300/400 2.8 with 2XTC

W

woollyback

Messages
1,417
Edit My Images
No
Folks,

Just before I launch into a 500 f4 has anyone any experience of the above 2 lenses with a 2X TC.

Thinking is saving a bit second hand and less weight with 300 and still AF on 5D2. I am assuming 1.4TC is a no brainer but has anyone any real experience of the 2XTC with these lenses.

Cheers:):)

Rob
 
Hi Rob, i bought a 300 2.8 for the weight savings you talk about and regularly use extenders.If you check out posts by roy c, targetman and i think hollis_f in the birds section you will be very happy with what this combination is capable of :thumbs:

Regards Tom
 
Had the same problem. What helped me was friends. One has a 300 and uses it with converters. 2 of the others have 500. I have tried both and prefered the 500 due to images IMO being sharper and with better colour when compared to the 300 with 1.4.

Not tried the 400..which was my first choice. What I seen may produce nicer images and more usefull in all conditions. However the weight put me of when I held one and with a back problem thought to give it a miss. Even though I still think about it.

In all I opted for the 500 and antisipate it arriving next week. Luckly second hand but being serviced before I get it.

I am not a expert but thats what helped me witht he same issue.

But I do have a sigma 300 2.8 as well. Got that because of the reduced cost but at times I find it a little soft.

Sorry forgot used the 500 with both 1.4 and 2x and found it fantastic if you needed the extra but not as sharp but that may be me:D:bonk:
 
Last edited:
I have the 600mm and 300mm and the 600mm is sharper than the 300mm with a 2x also the 600mm is a stop quicker f4 opposed to 300 & x2 at 5.6 that said the results are decent and if you buy the mk3 convertor it will be even better. The 400mm f2.8 weighs in at a similar weight to the 600mm also it is not as sharp as the 300mm with a tele convertor close but not as good
Regards
Richard
 
Last edited:
I have the 500mm f4L and the 300mm 2.8L and both are excellent performers with either the 1.4X or 2X converters.

If I had to choose between them it would be the 500mm I'd keep as it gives the option of 700mm with the 1.4X TC and 1000mm with the 2X TC but only on a 1 Series body in the case of the 2XTC if you want to retain AF.

There are undeniable weight advantages with the 300mm 2.8L though and it does come into it's own with closer birds for me where the limited DOF with the 500mm can be a problem.
 
Last edited:
If the new Canon 2x TC is as good as the Nikon 2x, then I would have thought image degradation would be negligible when compared to the longer lens on it's own.

It would be interesting if someone had real world experience of any of the new TC's to test this but I can't see why the Canon 2x would not be as good as the Nikon ( other than being Canon obviously;) ) which I find great
 
I tried the new 400mm 2.8 with the Canon 2x III and, from the limited shots I was allowed to take, was very impressed with the results.
I won't be bying the new 400mm at that price in a hurry but the 2x TC III is on the top of my list for Christmas.
 
I just took this a few minutes ago with the 7D and 300.2.8 with 2X TC - in crappy light about as bad as it gets - exposure was 1/60th @ f/5/6 at 1600 ISO (tripod mounted with IS ON). Lots of blurry shots as you can imagine but this Chaffie was keeping pretty still.

5234027447_586f155bb4_o.jpg


The combination of the 300.2.8 and 2XTC will definitely get you results, but you do need pretty good light to keep a reasonable shutter speed and avoid raising the ISO.
 
micloi said:
I tried the new 400mm 2.8 with the Canon 2x III and, from the limited shots I was allowed to take, was very impressed with the results.
I won't be bying the new 400mm at that price in a hurry but the 2x TC III is on the top of my list for Christmas.
Click to expand...

I also tried the 2x III with my 70-200 mk 2 and with the limited shots I took, it is streets ahead of the mk 2 tc.

Top of my shopping list as well, look forward to the results.

George
 
Wow,

Thanks for the replies folks - I was expecting to hear 300 with 2X was pants IQ wise so get the 500, but that doesn't seem to be the case...

so a 5D2 with 500 would be about 4.5K as I already have the body

A new 7D with 300 & 2X would probably be about the same? and = ~ 960mm of length

Are my maths right I could get a crop body plus 300 and 2X and have longer length for same price.

Now that looks an attractive option??

Am I missing something obvious here?

Cheers

Rob
 
woollyback said:
Wow,

Thanks for the replies folks - I was expecting to hear 300 with 2X was pants IQ wise so get the 500, but that doesn't seem to be the case...

so a 5D2 with 500 would be about 4.5K as I already have the body

A new 7D with 300 & 2X would probably be about the same? and = ~ 960mm of length

Are my maths right I could get a crop body plus 300 and 2X and have longer length for same price.

Now that looks an attractive option??

Am I missing something obvious here?

Cheers

Rob
Click to expand...

Your maths is right - 300mm X2, X a crop factor of 1.6X would indeed give you an effective 960mm - that's the focal length you'd need to get the same field of view on a full frame sensor. It's a bit misleading though to include the crop factor in the calculation as you get an actual 600mm focal length regardless of the sensor size.

The bottom line is that the 500mm is always going to give more reach, and just using the 1.4XTC with the 500mm gives an actual 700mm and max aperture of f/5.6 losing just one stop, whereas the 300mm and 2XTC would still give you a max aperture of f/5.6 losing 2 stops but with an inevitable loss of quality due to the 2X TC. Good as the 300mm and 2X TC is it wont match the 500mm and 1.4X TC combo, the latter combo needing that bit less cropping too for distant subjects, especially small ones.

However, you'd also see a pretty impressive improvement in reach anyway swapping from your full frame sensor to a 7D, so you can't really go wrong with either lens, and it's all about money unfortunately, so the 300mm and 7D makes a lot of sense. :thumbs:
 
CT said:
... so you can't really go wrong with either lens, and it's all about money unfortunately ...
Click to expand...
I think that's the bottom line. All these lenses are great (and if you avoid the 400/2.8 they're all portable).
 
I often use the 300/2.8 with a 2x tc - AF slows a bit but using a focus limiter speeds it up nicely. IQ even wide open is acceptable but I try to stop down one if I can for the very best results.
HERE is a link to some of my examples of the 300/2.8 + 2 x tc all taken with a 7D - most of the shots are also cropped a fair bit.
For me this lens is all about the weight/portability - even a weakling OAP like me can carry it for hours. Before buying it I tried the 500/4 but the weight/bulk was just too much for my style of shooting.
 
BTW Rob, the 300/2.8 is also fairly good with stacked 1.4x and 2x tc providing you have good light and a sturdy tripod. below is an example - 840mm (FOV =1344mm on 7D) This one was taken with a 40D.

840mm_1.jpg
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top