Teleconverters ?
- Thread starter J H Foto
- Start date
- Messages
- 2,115
- Name
- Dex
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Depends on what lens your planning on using it with. For me if I need to get in closer for £200 for both my 1.4 and 2x extender it's saved me potentially 5-8k than having to buy other lenses. Granted I lose 1-2 stops of light and for some it may not be as sharp but I love them.
These are with the sigma 120-300 sport
1.4 extender
9S1F9210 by Maximum Revs Photography, on Flickr
2x extender
9S1F7077-3 by Maximum Revs Photography, on Flickr
These are with the sigma 120-300 sport
1.4 extender
9S1F9210 by Maximum Revs Photography, on Flickr
2x extender
9S1F7077-3 by Maximum Revs Photography, on Flickr
- Messages
- 2,616
- Name
- Glenn
- Edit My Images
- Yes
I have the Sigma EX 1.4x and 2.0x converters and use these with Sigma 70-200mm f/2.8 and 300mm f/2.8 lenses.
The 1.4x is nearly invisible in terms of impact on image quality and focusing. In good light the 2.0x is OK too.
In poor light on my camera at least, the 2.0x produces noticeable loss of IQ and focusing speed. Sometimes no other choice, but the images need a fair bit of work afterwards and even then the images aren't usually something I'd post.
The 1.4x is nearly invisible in terms of impact on image quality and focusing. In good light the 2.0x is OK too.
In poor light on my camera at least, the 2.0x produces noticeable loss of IQ and focusing speed. Sometimes no other choice, but the images need a fair bit of work afterwards and even then the images aren't usually something I'd post.
Last edited:
- Messages
- 16,746
- Name
- Keith
- Edit My Images
- No
They're great, if you make good use of them. I have a 1.4x Nikon that I use with a 300mm f4, which gives me 420mm 5.6 without any noticeable loss of quality, or even any slow up in AF.
But, alas, I don't use it near enough and have it up for sale on a local site. Nobody has bitten yet, so I'll continue to use it until I can sell it on. If I had transport, which I do not, I would definitely make better use of it. There's just nothing really interesting to shoot with it around where I live.
But, alas, I don't use it near enough and have it up for sale on a local site. Nobody has bitten yet, so I'll continue to use it until I can sell it on. If I had transport, which I do not, I would definitely make better use of it. There's just nothing really interesting to shoot with it around where I live.
- Messages
- 12,662
- Edit My Images
- No
Depends what lens you have Jeff and the widest fvalue - they don't really "work" with all but the (more) expensive zooms, f2.8's
Last edited:
- Messages
- 130
- Name
- Michael
- Edit My Images
- Yes
I am thinking of getting the Canon 70-200mm f2.8 lens which on my cropped body APS-C camera would be 112x320mm, with an 1.4 extender added that would become equivalent 157-448mm which would be great for shooting sports. Are there any significant downfalls with that setup that you can think of? I want as much feedback before I decided to invest in the lens and extender.
- Messages
- 3,321
- Name
- Peter Rushworth
- Edit My Images
- No
Which version of the 70-200mm f2.8 as the MKI IS version wasn't great with the 1.4x TC and won't even consider the 2x TC. The MKII version much better, especially combined with the MKIII TCs.
- Messages
- 12,662
- Edit My Images
- No
Michael, hopefully a Canon shooter will answer your question
The lower the magnification the better, so x 1.4 is the lower
you will always lose IQ and light, down to f4 with the 1.4
Mine works OK with my Nikon 70 200mm f2.8, but I tend to mainly use TC's with my prime lens and I'm not a fan using them with my zoom
always check with the manufacturers compatibility chart, (easily found on the web), before you buy and with the web if you buy a non-Canon TC …… especially for the AF function
(PS if you want good, inexpensive longer, save your money and buy a used Canon 400mm f5.6)
The lower the magnification the better, so x 1.4 is the lower
you will always lose IQ and light, down to f4 with the 1.4
Mine works OK with my Nikon 70 200mm f2.8, but I tend to mainly use TC's with my prime lens and I'm not a fan using them with my zoom
always check with the manufacturers compatibility chart, (easily found on the web), before you buy and with the web if you buy a non-Canon TC …… especially for the AF function
(PS if you want good, inexpensive longer, save your money and buy a used Canon 400mm f5.6)
Last edited:
- Messages
- 3,321
- Name
- Peter Rushworth
- Edit My Images
- No
As mention, depends which lens you are intending to add the TC to, remembering that you lose 1 f-stop with a 1.4x TC and 2 f-stops with a 2x TC. Really designed for prime lenses, but also used with compatible zooms. So my advice is next to see your lens is compatible first.
