Brownie45 Loc: Louisville, Kentucky USA

I enjoy going to the Muscatatuck National Wildlife Refuge near Seymour, IN. I get to see a lot of birds and other animals I do not see near my suburban condo. I have been disappointed that my 500mm lens was just not long enough to get the shots I want. For some reason the animals do not like to hang out close enough to the road. I decided to get a 2X teleconverter, because I could not justify a 1000mm lens. These pictures were my test outing with the teleconverter. The algae bloom is really bad. All shots were taken with the camera resting on a rice bag on the car windshield. I think I am happy with the teleconverter.

(Download)


(Download)


(Download)


(Download)


(Download)

robertjerl Loc: Corona, California

You didn't get the pictures posted.

CHG_CANON Loc: the Windy City

The images don't seem to like being near UHH either ...

Brownie45, we look forward to getting some posted.

Brownie45 Loc: Louisville, Kentucky USA

I got the images to post. I tried deleting the first one and reading it with store original checked, but it did not seem to work. You can see the dragon fly in focus in the original.

Retired CPO Loc: Travel full time in an RV

If you can beg, borrow or rent a 1.2/1.4 converter I think you will like the results better. I've never been a fan of teleconverters but if I were to use one it wouldn't be a 2.0. All of your posted photos are soft focused. I'll take a sharp photo that needs a bit of crop over a soft focus frame filling photo any day of the week.

Howard5252 Loc: New York / Florida (now)

If these photos are typical, I would not be happy ... at all. With the exception of the first and last (certainly the frogs and turtles) they all have a problem of some combination of soft focus and movement. I can't tell what equipment you have but I would suggest removing the 2x converter and practice getting better photos with the 500mm alone. If you insist that you need a longer reach - try a 1.4TC. BTW the movement is on you, not the equipment; try a higher shutter speed and/or a softer touch on the shutter button.
We've all been there ... thinking the answer is a longer lens. Sometimes it is the answer but most of the time, no. Technique can be improved and that includes figuring out how to get closer. Closer beats a longer lens every time. Finally, there will be times that the shot you want is just too far away. If you think the answer is a longer lens, you will soon find that the shot you want is just too far away. If you think the answer is a longer lens, you will soon find that the shot you want is just too far away. If you think the answer is ... .
Get the point?

CHG_CANON Loc: the Windy City

I wouldn't be so quick to throw-in the towel on this 2x without first addressing the exposure and focus issues and understanding more about the lens and how focus is being performed for these posted examples.

Given the EXIF reports an original 6D with confusing lens info, it would seem the focus is a manual process with this 2x. Alas, to 'see' the details in manual focus requires LiveView and the 100% focus zoom, something very difficult on a moving subject in bright sunshine on the LCD. This configuration might also work best with a tripod.

When using a camera, lens and extender configuration where you retain autofocus, one might expect details like this Blue Angel close-up from an extended 1000mm configuration.

Blue Angels by Paul Sager, on Flickr

(Download)

agillot

you did not say what lens / camera used . i use a 800 mm nikkor from the 80 s on a crop sensor D300 .that is the minimum for birds .i tried to add a spotless 2x nikon to the lens , no good , i tried a 1.4 kenko , and this work great , hard to tell the difference in the quality of pictures . a extender will work on a high quality lens but not so great on a consumer lens . also the tripod and technique used to be stable when you press shutter is important .do a google / youtube on that subject .

Retired CPO Loc: Travel full time in an RV

I don't think you can make a statement like that flat out. While having a 800mm lens for birds would be nice, I have a Nikon 200 to 500mm and have some very nice bird photos taken with a D500 crop sensor camera. I'm going to put it on my D610 FF and give it a try. The key, in my view is to get close, whatever it takes. And I haven't had to hire a pack mule to carry my equipment.

dar_clicks Loc: Utah

It is true that a 1.4X TC will give sharper results than a 2X TC, but it is possible to get usable results from a 2X. Try to use all the stability techniques you can think of to promote sharpness -- like camera mounted on a solid tripod, mirror up, remote or wired shutter release, etc. In any event, doing photography at 1000 mm requires some special practices whether or not a TC is involved.

I see from the EXIF info on one of the files that your TC passes the updated focal length information to the camera. That is invaluable as it helps avoid wondering "Did I use the TC on that shot or not..?" when reviewing the photos later!

Years ago, in the 35 mm film days, I subscribed to a magazine that often included wildlife photos. Some of those photographers were crazy enough to stack several TCs behind their telephoto lenses. Hey, the photos were published and looked pretty good! go figure...

Blenheim Orange Loc: Michigan

Looks like there is a lot of duckweed there rather than an algal bloom.

Identifying Harmful Algal Blooms:

https://www2.illinois.gov/epa/topics/water-quality/monitoring/algal-bloom/Pages/identifying.aspx

The best wildlife photographers go to a lot of trouble to get close to critters without spooking them - blinds, camouflage, patience. It is not just a matter of using a long lens.

Mike

bwana Loc: Bergen, Alberta, Canada

The pix look a bit soft, which I've come to expect from a 2x TV. I've found a 200% upsize works about as well. A 1.4x TV works well.

bwa

woodweasel Loc: bellingham Wa

Very neat