whlsdn Loc: Colorado

Yes, I've searched the TELECONVERTER topic and read through several of the threads, and I understand the cautions of light loss and possible image "softening." But if some fellow hoggers have some advice to share for my specific set of circumstances, I'd enjoy reading it.

I currently possess 2 crop sensor cameras:

Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX85 with 2 lenses: Lumix G X VARIO 1:2.8/35-100 POWER O.I.S. and LUMIX G VARIO 1:4.0-5.6/100-300 (all purchased new a few years ago from Mikes Camera in Boulder, CO)

Canon EOS 60D with 2 lenses: Tamron SP AF ASPHERICAL XR Di LD (IF) 28-75mm 1:2.8 MACRO and Canon Zoom Lens EF-S 18-200 1:3.5-5.6 IS (all items bought used in recent months from private parties... camera inspected, cleaned, & adjusted by Key Camera in Longmont, CO - rated "nice")

My usual photography activities include shooting landscapes & wildlife, sunsets & occasional sunrises, granddaughter's volleyball tourneys, family & friends gatherings and activities (camping), occasional motorcycle races, and "chronicling" our motorhome and motorcycle travels...fewer of the latter these days.

So, for those of you still with me (and I admire your patience), I'm considering a used teleconverter for one of my two cameras as opposed to buying a new long reach telephoto, $s being limited. Having just started, I have yet to find any for the Lumix. For the 60D I have found at KEH 3 brands at OK prices: a Promaster 2X Spectrum 7 Digital, Kenko 2X Teleplus MC7 DGX Black, and - at the top of the price heap - Tamron 2X SP 300F Black.

If I shoot in good light, will I be equipped to get decent photos with the Canon? Do you have any cautions about any of these 3 brands of teleconverters? I know and like Tamron...so far. I've used Promaster filters. I've read nothing bad about any of these, but the price of the Promaster is only $42 while still being rated in excellent conditions, so I'm drawn to that. Plus today's KEH sale is extra motivation for buying lenses today!

LATER: I've just found reviews of the Tamron, many of which suggest it does not work at all with Canon lenses, just Tamron lenses. Of course, not all agree. LOL....groan LATER STILL: I see BH specifies they work with Tamron lenses.

JimRPhoto Loc: Raleigh NC

The teleconverter may be one of the most useful accessories you get for your outfit. I have had a number over the years by various third party makers, and they all suffered noticeable loss in sharpness, but with one exception. Recently I came back to Canon, and one of your camera sets is a Canon along with a Canon lens. By far, I have had the most success with a Canon 1.4 teleconverter to go with my Canon zoom lens (70-200). I have the teleconverter that is made for the lens (it will not work with my other Canon lenses, only the one). This is one of the best decisions I have made concerning sharpness, minimum loss of light, compatibility, etc. I would recommend a Canon teleconverter to use with your Canon "long" zoom lens. JimR

whlsdn Loc: Colorado

Thanks, Jim! I'll look for that, though I know it'll be more $. (Always pays not to scrimp from the start, I know.)

whlsdn Loc: Colorado

Yikes! The Canon teleconverter is about $430 in either 1.4 or 2x. Grey market about $250. Woof. Even if I'd risk the grey market choice, I will have to delay on that luxury, I think. Guess I'll just have to sneak up on things a while longer.

JimH123 Loc: Morgan Hill, CA

I haven't had much success with generic TCs. And I have also found that I get better results if I stop the lens down quite a bit, which makes use of them even more difficult. And I find also that they work better with primes than with zooms.

That said, I should ask how you expect to use that extra reach. I have had a much better experience using older manual prime lenses. Of course this means manual focusing, and perhaps that doesn't appeal to you. But these older lenses can often be found for reasonable prices.

One that I find that is good is the old Asahi Pentax Takumar SMC 400mm f5.6. I get very sharp pictures. But I do have to manually focus. I have used it with full frame, APS-C and m4/3.

CHG_CANON Loc: the Windy City

If the teleconverter is not physically compatible with the target lens, it doesn't matter. For Canon lenses, this means only the L-series prime lenses of 135mm or longer, plus a select few zooms can have either EF 1.4 and 2.0 extenders physically attached to the lens. You also have to confirm the AF capabilities of your camera, what is the smallest aperture the camera will retain AF with? You're 60D is rated to only f/5.6, see page 75 of the 60D user manual.

Once you move away from L-series lenses and doubling the aperture of an f/2.8 or faster prime lens, you should limit your selection of extenders to the same brand as the lens.

You should recognize given the lenses and camera involved in your post, you're investigating a way to waste your money.

joer Loc: Colorado/Illinois

Good extenders are expensive and degrade image quality from a little to a lot. Over the years I have learned its better to crop or just to get a good quality longer lens and skip the extender.

