A 2x TC Example

[Loupey]

Reflecting on some recent posts regarding teleconverters, I shot this heron last night and I thought it might make a good illustration of what I'm getting with the Canon 2x TC and the 300mm f/4L IS.

The first image is full-frame. The second is a crop of the same image. I did perform an initial adjustment to the Levels and Curves. But I purposefully did NOT perform any sharpening.

Specs:

Canon 300mm f/4L with 2x II TC
ISO 200
f/11
1/350s
Shooting distance: ~250 yards
Platform: monopod (didn't want to hand-hold this example)
IS: on
Air quality: humid (a couple showers just passed)

I think the 2x performed admirably. I was happy to see the eye detail and the veins on the leaves behind the heron.

Keep in mind I am working with an APS-C sized sensor and do not have a lot of pixels to work with (6.3mp Canon 10D).

[Bevb]

Well done on this example of the 2x tele convertor, but taking everything into consideration, pixels, non sharpening etc, i still find that the 2X often makes the image very soft, and no amount of sharpening can rectify it satisfactorily especially in cropped images.

I see you used the monopod, i wonder if the images would be the same if using a tripod and shutter cable? for the 2X.

If i have to use a TC i prefer the 1.4 i can handhold this with it on my 70-200L, and the images, (I wont say are non editable, how many are these days?) are not so soft especially after cropping.

Sorry Loupey if i sound really critical, but i dont mean to be, :blush2: this is just my thoughts on TC's.

[Loupey]

No sweat, Bev

I agree that all TC's will degrade the image quality to some extent. And my intention was to demonstate its capability/limitations. Although I would love to have that Canon 600mm prime, my budget doesn't allow that at this time

In a pinch, TC's can be useful and may deserve a spot in a gadget bag. Here is what I consider my "final version" of the shot. Sharpened and cropped to about the limit that I would crop any non-demonstration image.

As always, thanks for your input, Bev.

[Loupey]

Whoops, sorry Bev I forgot to address your question about the tripod/cable matter.

I'm sure that the image would have improved had I used "proper" technique. In my film days, I would have used a heavy tripod, cable release, and mirror lockup for a stationary subject such as this.

I might run a couple tests - one subject with:

1) 300mm only
2) with 2x TC hand held
3) with 2x TC monopod mounted
4) with 2x TC tripod mounted, remote cable, mirror lockup

I'm interested in seeing the results myself. Generally, I don't walk around much with the tripod anymore. Hand-holding for quick grabs have been the norm lately.

[Knight]

Good Example Loupey , i truly believe in Tcon's . The camera i had before my D50 was a Kodak Z740 10X optical 5 Digital for 50X combined . I soon learned that the 5X Digital did not give me what i wanted quality wise so i bought a 1.7 Tcon and stayed with the optical at all times and i got some pretty good Captures quality wise . At this moment im using a 70-300mm with my D50 and will be getting a Tcon for it, I only have to decide winch one 1.4 1.7 or a 2.0 also i hear that some people are getting good results with 3.0X Tcons , but i do mostly spur of the moment shooting with no tripod so i think i will have to get the 1.4 or the 1.7 Tcon . If you know of a site that has some good comparison photos let me know

[paulnj]

Not too shabby.

[mjs1973]

Another good example Loupey. My only advice when it comes to getting a TC is to get a good one!!! I have a cheap one (Quantary 2x from Ritz) and I have found that I get better result without it, and cropping the image to the same size that I would have gotten if I had used it. Between the light loss, and the poor image quality it becomes more of a pain in the but than it's worth.

After seeing this example tho, it might just push me to go out and test it, just to see what I can do with it if I take my time, and stop down my lens... If I felt I had the need for one, and the $, I wold get another one, but I would go with the Canon this time.

I have actually thought about taking the guts out of the one I have, and converting it into an extension tube.

[Bevb]

Whoops, sorry Bev I forgot to address your question about the tripod/cable matter.

I'm sure that the image would have improved had I used "proper" technique. In my film days, I would have used a heavy tripod, cable release, and mirror lockup for a stationary subject such as this.

I might run a couple tests - one subject with:

1) 300mm only
2) with 2x TC hand held
3) with 2x TC monopod mounted
4) with 2x TC tripod mounted, remote cable, mirror lockup

I'm interested in seeing the results myself. Generally, I don't walk around much with the tripod anymore. Hand-holding for quick grabs have been the norm lately.

Oooooh! a 600mm prime, yes please!

My thoughts exactly about tripods, a necessary evil i know but i also prefer handholding rather than carrying one around, i find them very awkward for bird photography especially flight shots, and dog action photography which i do.

If you do these tests i will look forward to your findings. What would we do without you!

[paulnj]

A 600F4 not only sets you back $7200, but you then need a real sturdy head(whimberley/arca ball....) on top of serious legs(gitzo 1400 series...). Now you are at $8000 or so. OK... the weight goes from 16 lbs or so camera/lens to 25+ depending on the tripod/head. I have friends who shoot like that and they are better men than me carrying that rig around

I want one anyway for those sit and wait shoots and they make great beach portrait lenses with a 2x :lol:

[payn817]

Thanks for posting this Loupey. While picking up the extension tube today, the salesman accidentally handed me a 1.4 TC, you know I had to try it.

