Tele extenders and quality
Jan 23, 2022 17:48:02 #
Lately here and on some Face Book photo groups there has been a bit of discussion on use of extenders when you either can't get the longer lens you want or need to wait to save enough money.
And of course you have the two sides (All extender images are Crap! vs They are great!) going at each other over image quality.
Well I use extenders fairly often. I do only use them on the lenses that the maker says they are compatible with. I figure the guys who designed and made them might know a thing or two about using them.
I think they do great when used properly.
Here is the OOC and a very heavy crop and PP rework of a shot I just posted to several forums today.
Male House Finch perched on a thorn at the top of a potted Mandarin Orange tree in my yard at aprx. 40' with strong late afternoon back lighting and fill flash taken last week. PP was done in LrC, PS & Topaz Denoise AI.
Canon 90D, Canon 100-400L mk2 +1.4x III @ 490mm, 1/2000 @ f/8.0, ISO-1600
And of course you have the two sides (All extender images are Crap! vs They are great!) going at each other over image quality.
Well I use extenders fairly often. I do only use them on the lenses that the maker says they are compatible with. I figure the guys who designed and made them might know a thing or two about using them.
I think they do great when used properly.
Here is the OOC and a very heavy crop and PP rework of a shot I just posted to several forums today.
Male House Finch perched on a thorn at the top of a potted Mandarin Orange tree in my yard at aprx. 40' with strong late afternoon back lighting and fill flash taken last week. PP was done in LrC, PS & Topaz Denoise AI.
Canon 90D, Canon 100-400L mk2 +1.4x III @ 490mm, 1/2000 @ f/8.0, ISO-1600
Jan 23, 2022 18:53:24 #
Jan 23, 2022 19:59:00 #
A beautiful result, Bob! Of course, you started with a first class lens and used a compatible tc, as you described. Amazing things happen when people follow instructions (LOL).
Jan 23, 2022 20:32:26 #
My 1.4 extender works just fine on each of the lenses. My 2x shoots a little soft on my 70-200. But when we use it with the 400 f4 DO or the 500 f4 it’s sharp. Not sure why it works better with the longer primes.
Jan 23, 2022 21:47:13 #
Susan yamakawa wrote:
I’m glad you fixed it😊👍
Thank you, oh, someone elsewhere asked about the high light in the bird's eye.
Enlarge it enough and you see it is the end of our swimming pool (between myself and the bird) reflecting the spill from the flash.
Jan 23, 2022 21:50:28 #
UTMike wrote:
A beautiful result, Bob! Of course, you started with a first class lens and used a compatible tc, as you described. Amazing things happen when people follow instructions (LOL).
Thank You
Huh??? "instructions"??? What are "instructions"?
Jan 23, 2022 22:05:32 #
jim quist wrote:
My 1.4 extender works just fine on each of the lenses. My 2x shoots a little soft on my 70-200. But when we use it with the 400 f4 DO or the 500 f4 it’s sharp. Not sure why it works better with the longer primes.
In the case of the Canon 1.4x III it actually says it works best with primes 300mm and over or the some of the L class zooms.
I have a 70-300L I got from someone here on UHH with a Kenko MC4 1.4x for Canon EF lenses. It is totally functional for all things with that lens. Not even the Canon 1.4x III have full functions with that lens.
The lens came out in 2010.
The extender came out in 2011 and was meant for primes and a limited number of zooms. (the various 70-200L's and the two 100-400L versions only)
Jan 24, 2022 05:26:24 #
Jan 24, 2022 08:10:18 #
Yes, there has been a lot of discussion on this site about the use of extenders. Personally, I would not be without them for my bird photography. With my Sony gear, other than the loss of light and necessary exposure adjustments, I find close to zero impact on image quality. I can’t say that regarding my previously owned Canon gear.
Jan 24, 2022 09:59:19 #
Bob, Thanks for the nice example...wish tc's were available for my Panasonic lenses!! 
Jan 24, 2022 11:07:59 #
StanMac
Loc: Tennessee
robertjerl wrote:
Lately here and on some Face Book photo groups the... (show quote)
I’d say the extender did its job. But the PP also made a huge difference as well, I am sure.
Stan
Jan 24, 2022 16:51:55 #
robertjerl wrote:
Lately here and on some Face Book photo groups the... (show quote)
The OEM teleconverters made for a particular lens work very well. A lot of 3rd party teleconverters are, indeed, crap!
bwa
Jan 24, 2022 17:21:08 #
Jan 24, 2022 17:43:46 #
J-SPEIGHT wrote:
Ni e shots
Thanks
Uh, your computer has run out of lower case "C's"???
Jan 24, 2022 17:45:09 #
Nalu wrote:
Yes, there has been a lot of discussion on this site about the use of extenders. Personally, I would not be without them for my bird photography. With my Sony gear, other than the loss of light and necessary exposure adjustments, I find close to zero impact on image quality. I can’t say that regarding my previously owned Canon gear.
Good to hear.
Well, I like my results with my Canon gear.
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.