Gene51 Loc: Yonkers, NY, now in LSD (LowerSlowerDelaware)

Generally speaking a Tele converter is intended for fast, telephoto lenses, and a limited number of fast zooms - with F2.8 and F4 the likeliest maximum apertures for best results. Some lenses come with dedicated TCs, like the Nikkor 180-400, the Canon 200-400. In some cases, like Sigma's and Tamron's 150-600s - their TC and the lens firmware presents the lens as an F5.6, and with a 1.4X TC it will report F8, so that it can still retain autofocus.

A wide angle to modest telephoto is still a wide angle lens - and there can be physical contact between the front element of the TC and the rear element of the lens. I would not recommend using a TC with a wide angle lens - that is just asking for trouble.

I would not recommend using a 2X TC unless you have a "known-to-be-good" combination - like the Nikkor 200mm F2, the latest 70-200 F2.8 FL or the 400mm F2.8 - both of which focus pretty well, and are amazingly sharp lenses to begin with. Adding a TC will impact any lens, but when the lens is as sharp as those three, you should be able to get great sharpness, even with a 2X TC.

A 1.4X TC will reduce sharpness by about 5%, a 1.7X about 15%, and a 2X about 25%.

Most cameras will not autofocus with a lens that is slower than F8. And manual focus through a really dark viewfinder is no picnic. With the Lumix you will have an advantage, since the image on the preview screen and the EVF will be nice and bright.

robertjerl Loc: Corona, California

I have the Canon 1.4x III for use with one lens, my 100-400L mk II (used with a mk I before I upgraded) It only works with a limited list of Canon lenses but with those lenses it is excellent.
For general use I have Kenko Pro 300s in 1.4x and 2.0x. I almost never use the 2.0x but the 1.4x when teamed with my Tamron 180 macro works great. On a crop sensor it gives me the Angle of View of a 403 mm lens so it works for things like hummers at the feeder or butterflies on flowers and gives great images. The AF is slow, but that lens has slow AF to begin with. I tend to use manual focus and pre focus on the feeder or flower where the hummer or butterfly will come (maybe).

whlsdn Loc: Colorado

I'm grateful for all these prompt replies. Clearly this is an even more complex subject than I'd grasped from my reading of previous threads on Teleconverter topics. Many of those comments, while reflecting the same cautions of compatibility and lighting limits and normal impact on crispness, had occasionally trended into differences of opinions about whether TCs can or cannot work suitably in acceptable circumstances. Some love 'em, some hate 'em, and some find 'em just OK.

Here I'm concluding the issue of lens matching, quality of product, and nearly unavoidable limitations in usage suggest, in my case at least, I'd be better off simply saving up for a good quality, long-reach telephoto lens. Either fixed or zoom, depending on what I can find to suit the most frequent distances at which I find myself wanting to shoot. That's OK too; it's the kind of advice I was hoping to get. Buying the Canon TC for $430 might look like the only possible safe move, but I'm thinking why not just wait until I can get a quality lens...and not compromise light? No, not an L series investment, but...

As for questions asked, I don't mind working with manual focus if I'm lucky enough to be shooting fairly static wildlife, for instance, or simply a nice Rocky Mtn scene. If I'm shooting a volleyball game, I don't usually need more reach than I already have, but even then I'm sometimes manually focused on a zone of the court from a fair distance, and that works.



Gene51, your paragraph about the Lumix was unique in that it expressed an observation I'd totally not thought about. If I ever come back to considering a TC, I think my hope will be to find one that would fit the Lumix.

whlsdn Loc: Colorado

I suppose CHG_CANON should get the prize for the most succinct piece of advice relative to the specific info I provided and questions I asked! Thank you! Seriously. After your reply added to a few others, your message is both clear and useful. For now, I'm saving my $.

jerryc41 Loc: Catskill Mts of NY

Before I bought a Kenko 1.4 TC, I considered three things: the cost of the TC, the cost of a 600mm lens, any loss in image quality. As far as I'm concerned, the Kenko 1.4 works fine for me. After I received it, I posted pictures here taken with and without the TC, and people were guessing which was which.

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

If you want to get an Extender, canon term for teleconvertor, I would suggest the 1.4 mk III from canon. Buy used and you will save money, either from eBay or B&H, KEH or Adorama.

catchlight.. Loc: Wisconsin USA- Halden Norway

Great explanation and well articulated...

I agree and in general you must be willing to give up sharpness and a few f/stops to gain length.

My experience with the newest version Canon 1.4 and 2.0 were too disappointing for me personally, but having them for a short time gave me an opportunity to compare. The 70-200 f 2.8L IS, 200L f/2.0 IS and 300 f 2.8L IS all produced better images cropped vs extended with the Canon 5D MK4. My testing after hours of lens micro adjustments produced very good data.

Many claim excellent results but, for me much more came from cropping the FF image.

cmaxi

These things do not wear out. Also eBay as an alternative. Canon teleconverters only work with a limited number of "L" telephoto/zoom lenses. Tamron has traditionally been a good choice, but I wuoold probably avoid the 2x version.