Skip to Content

Teleconverters/extenders

Discuss and share your wildlife photography, filming and equipment
User avatar
DuQues
Honorary Virtual Ranger
Honorary Virtual Ranger
Posts: 14520
Joined: Fri Jan 14, 2005 5:42 pm
Location: Red sand, why do I keep thinking of red sand?

Teleconverters/extenders

Unread post by DuQues » Wed Oct 12, 2005 1:21 pm

ceruleanwildfire wrote:Scruff, you realise you have just made me extremely jealous. 800mm, enough to take a picture of a tick smiling on the butt of a buffalo from a mile away. Seriously jealous.

Shall I make it even worse? :twisted:
800mm plus the 20D's cropfactor is 1280 mm....
Not posting much here anymore, but the photo's you can follow here There is plenty there.

Feel free to use any of these additional letters to correct the spelling of words found in the above post: a-e-t-n-d-i-o-s-m-l-u-y-h-c

User avatar
ceruleanwildfire
Posts: 120
Joined: Thu Jan 20, 2005 5:22 pm
Location: Born and Bred in SA, Living in NZ

Unread post by ceruleanwildfire » Wed Oct 12, 2005 1:39 pm

DuQues wrote:Shall I make it even worse? :twisted:
800mm plus the 20D's cropfactor is 1280 mm....


And even worse, add a 2x convertor giving you 2560mm. Take a picture of a mite smiling on the butt of a tick smiling on the butt of a buffalo from a mile away. Depressing really.

User avatar
ceruleanwildfire
Posts: 120
Joined: Thu Jan 20, 2005 5:22 pm
Location: Born and Bred in SA, Living in NZ

Unread post by ceruleanwildfire » Thu Oct 13, 2005 8:54 am

Loams wrote:Don't you get less than 2x with the converter? something like 1.6 instead??


Depending on your camera make and model you can get a 1.4x and 1.6x or 1.7x convertor.

User avatar
DuQues
Honorary Virtual Ranger
Honorary Virtual Ranger
Posts: 14520
Joined: Fri Jan 14, 2005 5:42 pm
Location: Red sand, why do I keep thinking of red sand?

Unread post by DuQues » Thu Oct 13, 2005 2:13 pm

Loams wrote:Sorry CWF, I meant with a 2x converter you don't get full 2X conversion, you get something like 1.4 or 1.6 with the actual 2x converter. Is this true?

No. You get the quoted amounts, so 1.4 times with the 1.4, 2x with the 2x converter. The 1.4 will cost you one, and the 2x converters two stops of light. Something to keep in mind, as most camera's lose autofocus above f/5.6, and some (like the EOS 1 series) above f/8.
Loams wrote:Also how many meters does that lens with converting (roughly) bring the object closer??

Not a single nanometer. Good thing, imagine someone using it on the moon, and we wake up to find it nearly on top of us! :lol:
Not posting much here anymore, but the photo's you can follow here There is plenty there.

Feel free to use any of these additional letters to correct the spelling of words found in the above post: a-e-t-n-d-i-o-s-m-l-u-y-h-c

User avatar
Obelix
Junior Virtual Ranger
Junior Virtual Ranger
Posts: 186
Joined: Thu Oct 27, 2005 3:54 pm
Location: A little village in Gaul

Unread post by Obelix » Mon Apr 24, 2006 2:04 pm

Bought the Canon Powershot S2 quite a while ago. Thinking about buying Canon’s 1.5X telephoto converter (with adapter) – I need, as always, as much zoom as I can afford.

I thought Canon’s 1.5X telephoto converter was the only option for the S2. However, was told over the weekend by "reliable" shop that you can buy, for less, a generic 2x converter (to be used with the Canon adapter on the S2) and that it works just as well (with the extra zoom as a bonus). Does anyone know about these generic converters and whether they will work specifically on the S2 as well? Any other suggestions would be appreciated as well (good idea / bad idea?). I’m just concerned I might run into trouble if I buy it, seeing as it is not a Canon converter? Also, I assume I’m going to lose light with the converter, but will the image stabiliser still work?

danieldoesamerica
Posts: 2
Joined: Thu Jun 01, 2006 4:11 pm

The teleconverters topic

Unread post by danieldoesamerica » Thu Jun 01, 2006 4:46 pm

Canon 300mm IS 4.0 with 1.4X converter or Canon 400mm 5.6 (no IS) I am looking at buying one of these two setups. They are both about the same cost. Both are "L" series lenses. Looking mostly at amateur bird photography as well as general wildlife. Any comments or suggestions?

User avatar
j-ms
Junior Virtual Ranger
Junior Virtual Ranger
Posts: 260
Joined: Fri Jul 29, 2005 7:55 pm
Location: Schoenmakerskop (near Port Elizabeth)

Unread post by j-ms » Thu Jun 01, 2006 7:41 pm

My wife has the 300 f/4.0 IS L & I have the 400 f/5.6 plus 1.4x & 2x converters. With the copies that we have (remember, every lens varies, even L lenses QC is not 100%) the 400 slightly shades the 300 in IQ and with the 1.4 attached there is a definite IQ difference in favour of the 400. Of course, the 400 doesn't have IS but it is probably the best hand-holder-able lens for bird photography. Both lenses have great contrast and clarity with lightening fast AF. Check out www.fredmiranda.com for reviews and you will notice that, apart from Canons 600 F/4.0, these 2 lenses consistently score tops in users' reviews of longer lenses.