2 types of TC, ones that communicate with the camera and ones that don't.
sk66
Advertiser
- Messages
- 8,677
- Name
- Steven
- Edit My Images
- Yes
This is particularly important regarding "functional" AF points with your camera body. Many lower spec bodies will be heavily restricted at f/5.6 (some are down to the center AF point only).
- Messages
- 12,662
- Edit My Images
- No
I have used the Nikon 1.4, 1.7 and 2.0 (new V3) with 70-200, 300 and 400 with good effect, the latest 2.0 does very well IMO and I have had useable images that would otherwise have been impossible
gramps
my TC14Ell is OK with the 70 200mm, but I'm not a fan ….. the others even the TC20Elll are not good
The TC14Ell is good with the 300mm f4, but the TC20Elll is not
Both are good with the 300mm f2.8VR, especially the x2
the TC14Ell is fine with the 600mm non VR ……. the TC20Elll ….. doesn't look great, but too early to comment
Last edited:
- Messages
- 41,872
- Name
- 'Gramps'
- Edit My Images
- No
300mm + TC-2.0 III
Spoonbill by photogramps, on Flickr
Bar-Tailed Godwit by photogramps, on Flickr
Bee by photogramps, on Flickr
Good enough for me
Spoonbill by photogramps, on Flickr
Bar-Tailed Godwit by photogramps, on Flickr
Bee by photogramps, on Flickr
Good enough for me
- Messages
- 12,662
- Edit My Images
- No
just as I indicated - the "new" TC20Elll is good with the 300mm f2.8 - in fact I'm going to compare it with the 600mm f4 when the light gets better
D700 + Nikon 300mm f2.8 VR + TC20Elll @ f8 and ISO 400
but I think Jeff, the OP, shoots bird with a tele (lens)
Last edited:
- Messages
- 130
- Name
- Michael
- Edit My Images
- Yes
I was considering in the long run getting the Canon EF 70-200mm f2.8 L USM lens MK I with the Canon EF 1.4 MK III extender. The Canon EF 70-200mm f2.8 L IS MK II is significantly more expensive than the MK I, is it really worth spending more for MK II considering that I am planning on also getting the 1.4x MKIII extender?
- Messages
- 12,662
- Edit My Images
- No
I'd definitely check with Canon which TC works the "best" with which lens as, (they say!), the trend is that TC's are now made to suit the later lens - i.e it is usually no good buying an older TC to go with a newer lens and vica versa
Last edited:
sk66
Advertiser
- Messages
- 8,677
- Name
- Steven
- Edit My Images
- Yes
REALLY depends on the camera. The newer high end Nikons have 11 AF points at f/8 and all of them at f/5.6.
First off, if you have a cheap zoom, you might get a little more out of it with a 1.4x but it'll hardly be worth the loss of light. Forget a 2x unless your main lens is very sharp, which usually means decent quality.
I've shot some decent bird photos with Nikon 70-200mm f4 VR and Nikon version 3 2x TC when stopped down to F10, but although AF works with my D7100, AF accuracy could be better. As a result it's not so good for birds in flight. The Nikon 1.4x works well with that lens though with some good dragonfly in-flights obtained. I've heard that the latest Canon v3 TCs are pretty good but like the Nikons you have to check which lenses they'll work with.
I have the new Nikon 300mm F2.8 VR2 prime and both Nikon type 3 TCs are very good with it. The lens with 1.4x is sharp wide open, while the 2x is best at around f6.3/f7.1. Micro-contrast drops a little with the 2x but the detail is still there and can be brought out with a bit of ACR sharpening in Photoshop.
I've used independents in the past when I shot with Sony and they tend to work with a wider range of lenses than OEMs, particularly the Kenkos which don't protrude beyond the mount. The Pro 300 is better than their cheaper range but I wouldn't bother with a 2x Kenko, pro 300 or any other. I used an EX Sigma 1.4x TC with Sigma 100-300mm F4 which worked well but I found with other non-Sigma lenses the Pro 300 was a little sharper. The independents I've tried had more CA than OEM versions and were less sharp at the corners. Most CA can be corrected in post processing.