It's a Kenko, and the only one in town for Minolta mount, $129. It's going to join the rest of the kit soon. I almost screamed when I used it with my favorite lens. They have a gray colored Sigma 400mm f/5 too :cornut: for $200. Anyone know anything about this lens? It isn't TOO fast, but it may do.

I'm working on using that tube, and will post later this week, IF I ever get it down.


Thanks again for all this information you have been providing, it is helpful, and inspiring me to try new things.

Now, after all this spending/experimenting, hopefully Sony will stick around in the DSLR world.

[paulnj]

That soulds like the older Sigma 400f5.6 Macro which was a very capable lens. The AF speed may not be lightning fast, but $200 is a fair price if you ask me. It's dark grey right?

[SmartWombat]

I have the Canon 2x and I find it too soft for my liking.
Plus the lens I really wa to use it on (100-400) isn't fast enough (F4-5.6) and with two stops loss from the converter the AF won't function on the 20D, 1DSmkII, or 1DmkIIN
So, time for a 400mm IS f2.8 I suppose ... dream on !!

[paulnj]

400F4 DO IS

[Loupey]

.... At this moment im using a 70-300mm with my D50 and will be getting a Tcon for it, I only have to decide winch one 1.4 1.7 or a 2.0 also i hear that some people are getting good results with 3.0X Tcons , but i do mostly spur of the moment shooting with no tripod so i think i will have to get the 1.4 or the 1.7 Tcon . If you know of a site that has some good comparison photos let me know

Knight, since you already have a zoom that goes out quite far, I think I would stay with the 1.4x. As for 3x, I would say that would be pushing the limits of any lens too far.

[Loupey]

...
I have actually thought about taking the guts out of the one I have, and converting it into an extension tube.

Michael, that sounds like a patentable idea. A convertable converter - one quick twist to remove the optical part to make it into an instant extension tube.

[Loupey]

OK, as promised a quick and dirty sampling of some field testing:

The setting. Shown below (shot with 40mm) to provide a reference perspective of the shooting target (birdfeeder) which is about 100' away.

All shots are adjusted slightly for Levels as the originals were made in RAW format and too flat for anyones liking. However, NO sharpening was made.

In both sets, I made sure to stop the lens down to the same amount (2 stops from maximum). Thus, the 300mm shot was at f/8 and the 600mm at f/16.

All other factors were unchanged:

Tripod mounted
IS off
Remote switch cable
Mirror lockup enabled (shutter released after a delay of 3~5 seconds)
ISO 200

[Loupey]

Now, the same images compared side-by-side when a USM sharpening has been preformed before the crop.

Although the 300mm+2x resolution is better, I am surprised that the 300mm shot held together without blowing up.

Keep in mind, however, that these two were shot at two different shutter speeds (to ensure the same amount of aperture stop-down). Some vibration of the 600mm shot at 1/125s could be spoiling the dfference when compared to the 300mm shot at 1/500s

[Loupey]

Now for the Camera Shake Test.

Same setting but now I shot these all at 1/500s at f/11 (ISO 400) with the 300mm + 2x combo.

I must say that I am surprised by the results of this impromptu test. I have arranged them in the order (from best to worst) that I thought would be the outcome. You can see that my notion was incorrect.

Let me know if these tests are helpful.

[payn817]

Interesting, thanks for these examples. Does the TC change your min. focus distance?

[poker]

Now for the Camera Shake Test.

Handheld with IS looks to me to be the best with the naked eye, IMO. What shocks me is that the IS (off) with TRIPOD is so soft! What is going on here? I'm basing my observation on the wood grain area towards the bottom. I'm assuming the same focusing point was used at all times.

This thread gives food for thought....thanks.

[Loupey]

Payn, unlike extension tubes, teleconverters do NOT change the minimum focusing distance.

Manacsa, yeah I was real surprised too with the results. Perhaps the fact that this generation IS requires that the IS be turned off when tripod mounted. Focusing is all done manually (I shoot 95% manually). Anyway, the 10D will not allow AF for any combination slower than f/5.6 wide open.

After seeing these results, I thought perhaps my shutter speed was too high to show any noticeable differences. But using conventional wisdom, the equivalent 960mm lens would dictate that 1/1000s be the slowest safe hand-holdable shutter speed. So I figured half that speed should exaggerate the differences.

For the time being, the results reinforce my current style of shooting (handheld) and I am now carrying around the monopod more. The tripod definitely stays home

[Bevb]

Once again a great informative series of tests that you have provided, and thanks for taking the time to do this, i am certainly learning from all this.

Il look at my TC's in a different light now!!:idea:

[Loupey]

Once again a great informative series of tests that you have provided, and thanks for taking the time to do this, i am certainly learning from all this.

Il look at my TC's in a different light now!!:idea:

Bev, I posted some "real-world" 2x examples in Manacsa's thread about IS in the Help Forum.