Daxster

I have used the 1.6 crop on my r and it works very well with 70/200 no change in f stop.Gives me 320mm at no cost

CHG_CANON Loc: the Windy City

Changing your 30MP full-frame camera to a 11.6MP crop body is a 'cost' probably most of us wouldn't consider.

Blurryeyed Loc: NC Mountains.

I would argue that your sensor limits the reach of even the best of lenses because of pixelation that occurs in cropping a small section out of a larger image, something that most wildlife photographers find themselves having to do. An extender can help to cure that problem, personally I use the Canon 300mm f/2.8 II with the 2X extender for birding and get terrific results, that current setup replaced a 500 f/4 and I find it to have better performance across the board.

Blurryeyed Loc: NC Mountains.

You are not actually changing the reach nor are you changing the pixel density in your image, you are simply changing the coverage on your sensor, most of us would simply crop in post, the best use for the crop on the R is for the use of EF-S lenses.

philo Loc: philo, ca

I only shoot the sun at night. hoho

Notorious T.O.D. Loc: Harrisburg, North Carolina

If you use an extender you are putting the same number of pixels on a smaller view of the scene. That increases the number of pixels over the smaller area in view vs cropping a larger area in my experience. If this wasn’t true we could just shoot everything with one focal length and crop to what we wanted, right... No, doesn’t work that way in my book.

Blurryeyed Loc: NC Mountains.

I am not sure what you are trying to say, my point was that he is just using a smaller portion of his 30mp sensor, it is not like he is using a 24mp crop camera which translates to a 50mp plus full frame, he is simply cropping the 30mp image in his camera vs post, it does not improve the image sharpness at a given focal length, a high density crop sensor will provide better sharpness than a 30mp sensor cropped is the point that I was trying to make and the crop feature on the Canon R is not an equivalent to the Canon 90D for instance. Personally I would prefer to crop in post.

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

Agreed, a 2X on say a 300 3.8 or a 500 or 600 f4 is JUST, OK. But on a zoom lens, even a fast one, you are asking for less than a stellar performance from that lens.
MOST folks, not all, get a 2X to save a buck and not buy a longer telephoto. Most folks don't want to fork out the money so they seek a less expensive alternative, I get that, I was there myself once long ago.
But as I came to appreciate long fast lenses and sharp longer zooms i began to understand my subjects and how to get closer to them by paying close attention to their habits I got better and better shots.
Anything over a 1.4 on a fast prime for me is asking for trouble. So I simply avoid and travel to places where I know I can get the shot without having to rely on extender's.
The image below was taken of a 4 week old Sand Hill Crane Colt using a D850 and a Nikon 200-500 5.6 lens without a extender, I know where he/she was going to cross the path each day from previous observation's, so I placed myself where I could get the Colt as he/she came over a small rise to cross the path.
1/2500 sec. f8, 360mm ISO 3200.

Resqu2 Loc: SW Va

Thanks for the info you provided. Great shot to. For me photography is a hobby and while I’d love to have a big, fast prime lens I don’t see it happening as I just don’t have that kind of money. If I can get ok shots of the local squirrels and a few other things I would be happy. I did find a small well stocked lake that an Eagle and Hawk fish in and fight over and I’d love to get better shots of them also.

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

Hey, talking about saving money, if you were willing to spend $500.00 for the latest Canon 2 X extender
https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/732111-USA/Canon_4410B002_Extender_EF_2X_III.html?sts=pi&pim=Y

Then for a grand more you can get this, why skimp when you can get better results using the same camera and have a lens that will deliver over time.
https://www.ebay.com/itm/Canon-EF-100-400mm-f-4-5-5-6-L-IS-II-USM-SKU-976860/283860390212?epid=11030516553&hash=item421765d144:g:IikAAOSwRLxeppRp
Can you handle $70.00 a month?

CHG_CANON Loc: the Windy City

We're always left wondering why non Canon users extrapolate their experiences onto the performance characteristics of Canon's Extender 1.4III and 2.0III. A couple of random 2x selections, including a moving / panning subject. Slightly higher resolution versions are available via URL links to the Flickr host page.

Chimpanzee by Paul Sager, on Flickr


Kyle Franklin - Dracula by Paul Sager, on Flickr

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

Nikon and Sony can both post these types of images using 2X extenders. But for the average JOE, which is what we are all talking about here, 2X extenders are a detriment to a quality image.

Resqu2 Loc: SW Va

Thanks for the links, My plan was to spend around $275-300 for a used one, that’s what they seem to be running over on FM. I may look for a longer lens that’s used also. I just can’t afford the big and fast ones. They are as much as a small car lol.

philo Loc: philo, ca

I have never tried this before;but because of you post I garbed my gear and gave it a shot.
body canon eos R, Lens canon 70-200, canon 2x extender. hand held ...just a grab shot.

Resqu2 Loc: SW Va

I see no problem at all with that. Thanks for doing that and posting.