User avatar
Mars
Posts: 77
Joined: Wed May 03, 2006 10:22 am
Location: gauteng
Contact:

Unread post by Mars » Fri Jun 02, 2006 8:41 am

Danie

Canon 300mm IS 4.0 with 1.4X converter will give you 420 mm which is better than 400, and at 420 it is eqw to 12 x optical zoom, you would wish you had is, so go for the one with is !!!! or you might get blurry shaky pics all the time

danieldoesamerica
Posts: 2
Joined: Thu Jun 01, 2006 4:11 pm

Does 1.4x converter change a lens' minimum focusing distance

Unread post by danieldoesamerica » Fri Jun 09, 2006 4:08 am

Does adding a converter (either a 1.4x or 2x) change a lens' minimum focusing distance? Any answers?

User avatar
peterpiper
Virtual Ranger
Virtual Ranger
Posts: 163
Joined: Wed Feb 15, 2006 6:46 pm
Location: In the studio for now

Unread post by peterpiper » Fri Jun 09, 2006 8:37 am

Nope, focusing distance stays the same. This can be quite an advantage although I personally am not happy with the 2x on digital. Strange, as it worked well on my film camera. The 1.4 is awesome.
Home is where you hang your @

User avatar
Mars
Posts: 77
Joined: Wed May 03, 2006 10:22 am
Location: gauteng
Contact:

Unread post by Mars » Fri Jun 09, 2006 8:42 am

Piper

I have to disagree with you, I have a 2 x converter on my digital camera and the results are perfect, you sometimes need to ajust apeture a few stops but that is logical as a converter makes you loose some light, depending on what converter you use and how big the apeture is, I guess a 2 x will work with some digitals and not so good with others, but it works perfectly with leica.

User avatar
richardharris
Junior Virtual Ranger
Junior Virtual Ranger
Posts: 456
Joined: Sun Sep 04, 2005 3:04 pm
Location: Nottinghamshire UK

Unread post by richardharris » Sat Jul 01, 2006 12:52 am

Image

This is an example of the Canon 500mm with 1.4x convertor. If everything (focus, exposure, good light etc) is just right you can get superb results.

Richard

http://www.pbase.com/richardharris/june_2006

User avatar
oddesy
Virtual Ranger
Virtual Ranger
Posts: 2694
Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2008 4:57 pm
Location: Randburg, SA

2x converters

Unread post by oddesy » Sun Jan 06, 2008 12:33 pm

hi everyone, i was wondering if anyone could give me some advice on buying a 2x teleconverter for my pentax DSLR??

If anyone has a converter could you please tell me if it in any way has decreased your image quality?
I am not a proffesional photographer but i do like sharp, clear images, especially for taking pics in my favourite place!! :mrgreen: :mrgreen:
The beginning of knowledge is the discovery of something we do not understand.

"We are what we repeatedly do. Excellence, then, is not an act, but a habit." Aristotle

User avatar
Johannes van Niekerk
Junior Virtual Ranger
Junior Virtual Ranger
Posts: 80
Joined: Tue Jun 05, 2007 6:22 pm
Location: Lowveld - Near Kruger!

Unread post by Johannes van Niekerk » Sun Jan 06, 2008 4:15 pm

hi odessy - and welcome to the forum!

The issue of 2X converters is a contentious one and you will probably get different answers from different people.
I've used 2X converters in the past with mixed results. I think it depends on the lens you use it with.

On my old Nikon D70 and a Sigma 70-200 F2.8 I had fair results with a Sigma 2X. Wide open was not acceptable to me, but stopped down it was acceptable (though not superb). I used it when necessary, because it still gave more detail than up sizing in photoshop.

I just recently got the Canon 1.4X and 2X converters, I have not done major testing with them, but my first impression is that the 1.4X is slightly sharper than the 2X. The other thing that I have noticed is that both converters perform better (less degrading) when used with high quality prime lenses.

The other factors that you must take into consideration is the loss of light. A 2X converter cost you 2 stop - an f/2.8 lens becomes f/5.6 wide open. This, together with the longer reach, essentially requires you to us 1/4 X the shutter speed than without the converter. e.g if you could use 1/500 sec with your lens wide open, you will need 1/2000 sec with the converter to compensate for camera shake and exposure. This can be done these days by increasing the ISO - but at the cost of noise.

Another important factor is that you may lose the ability to autofocus when you add the 2X converter. I'm not sure about the Pentax, but I have a feeling that it will not autofocus with anything higher than F/5.6.

Overall the 1.4X converters give better image quality and will more easily retain autofocus.

Note to mods - this thread may be more suited to the photography forum.

User avatar
DuQues
Honorary Virtual Ranger
Honorary Virtual Ranger
Posts: 14520
Joined: Fri Jan 14, 2005 5:42 pm
Location: Red sand, why do I keep thinking of red sand?

Unread post by DuQues » Mon Jan 07, 2008 10:18 am

TexasBoer wrote:I just recently got the Canon 1.4X and 2X converters, I have not done major testing with them, but my first impression is that the 1.4X is slightly sharper than the 2X. The other thing that I have noticed is that both converters perform better (less degrading) when used with high quality prime lenses.

I concur completely. The problem with converters is that they also magnify the flaws in the lens used. Aside from autofocus, I will never use a 2x converter on my 100-400, unless it's just to identify a bird. But I have seem photos Madach made with a 2x on his 300mm f/2.8 and you really have to look well to see the difference.

However, I do not know what the quality of the converters available for Pentax is like...
Not posting much here anymore, but the photo's you can follow here There is plenty there.

Feel free to use any of these additional letters to correct the spelling of words found in the above post: a-e-t-n-d-i-o-s-m-l-u-y-h-c


Return to “Wildlife Photography Enthusiasts”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 9 guests


Webcam Highlights

Addo
Submitted by Anonymous at 16:27:06
orpen
Submitted by inawe at 16:07:01
satara
Submitted by Foxy at 16:57:00
nossob
Submitted by Trrp-trrrrrrrr at 14:20:19