Experimenting With Extenders

GerryNick2 · #1 (**permalink**) 25-01-2008, 11:04 AM

Whether to purchase an Extender or Teleconvertor can be a bit of a nightmare. When you search forums there is so much conflicting information on lens compatability,image degradation,loss of AF etc its like walking through a minefield.

As a result of duplicated Xmas presents I now seem to have acquired 3 extenders, a Kenko AF 1.5 x Teleplus DG, a Kenko PRO 300 1.4x and the Canon Extender 1.4x II.

Primarily they are for use with my Canon 30D and 100-400mm.

The Canon extender is a bit restictive, it just does what it says on the box. It only fits the listed L class lenses and in the case of the 30D + 100-400mm you loose AF and have to focus manually. Manual focus is a bit of a pain but get it right and the images are very sharp with no noticeable image degradtion which is what you would expect from Canon and at a cost £200+. If you are lucky enough to have a 1D series camera AF is of course retained.

I have not had chance to use the Kenko Pro 1.4x yet so will feed back on this one at a later date.

In respect of the Kenko AF 1.5 x Teleplus DG I must say that early results are encouraging. It fits all my Canon lenses as unlike the Canon it does not have a protruding element and AF works extremely well and no effect on IS. There is no reporting back to the camera so no need for taping etc, the EXIF data still shows the original lens focal length. Works extremely well on my EF 70-300mm F4.5-5.6 DO IS which gives me a very light and compact walk about set up and an extended range of 105-450, great for Zoo pics etc. Likewise on the 100-400mm AF is retained, there is a bit of play between the lens and convertor but it does not seem to effect image quality. As to image quality they do seem to be a little soft, but I put some of this down to poor light and camera technique.

This shot was taken this morning at a distance of 30 feet using the 100-400mm + 1.5tc, at 600mm, hand held, ISO800, f5.6, 1/125sec. May be a little on the soft side but did not think it was too bad for a snapshot, a tripod or monopod would no doubt have produced a sharper image. See what you think and give me some feedback.

Gerry

Tobyh · #2 (**permalink**) 25-01-2008, 12:39 PM

Handheld at that shutter speed I think you got a pretty reasonable result. Like you say it's a little on the soft side but it is only just off.

I tend to use my Kenko 1.4 DG Pro a little too much as I only have a 300mm lense at this point. Given the right shooting circumstances they can produce excellent results. I don't find mine restricting me, if anything it's my technique.

Also my TC works well with the lenses I do have, no issues at all (Sigma 70-300 and a Tamron 90mm Macro) on a D50.

Claymore · #3 (**permalink**) 26-01-2008, 08:10 PM

Interesting stuff Gerry! i have been thinking of buying a 1.4x for my Sigma 50-500mm still not sure if they would work ok together? not too bothered about auto working as i tend to switch it off more than anything. My camera is a Canon 350D i can see a slight softness on your photo but it doesn't spoil it at all, He looks ready to leap Geronimo! LoL
Lovely shot
Cheers
Brian
ps do you shoot in RAW mode? i keep seeing articles in the magazines saying how much better it is than JPEG but concerned about the file size? would it slow down my camera when firing multiple shots? (the speed it rights to the memory card) as i wouldn't want to miss a good shot while waiting for it to write to the card.

MagpieMick · #4 (**permalink**) 26-01-2008, 08:57 PM

Gerry,

The 1.5x would be the weak performer both the other two work very well...
As you say kenko 300 straight out the box and the Canon needs the pins taped, these work best when tripod mounted.
A few times when needed i've stacked convertors 1.4x on 1.4x so 2.8x this was for record shots as i could not get close enough, the light was o.k. and using the same technique as for Digiscoping ( take hundreds of shots to get a few keepers ) ended up with some userable results.............!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Claymore:

" i keep seeing articles in the magazines saying how much better it is than JPEG but concerned about the file size? would it slow down my camera when firing multiple shots? (the speed it rights to the memory card) as i wouldn't want to miss a good shot while waiting for it to write to the card."

Here we go !!! RAW V JPEG ...Yes it is depending on your final use of image..Yes it will slow down the write time by about 50% ish....better to miss a shot once in awhile keeps you on your toes........

Mick.

glsammy · #5 (**permalink**) 26-01-2008, 09:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Claymore

Interesting stuff Gerry! i have been thinking of buying a 1.4x for my Sigma 50-500mm still not sure if they would work ok together? not too bothered about auto working as i tend to switch it off more than anything. My camera is a Canon 350D i can see a slight softness on your photo but it doesn't spoil it at all, He looks ready to leap Geronimo! LoL
Lovely shot
Cheers
Brian
ps do you shoot in RAW mode? i keep seeing articles in the magazines saying how much better it is than JPEG but concerned about the file size? would it slow down my camera when firing multiple shots? (the speed it rights to the memory card) as i wouldn't want to miss a good shot while waiting for it to write to the card.

I wouldn't recommend any extenders on your 50-500mm. There's been quite a few threads about this, mainly by me!

The net results were that in PERFECT light, you can get a reasonable shot, at the cost of a great deal of CA plus a very soft image.
In anything other than perfect light, forget it. Horrendous results.

Suffice to say my 1.4X TC stays on my 150mm, where it works superbly well.

Claymore · #6 (**permalink**) 27-01-2008, 12:52 PM

Thanks for the info Mick, I think i will have a go at RAW when we eventually get a bright day maybe do some Raw/Jpeg's of the same shot to compare?
As for the 1.4x converter i think i will get one to playe around with while saving up for a bigger lens, the Sigmonster looks like a great piece of kit? would it be pointless getting one for the 350D or should i upgrade the Body+Lens? I know they are gert big walloping lenses but being disabled i do most of my photography seated/tripod so not bothered about the weight.
Thanks for all your advice
Cheerio
Brian In a Very wet/wild Scotland

peterjclarke · #7 (**permalink**) 29-01-2008, 09:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Claymore

Thanks for the info Mick, I think i will have a go at RAW when we eventually get a bright day maybe do some Raw/Jpeg's of the same shot to compare?
As for the 1.4x converter i think i will get one to playe around with while saving up for a bigger lens, the Sigmonster looks like a great piece of kit? would it be pointless getting one for the 350D or should i upgrade the Body+Lens? I know they are gert big walloping lenses but being disabled i do most of my photography seated/tripod so not bothered about the weight.
Thanks for all your advice
Cheerio
Brian In a Very wet/wild Scotland

I would recommend going for a 300mm F2.8 and tele converter before going for the Sigmonster. I have a friend who has the Sigmonster and has hardly used it. He bought it because he though wow 800mm. It's a lens you can carry about one hundred metres, then you feel like leaving it in a bush and coming back with a forklift.
Peter

mh68 · #8 (**permalink**) 29-01-2008, 09:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by peterjclarke

I would recommend going for a 300mm F2.8 and tele converter before going for the Sigmonster. I have a friend who has the Sigmonster and has hardly used it. He bought it because he though wow 800mm. It's a lens you can carry about one hundred metres, then you feel like leaving it in a bush and coming back with a forklift.
Peter

A mate of mine who has the Sigmonster actually transports it any distance on a home made trolley

.....if the site doesnt have good paths etc to use the trolley the Sigmonster gets left at home.

Mark H