Lens teleconverter or Nikon P900 ?? What do you think: My boys like to hunt in the fall and winter - I like to go with with and take pictures from the blind. Last year I brought my...

TommiRulz Loc: Corpus Christi, TX

My boys like to hunt in the fall and winter - I like to go with with and take pictures from the blind. Last year I brought my Sigma 50-500 with Canon 7Dmii - and it was not enough reach for some of the animals. So I was thinking this year to buy a Sigma 2X teleconverter, but the reviews are so mixed - I though maybe a Nikon P900 would be just as good as my DSLR, because they say you loose so much quality with the converter. So anyone have the Sigma 2X converter?? What do you think, do you loose enough quality to just go with the P900 or are those reviews exaggerated?

Old Timer Loc: Greenfield, In.

My experience with tc are that 1.4 is workable but with 2x most cameras will not auto focus. There definitely is a loss of quality with one. I have 1.4 and seldom use it. They are designed for prime lens primarily with fixed apertures. Mine works on my two prime lens and 70-200 alright but on other lens not the best results. I have not any experience with Sigma tc.but you would need to go to reviews and others that have used it.

dpfoto Loc: Cape Coral, FL

I was seriously considering a P900 until I looked more carefully at the specs... (1) It has a VERY tiny sensor, (2) It will not save the images as RAW/NEF, (3) It has no hot shoe for flash. Without those, particularly 1 & 2, I wouldn't want it.

RWCRNC Loc: Pennsylvania

I have the Canon Sx50 and while not as much reach as the P900, the IQ is not that great on the long end.

insman1132 Loc: Southwest Florida

Do you shoot a lot in RAW?? If yes, you won't want the P900. If you don't use RAW the P900 has a lot going for it as your choice for long range nature photography. I will say this, however, I don't think you will be satisfied with the 2x tc as a solution.

Besides, admit it! You'd really like to have another/new camera, wouldn't you??!!

Either way, have fun with your final choice.

ggttc Loc: TN

Yeah...I've looked at the P900 but no Raw...no deal.

Take a look at the Canon SX 60. I have one and its a fine little camera. In fact its one of the cameras we're going to set up for the eclipse

Tripod or monopod on the long end

MT Shooter Loc: Montana

TommiRulz wrote:

My boys like to hunt in the fall and winter - I li... (show quote)

You are alrady using a 500mm lens on a crop sensor camer giving you an equivalent field of view as an 800mm on a full frame. Just get closer to the wildlife and forget a TC on that slow lens.

TommiRulz Loc: Corpus Christi, TX

insman1132 wrote:

Do you shoot a lot in RAW?? If yes, you won't want the P900. If you don't use RAW the P900 has a lot going for it as your choice for long range nature photography. I will say this, however, I don't think you will be satisfied with the 2x tc as a solution.

Besides, admit it! You'd really like to have another/new camera, wouldn't you??!!

Either way, have fun with your final choice.

Ha ha ha - Probably - I do LOVE new cameras.... but I also LOVE good photos, so just wondering what might be best. Shhh.. don't tell the others but I shoot Jpeg (I know - gross) but I hate post processing and do very little of it. Thanks for the tip on the 2xtc

TommiRulz Loc: Corpus Christi, TX

MT Shooter wrote:

You are alrady using a 500mm lens on a crop sensor camer giving you an equivalent field of view as an 800mm on a full frame. Just get closer to the wildlife and forget a TC on that slow lens.

Well I'm in the blind and they are at the feeder - I don't know how I would get closer. My pics were pretty good last year but when I cropped in close they were grainy

TommiRulz Loc: Corpus Christi, TX

Old Timer wrote:

My experience with tc are that 1.4 is workable but with 2x most cameras will not auto focus. There definitely is a loss of quality with one. I have 1.4 and seldom use it. They are designed for prime lens primarily with fixed apertures. Mine works on my two prime lens and 70-200 alright but on other lens not the best results. I have not any experience with Sigma tc.but you would need to go to reviews and others that have used it.

Thanks for the tip

DOOK Loc: Maclean, Australia

I regularly 'shoot' long range wildlife (mainly birds) & I have a D7100/Sigma 120-400mm/Tamron 150-600 with a Sigma 2X converter, & a P900. IMO, the P900 leaves the other set up for dead. The DSLR with the converter is big, heavy & manual focus (which all means slow & not very practical). On the other hand, providing a good rest is used (I use a monopod), the P900 will take clean, sharp pics at 2,000mm without much difficulty (I have posted many 2,000mm shots in the Gallery). 800mm to 1,500mm shots are just a walk in the park. I don't shoot RAW, but if you do insist on RAW, you can rule out the P900, as others have stated.

Earl.

TommiRulz Loc: Corpus Christi, TX

DOOK wrote:

I regularly 'shoot' long range wildlife (mainly bi... (show quote)

Thanks for the very constructive advice - I'm always tentative to ask questions here because some members just like to be mean and nasty. But it looks like the P900 is going to be my best bet. I'll check out your gallery - thanks again

DOOK Loc: Maclean, Australia

TommiRulz wrote:

Thanks for the very constructive advice - I'm always tentative to ask questions here because some members just like to be mean and nasty. But it looks like the P900 is going to be my best bet. I'll check out your gallery - thanks again

Bill, I'll put my money where my mouth is. This shot was taken with my P900 at 2,000mm. I used a monopod & had my back against the side of my van for steadiness. Results like this are the norm, not the exception. By the way, the P900 takes superb videos, too. I would gladly recommend it.

Eatl.

(Download)

TommiRulz Loc: Corpus Christi, TX

Oh WOW - great picture!! Thanks again !!

billnikon Loc: Pennsylvania/Ohio/Florida/Maui/Oregon/Vermont

TommiRulz wrote:

My boys like to hunt in the fall and winter - I li... (show quote)

P900