link)
Facebook Fan Page (external link)

"If you aren't getting extraordinary images from today's dSLRs, regardless of brand, it's not the camera!" - Bill Fortney, Nikon Corp.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
TeamSpeed
01010100 01010011
Avatar
37,639 posts
Gallery: 111 photos
Best ofs: 2
Likes: 6280
Joined May 2002
Location: Midwest
     
Nov 22, 2009 20:21 |  #3

There are many samples of 2x converters on various lenses in this thread. I have been reasonably successful myself with a Kenko 2x.

https://photography-on-the.net …2&highlight=tel​econverter


Past Equipment | My Personal Gallery (external link) My Business Gallery (external link)
For Sale: Sigma USB Dock

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
futrcndctr
Member
Avatar
200 posts
Joined Oct 2009
Location: Orange County, CA
     
Nov 22, 2009 23:04 |  #4

I've used the Sigma 2x with my 70-200. It's a little soft, but it has allowed me to get images I otherwise would not have gotten, and I've been able to sharpen a little in LR to fix it. For a little over $100 (what I paid for it), it is definitely worth it to get a usable 400/5.6.


5DII, 24-105L, Canon 50L, Canon 70-200/2.8L II, 100mm Macro, 15mm Fisheye, Sigma 1.4x and 2x TC, 580EXII, 430EXII

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
newworld666
Goldmember
Avatar
2,306 posts
Likes: 19
Joined Jan 2009
Location: on earth
     
Nov 22, 2009 23:15 |  #5

I don't know with zooms .. but if you use a lot AF, TC2X needs a quite important micro adjustment. Just as a test, I used even stacked TC2X and TC 1.4X with a 300L2.8 -> correction was + 19 ... but could get fairly sharp picture from them in Monza last september with alonso.

IMAGE: http://photos.corbi.eu/Formula-One/Race/alonso00005/650459038_6H4it-X2-1.jpg

But even with a monopod, a 840mm is almost difficult to manipulate with F1 cars ....

Marc
5DMKII+1Dx 24L1.4II 85L1.2II 180L3.5 300F2.8nonIS TC2XII ..... Sigma14F2.8AFDG, Zuiko 500F/8 Reflex
http://myc-photos.eu (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Bear ­ Dale
THREAD ­ STARTER
"I get 'em pregnant"
Avatar
4,866 posts
Gallery: 8 photos
Likes: 743
Joined Mar 2009
Location: Australia
     
Nov 22, 2009 23:37 |  #6

FlyingPhotog wrote in post #9064160 (external link)
With which lens?

I was thinking of using it with my 100-400 but after your comment affirmed what others have told me, that kills that.

What about with a 70-200 2.8?


Cheers,
Bear Dale

Some of my photos featured on Flickr Bear Dale (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
FlyingPhotog
Cream of the "Prop"
Avatar
57,560 posts
Likes: 148
Joined May 2007
Location: Probably Chasing Aircraft
     
Nov 22, 2009 23:38 |  #7

ConDigital wrote in post #9065291 (external link)
I was thinking of using it with my 100-400 but after your comment affirmed what others have told me, that kills that.

What about with a 70-200 2.8?

It's not awful but you've already got the 100-400 which is native f/5.6 so you really aren't gaining anything.


Jay
Crosswind Images (external link)
Facebook Fan Page (external link)

"If you aren't getting extraordinary images from today's dSLRs, regardless of brand, it's not the camera!" - Bill Fortney, Nikon Corp.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Morlow
Goldmember
Avatar
2,824 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Jan 2009
Location: Yellowstone National Park
     
Nov 22, 2009 23:48 |  #8

This brings up a question I have been asking myself recently. Is it worth it at all to get a 1.4x for the 400 f/5.6? I am pretty sure it would be worthless 99.9% of the time, as f/8 would be laughable in anything other than the brightest sunniest days, but hearing a few people's input would really help.


Chris Knapp

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
FlyingPhotog
Cream of the "Prop"
Avatar
57,560 posts
Likes: 148
Joined May 2007
Location: Probably Chasing Aircraft
     
Nov 22, 2009 23:53 |  #9

newworld666 wrote in post #9065190 (external link)
I don't know with zooms .. but if you use a lot AF, TC2X needs a quite important micro adjustment. Just as a test, I used even stacked TC2X and TC 1.4X with a 300L2.8 -> correction was + 19 ... but could get fairly sharp picture from them in Monza last september with alonso.

But even with a monopod, a 840mm is almost difficult to manipulate with F1 cars ....

Hmmm...