If your camera doesn't have AF micro adjustment you could be disappointed with some combinations. Adding extra glass sometimes does funny things to PD AF sensors. Also, AF has to be spot on to get the maximum benefit of adding a TC, particularly a 2x.
I've shot some decent bird photos with Nikon 70-200mm f4 VR and Nikon version 3 2x TC when stopped down to F10, but although AF works with my D7100, AF accuracy could be better. As a result it's not so good for birds in flight. The Nikon 1.4x works well with that lens though with some good dragonfly in-flights obtained. I've heard that the latest Canon v3 TCs are pretty good but like the Nikons you have to check which lenses they'll work with.
I have the new Nikon 300mm F2.8 VR2 prime and both Nikon type 3 TCs are very good with it. The lens with 1.4x is sharp wide open, while the 2x is best at around f6.3/f7.1. Micro-contrast drops a little with the 2x but the detail is still there and can be brought out with a bit of ACR sharpening in Photoshop.
I've used independents in the past when I shot with Sony and they tend to work with a wider range of lenses than OEMs, particularly the Kenkos which don't protrude beyond the mount. The Pro 300 is better than their cheaper range but I wouldn't bother with a 2x Kenko, pro 300 or any other. I used an EX Sigma 1.4x TC with Sigma 100-300mm F4 which worked well but I found with other non-Sigma lenses the Pro 300 was a little sharper. The independents I've tried had more CA than OEM versions and were less sharp at the corners. Most CA can be corrected in post processing.
If your camera doesn't have AF micro adjustment you could be disappointed with some combinations. Adding extra glass sometimes does funny things to PD AF sensors. Also, AF has to be spot on to get the maximum benefit of adding a TC, particularly a 2x.
Last edited:
sk66
Advertiser
- Messages
- 8,677
- Name
- Steven
- Edit My Images
- Yes
I only have one lens that ends up f/8 w/ a TC. It works well, but it has fewer (11) points to work with.
I think the D7xxx are down to just the central AF point at/above f/5.6...
Last edited:
sk66
Advertiser
- Messages
- 8,677
- Name
- Steven
- Edit My Images
- Yes
I think the D5300 is down to the center AF point only at f/5.6... pretty hard to use for BIF. I generally only use the TC's with f/2.8 lenses (Sig 120-300 and Nikon 400) so that I still have all of the AF points/functions available (D4/810).
- Messages
- 11,513
- Name
- Stewart
- Edit My Images
- Yes
It's not the teleconverter that makes the image, it's the lens. A 1.4x TC on a 300mm f/2.8 will have barely any impact. The same TC on a 70-300 consumer zoom will degrade the image massively.Elsewhere on the Interweb there are some very good results shown using the Kenko 1.4...
- Messages
- 11,513
- Name
- Stewart
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Be careful what you read on the internet and what you infer from it.From what I have read on other forums is that f5.6 is the cut off, I have seen images that would certainly proove this.....
Most Canon DSLRs have a firmware cutoff which means they won't even try to AF if the maximum aperture of the lens (or lens+TC combo) is smaller than f/5.6. Canon 'pro' DSLRs will AF with a maximum aperture of f/8, but beyond that the firmware still cuts in to prevent it.
Nikon DSLRs work differently. There's no firmware limit, but there is a limit on AF performance which depends on the AF sensor, the aperture, the light, and the target. Consumer grade cameras will reliably focus with a maximum aperture of f/5.6 and will try with smaller maximum apertures but won't necessarily succeed. Pro grade bodies will be reliable to f/8.
Incidentally I'd be curious to know what these images are that prove the point. An image might or might not be in focus, but how does that tell you anything about the camera's AF performance?
- Messages
- 3,321
- Name
- Peter Rushworth
- Edit My Images
- No
Remember It's the lens and TC combination not the aperture setting used for taking the image.
So I can combine my 300mm f4 lens with a 2x TC (canon) (becomes a 600mm f8) and use it on my canon 1D body with centre focus point active and take an image at f11 if the light conditions allow.
Same setup on my 70D won't autofocus because the lens and TC combination is above the f5.6 max aperture for the cropped body, but i can still use this setup, but manual focus only or i could use my 300mm f2.8 with the same TC and it would autofocus on my 70D (300mm f2.8 + 2x TC becomes a 600mm f5.6). As Stewart said, Nikons are different and certain TCs are passive, so don't actually report to the camera that they are there, but you still lose f-stops. But it depends on the lens you are intending on using.
