Teleconverters .. front or rear mount, which is best?
Can you give me your take on teleconverters.
WOW!!! Digital will cost an arm and a leg. I was thinking on getting an adapter to use my OM teleconverter lenses, or just purchacing the digital teleconverter. Then I saw the add on lenses that screw on the front of the lens. The latter is a lot cheeper but as you can see by this photo....It leaves much to be desired. I don't want to lay out $500 or more on a rear mount digital teleconverter if I can't expect better results than I can get with a front mount, or should I just get an adapter and use my OM's?
What do you advise?
Seed eater
BTW.. I use Olympus gear.
This photo was taken with an E-600 using a 70-300mm and a Bower 3.5x from 75' away
Teleconverters are useless junk on lenses that are not designed for or fast enough to utilize them. Extension rings are another option if you are looking for closer images.
Also, are you aware that there is a cheap adapter available to mount either Nikon or Canon lenses on the Oly 4/3's bodies? I just ordered one from Amazon for $14, have to try my Sigma 150-500mm zoom out on the E420, it will be a 300-1000mm on those bodies.
When it comes to a 2x, you do get what you pay for. The one that fits between the camera and lens is a better way to go because the camera knows it is there and it won't put excessive weight on your AF motor.
That being said, many people here (including myself) have a teleconverter though it rarely gets used. It will rob light. It can cause autofocus to not work right. It can add distortion. It can also get the shot you want, but you need to be aware of the limitations.
MT= Nicon and cCannon are about half the price of an equal Oly lens. I think I'll check out the adapter
Rocket= I did find out it is best to preset an AF if you are going to use it but I almost always use manual focus. I think that is why I still have so many film lenses.
I Reasearched overnight. There are SOOOO many options in telephoto lenses. Does anyone have a reccomendation for large birds 75 to 100 yards away?
Look at Tamron. I don't know if they make one to fit on your camera/lens set-up but if they do their price is lower than most and quaality is good. I use a 1.4X wwith a f2.8 lens a lot, even for BIF. It autofocuses well. I also use a 2X with my 400mm f5.6 but naturally have to manual focus it.
Jim D
capsar050 wrote:
I Reasearched overnight. There are SOOOO many options in telephoto lenses. Does anyone have a reccomendation for large birds 75 to 100 yards away?
I use the Sigma 150-500mm with OS on hawks and eagles. Used to have the Sigma 50-500mm without OS, the OS allows me to handhold the lens, but not for long. It is sharp and the focus is fast.
capsar050 wrote:
I Reasearched overnight. There are SOOOO many options in telephoto lenses. Does anyone have a reccomendation for large birds 75 to 100 yards away?
What do you consider large birds? A lot depends on this. A robin size a 200 to 300mm prime would work well. Hawks or eagles or bigger you would do well with a telephoto lens out to 300mm or better. The 100-400mm lens is nice, gives you the ability to back off if you need to. What lens do you presently have?
Jim D
young eagle, about 125 yards, 400mm
sandhill cranes, about 125 yards, 400mm, lightly cropped
great blue heron, about 100 yards, 400mm lens
[quote=oldtool2What do you consider large birds? A lot depends on this. A robin size a 200 to 300mm prime would work well. Hawks or eagles or bigger you would do well with a telephoto lens out to 300mm or better. The 100-400mm lens is nice, gives you the ability to back off if you need to. What lens do you presently have?
Jim D[/quote]
I had just got my 70-200mm lens and was use to the push pull on my 100-400mm lens. Had the 70-200 on and got caught by surprise. Was only 48 feet away! Found out they don't work the same and could not get the lens to back off quick enough so the frame got over filled. Should have shot this at around 125-150mm.
Jim D
3 year olld eagle at 48 feet. SURPRISE! GOT YA!
capsar050 wrote:
Can you give me your take on teleconverters.
WOW!!! Digital will cost an arm and a leg. I was thinking on getting an adapter to use my OM teleconverter lenses, or just purchacing the digital teleconverter. Then I saw the add on lenses that screw on the front of the lens. The latter is a lot cheeper but as you can see by this photo....It leaves much to be desired. I don't want to lay out $500 or more on a rear mount digital teleconverter if I can't expect better results than I can get with a front mount, or should I just get an adapter and use my OM's?
What do you advise?
Can you give me your take on teleconverters. br ... (
show quote)
capsar050 . . .
I'm curious - what is a 'digital teleconverter?'
twowindsbear wrote:
capsar050 wrote:
Can you give me your take on teleconverters.
WOW!!! Digital will cost an arm and a leg. I was thinking on getting an adapter to use my OM teleconverter lenses, or just purchacing the digital teleconverter. Then I saw the add on lenses that screw on the front of the lens. The latter is a lot cheeper but as you can see by this photo....It leaves much to be desired. I don't want to lay out $500 or more on a rear mount digital teleconverter if I can't expect better results than I can get with a front mount, or should I just get an adapter and use my OM's?
What do you advise?
Can you give me your take on teleconverters. br ... (
show quote)
I'm curious - what is a 'digital teleconverter?'
quote=capsar050 Can you give me your take on tele... (
show quote)
A gimmicky way to try to sell a cheap Chinese tele converter to an uneducated DSLR owner.
MT Shooter wrote:
twowindsbear wrote:
capsar050 wrote:
Can you give me your take on teleconverters.
WOW!!! Digital will cost an arm and a leg. I was thinking on getting an adapter to use my OM teleconverter lenses, or just purchacing the digital teleconverter. Then I saw the add on lenses that screw on the front of the lens. The latter is a lot cheeper but as you can see by this photo....It leaves much to be desired. I don't want to lay out $500 or more on a rear mount digital teleconverter if I can't expect better results than I can get with a front mount, or should I just get an adapter and use my OM's?
What do you advise?
Can you give me your take on teleconverters. br ... (
show quote)
I'm curious - what is a 'digital teleconverter?'
quote=capsar050 Can you give me your take on tele... (
show quote)
A gimmicky way to try to sell a cheap Chinese tele converter to an uneducated DSLR owner.
quote=twowindsbear quote=capsar050 Can you give ... (
show quote)
A ggod reply. Normally the only difference is they will transfer the shooting info to the Exif file. Big company name brands. There are a few that do that anyhow.
Jim D
Okay, I have tried a Tamaron, a Rokinon, and finaly setteled on an Olympus 1.4 "Digital teleconverter.
The "Digital" means it is for the digital 4/3 lens and has the contacts so the lens can communicate with the camera body. It does fairly well. I should have gone for a 2x. See the Green heron below. 150 yards in low light of dawn. It didn't do too bad and the colors are not off from the natural tones. I do have to bump up two or three stops but I don't have a lot of noise so I guess this is what I will learn with. Thank you all for your help.
Dove 20 yards (cropped 25%)
Green heron 150 yards ( cropped 60%)
i use a 2x teleconverter with all my lenses,and have gotten good pictures when i do my part.the only time i have conflicts is when the lens also has a auto/manual switch.then i have to use manual focus. the 1.4x may have an edge over the 2x,but i am not going to put out the extra money to find out. about the lens speed.in bright sun light with the iso cranked up to 800 a 3.5- 5.6 70-300mm works just fine for me.i can set the exposure to 1/800-1/1000 with no problem.
If you want to reply, then
register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.