Ugly Hedgehog - Photography Forum
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register ☰
Main Photography Discussion
2x Teleconverters
Page <prev 2 of 5 next> last>>
Oct 4, 2011 09:53:32   #
Twardlow Loc: Arkansas
 
I use the 1.4 that Nikon makes (on d90 and d7000) and it works great. I generally leave it on all the time, using the 2.8, 70-200. Thom, on his website, thinks it may actually improve the corners slightly. I'm away from home now, but will try to upload some images soon. Or look up clancy_mora on flickr.

cheers, moi

Reply
Oct 4, 2011 11:35:20   #
photocat Loc: Atlanta, Ga
 
mora is your last name Clancy? I know we are not related,but interesting to find another clancy here/

Reply
Oct 4, 2011 11:40:51   #
Dyluck4 Loc: Georgetown Indiana
 
ShakyShutter wrote:
Susan17 wrote:
SQUIRL033 wrote:
i've used teleconverters, but i almost never do anymore. they cost too much in terms of light, and i have yet to find one that doesn't degrade image quality.

remember that with a 2x TC, you'll lose 2 stops, and your AF may or may not work - on Canons, the AF only works if the max aperture is f/5.6 or greater. don't know if Nikons are the same, but it's worth checking out before you buy a converter. your lens is f/6.3 wide open at 300mm; with the TC, that max aperture would be f/11 or smaller. as KG said, even in bright light, f/11 is going to give you some pretty slow shutter speeds, and it'll be hopeless in the early morning or evening when wildlife is most active. you may find you have to crank the ISO up so high that noise becomes an issue. if the lens is stabilized, that'll help, but even with that, in low light you'll have problems.
i've used teleconverters, but i almost never do an... (show quote)


By stabilized, do you mean the use of a tripod?
quote=SQUIRL033 i've used teleconverters, but i a... (show quote)


I'm sure by stablized he means a VR (vibration reduction) equipped lenz and a tripod wouldn't hurt either.

Be especially quiet if you are sneekin up on a bear.
quote=Susan17 quote=SQUIRL033 i've used teleconv... (show quote)


And your Husbands 450 Bushmaster! Oh "Shoot" this is a Camera forum!

Reply
 
 
Oct 4, 2011 11:44:13   #
Susan17 Loc: Elk Grove, CA
 
Dyluck4 wrote:
ShakyShutter wrote:
Susan17 wrote:
SQUIRL033 wrote:
i've used teleconverters, but i almost never do anymore. they cost too much in terms of light, and i have yet to find one that doesn't degrade image quality.

remember that with a 2x TC, you'll lose 2 stops, and your AF may or may not work - on Canons, the AF only works if the max aperture is f/5.6 or greater. don't know if Nikons are the same, but it's worth checking out before you buy a converter. your lens is f/6.3 wide open at 300mm; with the TC, that max aperture would be f/11 or smaller. as KG said, even in bright light, f/11 is going to give you some pretty slow shutter speeds, and it'll be hopeless in the early morning or evening when wildlife is most active. you may find you have to crank the ISO up so high that noise becomes an issue. if the lens is stabilized, that'll help, but even with that, in low light you'll have problems.
i've used teleconverters, but i almost never do an... (show quote)


By stabilized, do you mean the use of a tripod?
quote=SQUIRL033 i've used teleconverters, but i a... (show quote)


I'm sure by stablized he means a VR (vibration reduction) equipped lenz and a tripod wouldn't hurt either.

Be especially quiet if you are sneekin up on a bear.
quote=Susan17 quote=SQUIRL033 i've used teleconv... (show quote)


And your Husbands 450 Bushmaster! Oh "Shoot" this is a Camera forum!
quote=ShakyShutter quote=Susan17 quote=SQUIRL03... (show quote)


You all are too funny! I love it.

Reply
Oct 4, 2011 12:15:25   #
ShakyShutter Loc: Arizona
 
SQUIRL033 wrote:
Susan17 wrote:
SQUIRL033 wrote:
i've used teleconverters, but i almost never do anymore. they cost too much in terms of light, and i have yet to find one that doesn't degrade image quality.

remember that with a 2x TC, you'll lose 2 stops, and your AF may or may not work - on Canons, the AF only works if the max aperture is f/5.6 or greater. don't know if Nikons are the same, but it's worth checking out before you buy a converter. your lens is f/6.3 wide open at 300mm; with the TC, that max aperture would be f/11 or smaller. as KG said, even in bright light, f/11 is going to give you some pretty slow shutter speeds, and it'll be hopeless in the early morning or evening when wildlife is most active. you may find you have to crank the ISO up so high that noise becomes an issue. if the lens is stabilized, that'll help, but even with that, in low light you'll have problems.
i've used teleconverters, but i almost never do an... (show quote)


By stabilized, do you mean the use of a tripod?
quote=SQUIRL033 i've used teleconverters, but i a... (show quote)


no, stabilized means the lens has an internal mechanism to help counteract camera shake. some Tamron 28-300 lenses for Nikons - those made within the last couple of years - have a feature called "VC", for Vibration Control. when it's turned on, it helps keep camera shake from showing up in your photos, and lets you shoot usually a couple of stops slower shutter speed than you could otherwise do. if you have that feature, it's very helpful - i have a similar feature on my 100-400, and it's on all the time.
quote=Susan17 quote=SQUIRL033 i've used teleconv... (show quote)


What do you mean "NO" it means lens with internal mechanism...
That would be a YES in anyone's book.
Vibration Reduction, Vibration Control is there really a difference to someone asking an innocent question???

Reply
Oct 4, 2011 12:19:08   #
Gene
 
I use my 2x teleconverter with my Olympus cameras and am well satisfied with it. Keep in my that there is a 2 stop light loss.

Reply
Oct 4, 2011 13:23:41   #
gessman Loc: Colorado
 
Susan, some, if not all, of these folks who've replied to you are out to get world class images and do. While that might be really nice, if that's not what you're looking to do, a 2x might be very useful to you.

Reply
 
 
Oct 4, 2011 13:26:28   #
Susan17 Loc: Elk Grove, CA
 
gessman wrote:
Susan, some, if not all, of these folks who've replied to you are out to get world class images and do. While that might be really nice, if that's not what you're looking to do, a 2x might be very useful to you.


Thank you. I am a bit of a newbie and often wish I could pics of animals far away but don't want the extra weight, expense and room the huge lenses entail.

Reply
Oct 4, 2011 13:35:33   #
SQUIRL033 Loc: Chehalis, WA
 
ShakyShutter wrote:
What do you mean "NO" it means lens with internal mechanism...
That would be a YES in anyone's book.
Vibration Reduction, Vibration Control is there really a difference to someone asking an innocent question???


did you read her question?
she asked if vibration reduction meant using a tripod. i answer, no, it stands for...

simple English.

Reply
Oct 4, 2011 13:37:27   #
SQUIRL033 Loc: Chehalis, WA
 
gessman wrote:
Susan, some, if not all, of these folks who've replied to you are out to get world class images and do. While that might be really nice, if that's not what you're looking to do, a 2x might be very useful to you.


i agree. i just don't like to give people advice and then have them be disappointed with the results. especially when a 2x TC would inflict such a penalty in terms of shutter speed with her lens...

Reply
Oct 4, 2011 13:54:11   #
tainkc Loc: Kansas City
 
I have a 2x teleconverter and yes, the pictures tend to come out soft most of the time but they aren't bad. Sometimes, when I have everything just right. my photos are sharp as a tack. They are fun to play with.

Reply
 
 
Oct 4, 2011 13:54:58   #
dasboat Loc: Vernonia,Ore.(Vernowhere)
 
I used the canon 2x with a 100-44 maxed out at a bay in Astoria,or. this weekend to try and get a shot of something swiming 250-300 yards away,no stalking here.With mid day overcast,It seemed at the threshold of needed light.It wasn't till I got home that I could see the critter was a beaver with great clarity for that range,yet soft like all you say.It seems like a spy satalite when you can zoom in that close and see detail.

Reply
Oct 4, 2011 14:08:11   #
Susan17 Loc: Elk Grove, CA
 
So, is there a decent one at a reasonable price, around $100 -$200?

Reply
Oct 4, 2011 14:10:45   #
Susan17 Loc: Elk Grove, CA
 
Susan17 wrote:
So, is there a decent one at a reasonable price, around $100 -$200?


I have a nikon D-80 and a Tamron 28-300 lens 1:3.5-6.3

Reply
Oct 4, 2011 14:12:11   #
gessman Loc: Colorado
 
SQUIRL033 wrote:
gessman wrote:
Susan, some, if not all, of these folks who've replied to you are out to get world class images and do. While that might be really nice, if that's not what you're looking to do, a 2x might be very useful to you.


i agree. i just don't like to give people advice and then have them be disappointed with the results. especially when a 2x TC would inflict such a penalty in terms of shutter speed with her lens...


I understand your urge and fully agree but you're not responsible for HER urges and sometimes there is merit in letting others, if the expense isn't too great, see the results of their own folly, if we dare call it that. They, then, have the opportunity to do with or without it and at no penalty to you, or me as the case may be. If, on the other hand, their sights are not set as high, they may be tickled pink and think you're an absolute wizard. Some of us had rather see a fuzzy bird than no bird at all and with free shots and the burst mode they might even luck out and do better than fuzzy. I do all the time. :-)

Reply
Page <prev 2 of 5 next> last>>
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
Main Photography Discussion
Home | Latest Digest | Back to Top | All Sections
Contact us | Privacy policy | Terms of use | DMCA
UglyHedgehog.com - Forum
Copyright 2011-2024 Ugly Hedgehog, Inc.