Images taken with a 2x converter (Page 5): I’m not saying don’t use a TC. I occasionally use TC’s. I’m just saying these aren’t photos I would use to make that determination. They’re...

SuperflyTNT Loc: Manassas VA

btbg wrote:

I agree with you, but I was expecting to hear from a lot of naysayers and so far I'm not disappointed. I think converters are a relatively inexpensive way to get shots that would otherwise be impossible to take. And, like you I generally don't worry about noise reduction. Thanks also for posting the example. That was what I was looking for to create discussion.

I’m not saying don’t use a TC. I occasionally use TC’s. I’m just saying these aren’t photos I would use to make that determination. They’re just not good.

btbg

SuperflyTNT wrote:

I’m not saying don’t use a TC. I occasionally use TC’s. I’m just saying these aren’t photos I would use to make that determination. They’re just not good.

Thats fine. What Im asking is if you dont use the TC how are you even going to get the photo? What is the alternative?

SuperflyTNT Loc: Manassas VA

btbg wrote:

Thats fine. What Im asking is if you dont use the TC how are you even going to get the photo? What is the alternative?

I said I use TC’s on occasion. If you’re gonna use them, practice and learn to use them better. And consider the subject. If it’s a rare specimen you’re not likely to get better opportunities for its one thing, but wrens and sparrows are very common and certainly offer many better choices.

btbg

SuperflyTNT wrote:

I said I use TC’s on occasion. If you’re gonna use them, practice and learn to use them better. And consider the subject. If it’s a rare specimen you’re not likely to get better opportunities for its one thing, but wrens and sparrows are very common and certainly offer many better choices.

Well either your eyes are better than mine or they arent as bad as you claim. Sparrows are common, at least around here wrens are not. So the choice is shoot it when its there or dont shoot it at all.

Bill_de Loc: US

SuperflyTNT wrote:

If you’re gonna use them, practice and learn to use them better.

Over the years I have used 1.4x, 1.7x, and 2.0x Nikon converters with varying success. Typically these were used with 400 and 500mm Nikkor lenses. Tripods are always a big help.

The biggest thrill, and biggest drain on my wallet, was and is the Nikkor 800mm F/5.6 with the included 1.25x convertor. The convertors are built with the lens and carry the same serial number as the lens. If you lose it, Nikon will not replace. I once tried to use this lens hand held. Those days are gone, but with a good tripod

The Nikkor lenses with convertors that can flip in and out must be a big plus. Unfortunately for me my piggy bank is empty.

---

imagemeister Loc: mid east Florida

btbg wrote:

Nobody said it was. The question is should one get the photo even without optimum sharpness, or just not take the photo at all. Each of us has to make that choice. So, if you would not hand hold and would not crop, and would not use a 2x converter, how would you go about getting the photo?

IF I were hand holding I would try to brace somehow, if I were in low light I would crop and use AI pixel enlargement - in better light, I like to use a 1.4X and CROP - staying away from 2X TC. If pressed, I will use an APSC body and get a 1.6X crop that way - on top of a 1.4X TC and cropping and using AI pixel enlargement.

Sinewsworn Loc: Port Orchard, WA

btbg wrote:

Here's the photos

My very good monitor shows good detail, color rendition, sharpness-looks good tome.

Boris77

btbg wrote:

Here's the photos

Great shots.

I have no interest in long lenses or teleconverters, but they work well for you.
Boris

SuperflyTNT Loc: Manassas VA

Sinewsworn wrote:

My very good monitor shows good detail, color rendition, sharpness-looks good tome.

I checked out the Photo Gallery. I’m thinking you might not be the best judge.

Sinewsworn Loc: Port Orchard, WA

SuperflyTNT wrote:

I checked out the Photo Gallery. I’m thinking you might not be the best judge.

What kind of comment is that?

Rongnongno Loc: FL

Sinewsworn wrote:

What kind of comment is that?

Nothing important, just a pesky fly who does nothing other than buzz around the poop of its own making.

I ignore all its comment.

gwilliams6

imagemeister wrote:

LOL, Yes, using the latest most expensive bodies and lenses with extenders does give good results in the right hands and the right light .....8-)

The latest bodies doesn't mean the most expensive bodies by a long stretch. there are excellent quality bodies at different price levels that wont break the bank, and coupled with good long lenses and the appropriate TCs will yield excellent results. This is not only achievable with the most expensive bodies and even the most expensive lenses.

FYI, my Sony 200-600mm lens used in my example, is a performance bargain at $1898 USD new at B&H, and even less used. Nikon, Canon, OM System, Sigma, Tamron have similarly priced long lenses that will yield great results with the appropriate TCs. :
https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1485540-REG/sony_sel200600g_fe_200_600mm_f_5_6_6_3_g.html?ap=y&smp=y&srsltid=AfmBOoqNCZ9BM_pcj7V2fYSsysheaDpXAuPIOletXhkZneI6UtqVH5LLC9Y

Quality 24mp bodies like the current Sony A7C, like the 24mp of my A9 used in my example, can be had for as little as $1598 USD new at B&H, or even less used:
https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1612897-REG/sony_alpha_a7c_mirrorless_digital.html/?ap=y&ap=y&smp=y&smp=y&lsft=BI%3A514&gad_source=1&gclid=Cj0KCQjw8pKxBhD_ARIsAPrG45m3Qfl7-9yq5F5ctnQe88Pyl17FkxSG5fl6nVVzCi7BjSSDcc0j2VwaAvtbEALw_wcB

Sony 1.4 TC and 2X TC can be had for $400-$500 USD each.

Just the facts.

Cheers and best to you.

gwilliams6

btbg wrote:

I agree with you, but I was expecting to hear from a lot of naysayers and so far I'm not disappointed. I think converters are a relatively inexpensive way to get shots that would otherwise be impossible to take. And, like you I generally don't worry about noise reduction. Thanks also for posting the example. That was what I was looking for to create discussion.

SuperflyTNT Loc: Manassas VA

Sinewsworn wrote:

What kind of comment is that?

Pretty straightforward I would say.

Sinewsworn Loc: Port Orchard, WA

Rongnongno wrote:

Nothing important, just a pesky fly who does nothing other than buzz around the poop of its own making.

I ignore all its comment.

Thanx.