Page 1 of 1
Teleconverters question

Posted:
Tue Jun 02, 2009 10:12 am
by machineman9
I've currently got a 70-300mm lens but at times I am finding that I'm not getting enough zoom out of it which means I either have to enlarge the picture and drop the quality, or move closer... And moving closer is not always possible.
Am I right in thinking that a 2.0x converter will effectively make my lens a 140-600mm lens?
Would it be worth getting one? It seems like a cheaper alternative to buying a larger lens. In fact, it could be a tenth if not a hundreth of the cost of buying a larger lens to get that level of magnification.
Any input?
Cheers.
Re: Teleconverters question

Posted:
Tue Jun 02, 2009 11:26 am
by BAW0343
Yes, your exactly right.
Just keep in mind that a teleconverter can also reduce your image quality. From tests that I have seen, however, its really not that bad, but its something to keep in mind. Also on some systems it supposedly can affect AF, again I haven't seen proof, but rather just speculation.
Re: Teleconverters question

Posted:
Tue Jun 02, 2009 12:48 pm
by Omag 2.0
Teleconverter + 70-300 lens = bad idea!
Why?
1) Your maximum aperature-value rises, meaning you won't get as much light on your sensor, meaning you'll need longer shuttertimes or increased iso (and noise) to make a shot.
2) The AF of these lenses isn't stellar to start with and having less light on the sensor means even longer autofocus times... leaving you with a useless lens.
Teleconvertors are meant for quality primelenses ( fixed focal point). Better qualitly, lightstrong zooms like 70-200 f2.8 can be combined with them too ( if you choose the x1,4 variant), but still you get the best quality with genuine mm's.
Re: Teleconverters question

Posted:
Sun Jun 07, 2009 4:08 pm
by Keep It Simple
Back in my old film camera days (Minolta 101) I had a 2X
Re: Teleconverters question

Posted:
Sun Jun 07, 2009 4:12 pm
by machineman9
Whoops I lost sight of this thread for a moment there.
I was only really considering using it for things such as moon shots and maybe long range still photography. I don't do much motion photography let alone at a long distance so would it still be a bad idea to get one for something such as this?
I can try and look on eBay or something for a cheap one just to see how well it works and if I would need to use it or not, then if I do I could always look to buying the better and new one... That is, if there is still any reason to need one.
Re: Teleconverters question

Posted:
Sun Jun 07, 2009 4:25 pm
by Keep It Simple
e-bay.. ....a great idea,. :)
Get something cheap to see what it can and can not do.
Re: Teleconverters question

Posted:
Sun Jun 07, 2009 5:06 pm
by Mictheslik
I'd also look into whether your lens is actually compatible with the converter. I know that both of the canon ones only work with a selection of L lenses, and a lot of them lose AF when you do.
.mic