Upload your photos, chat, win prizes and much more
Can't Access your Account?
New to ePHOTOzine? Join ePHOTOzine for free!
Upload photos, chat with photographers, win prizes and much more for free!
I shoot with a Sony A300 and have the 18-70mm that came as a kit and I also purchased a Sigma 70-300mm Macro, and I have a Sigma 28mm macro. I am very pleased with the quality of each of the lenses but I would like to be able to reach out a little farther, say to maybe 500mm but I can't make myself shell out that kind of cash just yet so I was thinking about going with a 2x converter and was interested to hear some of the pro's and con's regarding them. Thanks
Join ePHOTOzine for free and remove these adverts.
I use a Kenko 2x and though when you pick it up it feels cheaply made, the optical quality is spot on , it enables my 80-200 nikkor to stil run at f2.8 and retains all metering & focus functions, can recommend them if available in your fitting and cheaper than home brand.
Quote: ...it enables my 80-200 nikkor to stil run at f2.8...
Not strictly true there Graham. It's a 2x so you are shooting at f5.6 when fully open and not f2.8.
Check here to see if your lenses are compatible with the Sigma teleconvertors.
The 70-300mm won't take a teleconverter and even if you found one that would fit onto the lens the lens itself does not have enough quality to actually give you a usable increase in focal length. Already the lens is going softer at 300mm end - to take it longer would just give you very soft images.
I would not advise this - further teleconverters generally don't fit shorter focal range lenses - I do know however that hte sigma 70mm macro takes teleconverters (sigma) very well though its not listed to and the teleconverters appear not to report to exif.
I have never found one that could give me better quality than simple cropping and I only use one if it is the only way to get the image big enough on the sensor to use and if there is absolutely no other option available, such as walking closer !
Don't waste your money, no f5.6 zoom lens is suitable for a 1.4x converter let alone a 2x.
Thanks for the info !
I have a canon 90-300mm 1:4 - 5:6 EF lens and do some bird photography. I suppose I should be grateful for the images I get with this lens but would love to get closer shots without shelling out shed loads of money on a new lens. Can anyone suggest a teleconverter/extension tube that would do the job on a tighter budget ?
Can anyone suggest a teleconverter/extension tube that would do the job on a tighter budget ?
Afraid not, but you could try buying a portable hide instead, so you can get closer.
Extension tubes are used for macro work or to shorten the minimum focus distance of a lens so are totally useless for birds at distance.
Quote: I have a canon 90-300mm 1:4 - 5:6 EF lens and do some bird photography. I suppose I should be grateful for the images I get with this lens but would love to get closer shots without shelling out shed loads of money on a new lens. Can anyone suggest a teleconverter/extension tube that would do the job on a tighter budget ?
I don't see your lens on this compatibility list, so that might be a problem. Doesn't mean that it couldn't work with extenders of another brand, like Kenko or Soligor, or even Sigma, but it's not a good sign. Besides, you may wonder if the quality of your lens is high enough - quality always suffers a bit when you add a teleconverter, so you want to use it with a high quality lens only.
Extension tubes, as mentioned above, are not the same as extenders, don't get them confused. Extenders and teleconverters are one and the same thing, but extension tubes do the opposite.
Quote: I don't see your lens on this compatibility list, so that might be a problem. Doesn't mean that it couldn't work with extenders of another brand, like Kenko or Soligor, or even Sigma,
Not a surprise really everyone of those lenses is an L series which is what Canon converters are built for. Sigma converters are also likely to be out as they also have a protruding element that could damage a non-compatible lens.
The other two may fit physically, but AF will be lost and image degradation will be significant.
Correct. Therefore I wasn't about to recommend it.
without wanting to hi-jack the thread,what are ones considered opinions on the quality/difference between a Sigma 1.4x & the Canon 1.4x
Not a cost question
Well image quality wise the sigma is pretty much as good as the canon 1.4TC - though on a fullframe camera the sigma has slight shadowing on the edges (vignetting) but its not extreme - certainly workable. Aside from that the canon only really has the weather sealing advantage over the sigma - whilst the sigma will fit onto more lenses than the canon will (though it still has protruding front elements so it won't fit everything)
Honestly I can hardly tell any difference between my sigam and canon teleconverters when used on a crop sensor camera - though the sigma 2* televonverer is not a full 2* and is more of a 1.95* - side to side you notice the difference - inthe field its hardly noticable
ePHOTOzine, the web's friendliest photography community.
Upload photos, chat with photographers, win prizes and much more.
You must be a member to leave a comment
Get the latest photography news straight from ePHOTOzine in your email every month and win prizes!
01/09/2014 - 30/09/2014
Check out ePHOTOzine's inspirational photo month calendar! Each day click on a window to unveil new photography tips, treats and techniques.
View September's Photo Month Calendar