Teleconverters
Discussion
Ari said:
You need to be careful with teleconverters, they only fit a small number of lenses.
I bought a Nikon 2x teleconverter to use with my F2.8 70-200. I found that it drops the quality just enough that I end up reducing the finished image size by 50% to restore quality.
In other words, I end up with exactly what I would have got if I'd just used the lens as it was and then cropped the photo by 50% afterwards!
This..I bought a Nikon 2x teleconverter to use with my F2.8 70-200. I found that it drops the quality just enough that I end up reducing the finished image size by 50% to restore quality.
In other words, I end up with exactly what I would have got if I'd just used the lens as it was and then cropped the photo by 50% afterwards!
photosnob said:
They are crap. I've got two - 2 * and 1.4*. I don't even bother taking the 2* with my anymore and the 1.4 is generally rubbish, that's about all I can say for it. Crap IQ, crap AF and generally just annoying.
Mine are the Canon Mk2 version. The mk 3 mght be better. And I'm talking about using them with f2.8 lenses. Horrible nasty bit's of kit.
...and this.Mine are the Canon Mk2 version. The mk 3 mght be better. And I'm talking about using them with f2.8 lenses. Horrible nasty bit's of kit.
Worst photo gadget I've every bought. Years ago I bought a cheap one for using with a 70-300mm and as others have said in only the best light would it focus. Even then I may as well have stuck a jam jar in front of the lens. Now with the 2x converter on a 70-200mm I don;t bother using it. I find much better results by cropping the image.
wseed said:
...and this.
Worst photo gadget I've every bought. Years ago I bought a cheap one for using with a 70-300mm and as others have said in only the best light would it focus. Even then I may as well have stuck a jam jar in front of the lens. Now with the 2x converter on a 70-200mm I don;t bother using it. I find much better results by cropping the image.
It really does depend on the lens. I wouldn't use one on a zoom, they work very well on decent supertelephotos. Worst photo gadget I've every bought. Years ago I bought a cheap one for using with a 70-300mm and as others have said in only the best light would it focus. Even then I may as well have stuck a jam jar in front of the lens. Now with the 2x converter on a 70-200mm I don;t bother using it. I find much better results by cropping the image.
I use a 1.4 Canon and really can't notice any difference.
wseed said:
Worst photo gadget I've every bought. Years ago I bought a cheap one for using with a 70-300mm and as others have said in only the best light would it focus. Even then I may as well have stuck a jam jar in front of the lens. Now with the 2x converter on a 70-200mm I don;t bother using it. I find much better results by cropping the image.
This may be a factor...I was quite surprised when I attached a Canon 2x Tele-converter to my MP-E Macro lens. At full extension, the lens gives 5:1 "magnification"; with the tele-converter 10:1. This is necessary for subject at around 1mm. The image quality is perfectly acceptable. OK, this is a manual-focus lens even without the converter, but I was surprised how much resolution was retained with the set-up. Here's an example, a springtail measuring around 0.6mm:
Globular Springtail by Ed Phillips 01, on Flickr
Globular Springtail by Ed Phillips 01, on FlickrGravelBen said:
Out of interest, how does using the teleconverter for macro compare with extension tubes?
They are different tools for different jobs. After making my bold claims I decided to see if I was wrong.
Took the 1.4 out with my 70-200 2.8 ii. Still crap. Borrowed a 300mm 2.8 and again just okay... Certainly wouldn't want to be relying on it. I just hate the slowness of the af with it. Seems to track all over the place.
Will be bowing a supposed good mk3 to see how it compares. I'm not expecting great things.
Yep, I know the theory just interested in practice - I guess getting extreme magnification from the extension rings can reduce the working distance too much, even if it gives better image quality.
I was playing around recently with extension rings on a 400mm lens, with stacked extensions it seemed close to 1:1 macro with around 800mm working distance.
Obviously no good for far away things like the OP is trying to capture, but interesting how it all works.
I was playing around recently with extension rings on a 400mm lens, with stacked extensions it seemed close to 1:1 macro with around 800mm working distance.
Obviously no good for far away things like the OP is trying to capture, but interesting how it all works.
Simpo Two said:
If you have a 50mm lens, try it backwards...
Yip, thats what I've been using for most of my macro stuff - gives 1:1.4 reproduction ratio and about 100mm working distance.
Just got a set of extension rings to play with for a bit of variety and experimentation - extended reverse 50mm should be good for more magnification.
Bit off topic now, maybe I should move this to the macro thread.
Gassing Station | Photography & Video | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff