Check out Photo Critique Section section of our forum.
Osprey at 50-60 feet away.
Apr 9, 2017 21:59:29 #
foathog wrote:
That's good to know, Regis. I personally think that the 100-400 is a great close up lens too. so I agree with you there. but I was happy to see how sharp that lens was using the 2x when everyone on here seems to think it does the opposite
Many people think that a 2x converter automatically degrades the image. They are so wrong. If you have a great camera and a prime lens that is f4 to f2.8, you will get
a very sharp image especially if it is a Canon 2x III convertor. If the 2x III is not a Canon product, then the image may be degraded, because Canon 2x converters seem to be superior
to other 2x converters from what I have read and I believe I have proved this point with my many photos using a Canon 2x III converter.
I have used my camera (Canon 5Dsr) and lens (Canon 400 II DO f4) with and without the Canon 1.4x III, 2x III converters and the sharpness remains. No degradation of the photos.
But, people will believe what they want to.
Thank you, foathog.
Apr 9, 2017 22:00:16 #
Jim Bob wrote:
You always get those eyes right.
Thank you very much, Jim.
Apr 9, 2017 22:24:06 #
Check out Wedding Photography section of our forum.
Apr 9, 2017 22:35:24 #
Apr 9, 2017 23:50:42 #
Apr 9, 2017 23:52:13 #
sailorsmom wrote:
Excellent shot, Regis!
Thank you very much, Sue and Al.
Apr 10, 2017 02:13:33 #
WOW! That is superb! 
Regis wrote:
The Osprey was on top of a tree waiting to catch a fish in the lake below.
Hand held shot. 800mm photo.
Canon 5Dsr - Canon 400 II DO f4 - Canon 2.0x III - 1/640 - f/13 - ISO @ 1000.
Hand held shot. 800mm photo.
Canon 5Dsr - Canon 400 II DO f4 - Canon 2.0x III - 1/640 - f/13 - ISO @ 1000.
Apr 10, 2017 02:52:42 #
tropics68 wrote:
WOW! That is superb!
Thank you very much, tropics68.
Apr 10, 2017 03:21:58 #
Apr 10, 2017 10:39:47 #
TomV
Loc: Annapolis, Maryland
Regis wrote:
Many people think that a 2x converter automaticall... (show quote)
Regis, I agree with your assessment. I do not use a 2x, but I have evaluated a couple of versions of Minolta 1.4X and a Kenko MC4 DGX 1.4X with my 600mm prime on my Sony a99ii (42 Mpixel). I compared shots of hi tension power lines from over 1500 feet away and was hard pressed to see any differences between the use of the 1.4X compared to the naked a99ii.
I watched a B&H sponsored workshop by pro birder Arthur Morris and he has no qualms using the Canon 2X III. Other pros that I have seen in action also use converters and never talk about photo degradation, only the light loss. With enough light, the use of a matched converter on the correct lens is not a problem.
Apr 10, 2017 11:45:47 #
TomV wrote:
Regis, I agree with your assessment. I do not use ... (show quote)
Thank you for your input, TomV. The right camera and lens with the 2x converter will give you good detail. The cheaper 1.4x and 2x converters will give
a less than sharp image which probably is the reason many photographers don't like to use converters, TomV.
Below, is a recent bird photo that I took using a 2.0x converter and my Canon 5Dsr + Canon 400 II DO f4 lens at about 25-35 feet.
Check out Landscape Photography section of our forum.
Apr 10, 2017 12:49:22 #
Hi Regis, excellent shot as always. Were his feathers wet or is that how they always look? Keep them coming. Cheers.
Apr 10, 2017 13:43:32 #
flathead27ford wrote:
Hi Regis, excellent shot as always. Were his feathers wet or is that how they always look? Keep them coming. Cheers.
That day was cold, windy with rain. The feathers are puffed up to keep warm.
Thank you very much, flathead27ford.
Apr 10, 2017 18:01:28 #
Apr 10, 2017 18:43:50 #
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
Check out People Photography section of our forum.