Now you've piqued my curiosity. I feel a little experiment is in order with my MkIII. ;)


Jay
Crosswind Images (external link)
Facebook Fan Page (external link)

"If you aren't getting extraordinary images from today's dSLRs, regardless of brand, it's not the camera!" - Bill Fortney, Nikon Corp.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
newworld666
Goldmember
Avatar
2,306 posts
Likes: 19
Joined Jan 2009
Location: on earth
     
Nov 23, 2009 01:02 as a reply to  @ FlyingPhotog's post |  #10

from the same place, you can guess the difference between the TC's

I was too far to get interesting pictures with 300L2.8 alone.. but you can see Lewis hamilton with

300l2.8+TC1.4X

IMAGE: http://photos.corbi.eu/Formula-One/Race/Hamilton00007/650467185_2Npeo-X2-1.jpg

300l2.8+TC2X

IMAGE: http://photos.corbi.eu/Formula-One/Race/Hamilton00005/650466816_W7Bco-X2-1.jpg

300L2.8+TC2X+TC1.4X
-> I was surprised that AF was working like a charm (I heard that with 5dmK2 it shouldn't work , due to an aperture of F7.8 exif shows 5.6 only ????)
the most difficuly was to follow the car with an 820mm lens, not the AF at all..

IMAGE: http://photos.corbi.eu/Formula-One/Race/Hamilton00004/650466638_RN3Mq-X2-1.jpg

Sorry, for the differences of WB . I didn't spend time to correct it from the Raw

Marc
5DMKII+1Dx 24L1.4II 85L1.2II 180L3.5 300F2.8nonIS TC2XII ..... Sigma14F2.8AFDG, Zuiko 500F/8 Reflex
http://myc-photos.eu (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
FlyingPhotog
Cream of the "Prop"
Avatar
57,560 posts
Likes: 148
Joined May 2007
Location: Probably Chasing Aircraft
     
Nov 23, 2009 01:04 |  #11

Those are much better results than I've ever seen stacking both TCs...

They're entirely acceptable in my book.


Jay
Crosswind Images (external link)
Facebook Fan Page (external link)

"If you aren't getting extraordinary images from today's dSLRs, regardless of brand, it's not the camera!" - Bill Fortney, Nikon Corp.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Bear ­ Dale
THREAD ­ STARTER
"I get 'em pregnant"
Avatar
4,866 posts
Gallery: 8 photos
Likes: 743
Joined Mar 2009
Location: Australia
     
Nov 23, 2009 01:24 |  #12

As Jay said those pics look great.

Question - You can stack a 1.4x & 2x but you can't stack two 1.4x can you?


Cheers,
Bear Dale

Some of my photos featured on Flickr Bear Dale (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
newworld666
Goldmember
Avatar
2,306 posts
Likes: 19
Joined Jan 2009
Location: on earth
     
Nov 23, 2009 01:47 |  #13

Sorry . I don't have 2 TC1.4X, so I can't test it. But, I guess, that it should be possible.
The major issue, is that Exif shows only the first TC.
I was surprised that the stack was better than a crop of TC1.4X.
Basically I am convince that quality is concerned with micro focus adjustment -> +19 is almost near the maximum of my 5DMKII (I din't make any test with my 50D. usually I almost get better pictures with cropped one of the 5DMKII than with the 50D).


Marc
5DMKII+1Dx 24L1.4II 85L1.2II 180L3.5 300F2.8nonIS TC2XII ..... Sigma14F2.8AFDG, Zuiko 500F/8 Reflex
http://myc-photos.eu (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Patrick
Senior Member
596 posts
Joined Jun 2008
Location: WV
     
Nov 23, 2009 05:47 as a reply to  @ newworld666's post |  #14

On the 70-200 2.8 there is a noticable difference when the image is cropped. I only use the 2X when there is plenty of light. A little sharpening is PS makes them fine.


Bodies, Lenses, Lights, Stands, Transmitters, Receivers, Tripods, Meters, etc...

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
phreeky
Goldmember
3,504 posts
Likes: 13
Joined Oct 2007
Location: Australia
     
Nov 23, 2009 05:55 as a reply to  @ Patrick's post |  #15

I've used mine a little on a 400mm F/5.6. Bloody hard, but possible.

It's MF on a xxD body no matter how many tricks you can come up with - even at the highest contrast thing on the centre point etc, I think I got a lock once and it was quite off anyway.

On a bright sunny day I've used it for BIF, MF IMO isn't all THAT hard with it because thankfully the lens has a nice focusing ring and mechanism - fairly gradual (not too sensitive). ISO800, MF, breath too deep and you lose the subject - you get the idea. Use a monopod.

I personally also find the 2x very useful on the Tamron 28-75. Still quite sharp, and AF works ok (can "machine gun" occasionally at the long end, but not a serious issue).

I would have bought a 1.4x first, but a friend was getting rid of it and only wanted AU$50 for it, I couldn't resist.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

4,729 views & 0 likes for this thread
2x Teleconverter - How soft/bad is it really?
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is kevln
821 guests, 278 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.