what do you think about the use of 500 f4 with 2X teleconverters?
some people believe that 2X TC should be used only with 300 2.8 and 400 2.8.
Printable View
what do you think about the use of 500 f4 with 2X teleconverters?
some people believe that 2X TC should be used only with 300 2.8 and 400 2.8.
If you have a 1D body it will AF and for better sharpness it helps to stop down a bit. Image quality is not as good as with a 1.4x TC but the extra reach can come in quite handy at times.
Hello fellow photogs---I have a 50D, 100 x 400mm----Would a 1.4x TC work with this set-up. I like to capture BIF and would like a reach to at least 500MM. Would the IQ be affected?---Thanks for the help!
Steve,Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve Meadows
This combination would be f/8 so you would lose autofocus on a 50D, so not good for BIF. Also, it is my opinion that the 100-400 isn't that sharp so adding a TC will not be all that great, but would probably give a little more detail than without the TC.
Steve- Canon 1.4 tc will fit and work but you will not have AF with the 50D as you will be at f8 when at 400 mm. I understand the Kenko and Tamron tcs will allow AF, and some people tape pins on the Canon tc. AF will be slow at f8 though. I imagine IQ would be affected somewhat. A friend of mine uses the 400/5.6 with the 1.4 tc and gets sharp results, however, again, unless you have a pro body, you will lose AF.
I use this combo all the time with a 1D Mark II and feel it produces great results. I also use it on a 5D Mark II and focus with live view, like this one:Quote:
Originally Posted by Paolo Piazza
http://www.clarkvision.com/galleries...244.b-800.html
The results on the full frame 5DII are great.
Roger
I use a 500 f4 and 2 X TC on my 1D MK2 with excellent results. Al Forns tried my set up theis past Feb and he was impressed.
Here is a link to an image from that trip http://www.birdphotographers.net/for...ad.php?t=32857
and another: http://www.birdphotographers.net/for...ad.php?t=31982
And one more: http://www.birdphotographers.net/for...ad.php?t=34367
The 500 f/4 does well with a 2x, especially if you have a pro body. Image quality isn't quite up to 1.4x standards but it's still quite good. Here's a sample of what the combination is capable of.
I am a Nikon shooter and I really do not know if there is a great difference in the performance of 500+2XTC between both brands but I think that the differences should be minimal because of the quality of the lens we are talking about. I think that the get the best performance of the 2XTC you should use in the appropiate conditions that, in my experience, are:
1) Rock solid support
2) Very good light conditions
3) Stop down the lens about 2 stops
4) Subjects should be close to the lens
You can "glue" the 1,4XTC to the lens because quality is very high but if you think that you can make the same with the 2X... it is not a great idea. Usually, we all tend to use the 2X-TC right in the opposite circunstances, birds placed very far, poor light conditions, wide opened lenses and the like and that is a great recipe for getting bad quality images and to blame on the 2XTC. I did it a lot on the past (with the 300 f2,8) but when I realized that under adecuate conditions the 2XTC works very fine I began to get very good quality images and the percentage of keepers increases a lot.
Of course, the fastest the lens, the better performance of the 2X (very, very good with the 200f2; quite good with the 300f2,8 and good with the f4 pro lenses)
You can read more about the use of the 2XTC with the 500VR in the following thread: http://www.birdphotographers.net/for...ad.php?t=13389
An example of the 300VR+2XTC for birds in flight http://www.birdphotographers.net/for...ad.php?t=18453
Hope it helps
"The Moon occults Venus at sunrise on April 22, 2009. Technical. Canon 5D Mark II 21 megapixel camera with 500 mm f/4 lesn plus a 2x TC. Image at 1000 mm f/9, 1/160 second ISO 200. Crop to 18.7 megapixels"Quote:
Originally Posted by rnclark
I am posting these details to tempt: OK lazy ones - Artie! - click on the link and check out the image!
Roger, my only surprise is the amount of light on the subject that allowed you to shoot that early in the morning at f/9, 1/1/60, ISO 200.
Hi Jay,Quote:
Originally Posted by Jay Gould
Remember that moon is illuminated by the sun and Venus is too. But Venus composed of bright clouds and closer to the sun means it is quite bright. Venus is brighter than new snow in full sunlight by about a stop. So the exposure was driven by not overexposing Venus. Finally, the image was taken just as the sun was poking over the horizon, so the sky was already quite bright.
Roger
Quote:
Originally Posted by rnclark
Im really surprised anyone would make a general comment about the 100-400 like this. This lens may not be "As Sharp" as a fixed 400MM but is a sharp lens if you have a good copy.
Dont let any body tell you this lens is not "Sharp", and no it will not do well at all with a TC
http://i24.photobucket.com/albums/c1...ER2/OSPREY.jpg
http://i24.photobucket.com/albums/c1...R2/LILLY04.jpg
http://i24.photobucket.com/albums/c1...OSPREY01-1.jpg
http://i24.photobucket.com/albums/c1...SHOPRESIZE.jpg
See:Quote:
Originally Posted by TEASER
http://www.clarkvision.com/imagedeta...lens-sharpness
Scroll down to the 100-400 images and tell me how sharp the 100-400 is compared to the other lenses on the page. All measured with the same technique. A friend has a 100-400 and did the same test with the same chart and his results came out very goof at 400. Perhaps I need to send mine back to Canon. Also, the result on my 100-400 is the same for multiple cameras, even back to film days.
Roger