So I can combine my 300mm f4 lens with a 2x TC (canon) (becomes a 600mm f8) and use it on my canon 1D body with centre focus point active and take an image at f11 if the light conditions allow.
Same setup on my 70D won't autofocus because the lens and TC combination is above the f5.6 max aperture for the cropped body, but i can still use this setup, but manual focus only or i could use my 300mm f2.8 with the same TC and it would autofocus on my 70D (300mm f2.8 + 2x TC becomes a 600mm f5.6). As Stewart said, Nikons are different and certain TCs are passive, so don't actually report to the camera that they are there, but you still lose f-stops. But it depends on the lens you are intending on using.
OP
- Messages
- 1,414
- Name
- Jeff
- Edit My Images
- No
Last edited:
- Messages
- 3,321
- Name
- Peter Rushworth
- Edit My Images
- No
This was taken with 300mm f2.8 1.4x and 2x canon MKII TCs stacked, but the conditions were prefer, and the subject was stationary and lens balanced on a beanbag
We're not saying you can't, just that there are limitation in using TCs and you need the light conditions to achieve good results.
We're not saying you can't, just that there are limitation in using TCs and you need the light conditions to achieve good results.
- Messages
- 12,305
- Name
- Garry Edwards
- Edit My Images
- No
Horses for courses.
As others have said, a modest (1.4 mag) teleconverter on a good, fast lens may be worthwhile, but a 2 x converter on a cheap zoom won't.
So, if you have a real need for a longer lens on a regular basis, it would be best just to buy it rather than bodge it, and in many cases it will be better to buy a cheap long lens than to use a teleconverter. But, if it's going to be very occasional use, and if you're only going to use it in good lighting conditions and you're not planning on making big prints, then a teleconverter can be worthwhile.
A lot of years ago I took the normal dad shots of my eldest daughter being handed her degree. I was a very long way away, behind hundreds of other parents and the only shot I could get was with a 135mm lens fitted with both a 1.4 and a 2.0 converter, the lens was wide open because it had to be and the result was cr*p - but was acceptable because it was the best that could be done. If I had to do that today I would just use the best lens I had and crop the image.
As others have said, a modest (1.4 mag) teleconverter on a good, fast lens may be worthwhile, but a 2 x converter on a cheap zoom won't.
So, if you have a real need for a longer lens on a regular basis, it would be best just to buy it rather than bodge it, and in many cases it will be better to buy a cheap long lens than to use a teleconverter. But, if it's going to be very occasional use, and if you're only going to use it in good lighting conditions and you're not planning on making big prints, then a teleconverter can be worthwhile.
A lot of years ago I took the normal dad shots of my eldest daughter being handed her degree. I was a very long way away, behind hundreds of other parents and the only shot I could get was with a 135mm lens fitted with both a 1.4 and a 2.0 converter, the lens was wide open because it had to be and the result was cr*p - but was acceptable because it was the best that could be done. If I had to do that today I would just use the best lens I had and crop the image.
- Messages
- 3,748
- Name
- urrrm.... Matt
- Edit My Images
- Yes
i bought this recently
I have the sigma 2x DG and it was okay, but my sigma 70-200mm does suffer a noticeably.
I tried the canon 2x mkII against the sigma and frankly either they were matched on the sigma 70-200 or the sigma version was better.
anyway I bought the Kenko, as I don't use it that often and will be selling the sigma through lack of use.
The kenko seems okay, not as good as the new canon 1.4x but frankly it's 1/3 of the price
- Messages
- 16,746
- Name
- Keith
- Edit My Images
- No
A lot of wildlife photographers, with the best of long glass, who use TCs, still crop [they're subjects being tiny and very far away at times] - so why not just use the 1.4x to retain the best quality possible, and then crop a little, instead of going for 2x and risk losing quality from the off?
Here's a heavily cropped moon shot:
September Moon 2014 by Cagey75, on Flickr
I used the 300mm + 1.4x, hand held - and the crop was still huge. Would I have gotten better results with a 2x and less crop? I doubt it.
Here's a heavily cropped moon shot:
September Moon 2014 by Cagey75, on FlickrI used the 300mm + 1.4x, hand held - and the crop was still huge. Would I have gotten better results with a 2x and less crop? I doubt it.
Last edited: