Post by: Alchase on December 05, 2012, 09:42:09 AM
I have heard a few different opinions pro and con but really do not have enough shutter time yet to establish my own opinion so I will steal yours, :hello:
A buddy of mine who has every canon gadget know to man, wont touch them. His opinion is:
"it is just adding another opportunity to screw up the shot by putting more glass between you and the subject".
I see his point, but I still called him a white lens snob, :chuckle:
My sister is a good photographer (not as extreme as my buddy is) used a double with a 70-200 non-IS on her trip to Tanzania. She came back with some extraordinary shots.
I used the exact same combo and soon realized the auto focus only worked about 2/3s the way out, and I suck at manually focusing. I have not had the opportunity to try my (new to me) 70-300 IS with my doubler to see how the stabilization yet.
Some of the shots I see posted here, I catch my self thinking even with the EF 300, 2.8 you would have to be pretty dang close to get those shots without a 2v or 3x?
What do you guys think?
Post by: huntnphool on December 05, 2012, 09:58:29 AM
Post by: huntnphool on December 05, 2012, 10:02:19 AM
Post by: grandpawrichard on December 05, 2012, 10:16:53 AM
They are a hassle to use, but at times they are money well spent if you need the extra reach to get that "once in a lifetime shot". I don't go anywhere with my camera gear that I don't have my extenders with me. You just never know when you will need them!
Dick
Post by: huntnphool on December 05, 2012, 10:44:38 AM
I was wondering what you guys think of doublers?Your autofocus needs a aperture of f/8 to work with a 2X, when combined with a f/4 lens it will still work because you then are shooting at f/8. If you narrow your aperture or use a lens that is at 5.6 you will lose your autofocus ability. This is why it worked with your sisters 70-200, she either has a 2.8 or f4 and never started at 5.6.
I have heard a few different opinions pro and con but really do not have enough shutter time yet to establish my own opinion so I will steal yours, :hello:
A buddy of mine who has every canon gadget know to man, wont touch them. His opinion is:
"it is just adding another opportunity to screw up the shot by putting more glass between you and the subject".
I see his point, but I still called him a white lens snob, :chuckle:
My sister is a good photographer (not as extreme as my buddy is) used a double with a 70-200 non-IS on her trip to Tanzania. She came back with some extraordinary shots.
I used the exact same combo and soon realized the auto focus only worked about 2/3s the way out, and I suck at manually focusing. I have not had the opportunity to try my (new to me) 70-300 IS with my doubler to see how the stabilization yet.
Some of the shots I see posted here, I catch my self thinking even with the EF 300, 2.8 you would have to be pretty dang close to get those shots without a 2v or 3x?
Bottom line, unless you are starting with a very good quality L series lens (White Lens) you are going to see a degradation in sharpness and contrast, and slower or non existent autofocus. :twocents:
Post by: Alchase on December 05, 2012, 11:12:37 AM
Do you have the 70-300L?
I wish, no I have the EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS USM, it has been a good lens (for the price) not near the "L" though.
Post by: boneaddict on December 05, 2012, 11:16:58 AM
Post by: huntnphool on December 05, 2012, 11:20:00 AM
Well that is why you lose autofocus 2/3 of the way out. Doubled from f4 you are still shooting at f8, but when you zoom your lens it changes to the f5.6, narrowing your aperture past the point the autofocus needs, you are then shooting at f/11.Do you have the 70-300L?
I wish, no I have the EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS USM, it has been a good lens (for the price) not near the "L" though.
Post by: boneaddict on December 05, 2012, 11:24:02 AM
Post by: Alchase on December 05, 2012, 11:27:19 AM
GPR, that's good to know, I will have to set it up on the tripod with a remote when I get the chance.
Bone, I got to play with both the 300 2.8 "L" and the 400 2.8 "L", all I can say is wow! Incredible lenses that made taking great shots a whole lot easier. Thinking I was carrying 7k each scared the crap out of me, lol
Great info, put in terms I understand, thanks allot gentleman.
Post by: huntnphool on December 05, 2012, 11:33:58 AM
Huntnphool, the 70-200 I believe was 4-5.6, your explanation would explain why about 2/3 out did not work worth a crap, lolYour 70-300 should be f4-5.6 but the 70-200L is either fixed f/2.8 or f/4.
Post by: huntnphool on December 05, 2012, 11:38:53 AM
Thinking I was carrying 7k each scared the crap out of me, lolYou should try packing this thing around. :chuckle:
Post by: RaffleMule on December 05, 2012, 11:44:47 AM
Post by: huntnphool on December 05, 2012, 11:58:38 AM
I did carry that thing around.....And, I actually thought you two were serious about shooting the deer. Now, I know you just wanted a "sucker" to carry the camera around so you could get pics of it rather than actually pulling the trigger. :chuckle:See, I shot him. :chuckle:
Post by: Alchase on December 05, 2012, 12:12:03 PM
Sweet pics!
Post by: boneaddict on December 05, 2012, 12:21:53 PM
Post by: huntnphool on December 05, 2012, 02:34:17 PM
Which lens is that?Canon EF 500mm f4 IS
Sweet pics!
Post by: Alchase on December 05, 2012, 06:20:17 PM
All I want for Christmas is one each of these
EF 800, L 5.6 IS USM and EF 1200, L 5.6 IS USM, LOL
Post by: huntnphool on December 05, 2012, 09:49:28 PM
That thing is huge!A good start is a Canon 70-200mmL f4 IS and/or a Canon 300mmL f4 IS.
All I want for Christmas is one each of these
EF 800, L 5.6 IS USM and EF 1200, L 5.6 IS USM, LOL
Post by: popeshawnpaul on December 07, 2012, 08:19:19 AM
Post by: Alchase on December 07, 2012, 04:15:00 PM
Post by: Tom Reichner on December 08, 2012, 11:52:31 PM
Doublers can be very, very effective . . . or they can degrade image quality to the point where they're useless.
The key is to know when to use them, and what equipment to use them with.
I would not use a doubler (or any converter) with my 100-400mm zoom, or any of Canon's non-L lenses, with the exception of the 400mm f4 DO. I would also shy away from using them on any slower zooms. I had a 70-200 f4, which was a great lens, but I never liked the results when I used any converter on that lens.
I use a 400 f2.8 lens, and do not hesitate to put the 2x (version II) on it when the conditions are right. One of the "right"conditions is when I am rather close to the subject, and the subject has direct sunlight on it. Results in these situations can often be striking, with no apparent degradation of image quality whatsoever. Unfortunately, the time people usually think they need a doubler is when they are far from the subject . . . sorry, doublers usually don't resolve detail well when longer distances are involved.
Another situation in which I often use a doubler is when shooting skyline silhouette images. I do not hesitate to throw the 2x on my lens when shooting an image that is intended to be a silhouette, and the subject is too far away to allow for an effective composition. Why? Well, it's not so much that the doubler performs well in these situations; it's because these types of images can be processed more heavily without looking weird. If all you're looking to get is an outline of the subject, and you're not looking to capture any hair or feather detail, then you can go ahead and move that sharpening slider up way past where you normally would. So, in such situations any softness caused by the doubler can be "fixed" by sharpening the image. I would never do any significant sharpening on any "regular" types of images, as sharpened hair or feather detail usually looks terrible and fake. But silhouettes are usually far more forgiving.
Everything I've said so far applies only the the 2x converter, aka the "doubler". I use the 1.4 tele-converter quite often in a wide variety of conditions, and can rarely, if ever, notice any image degradation whatsoever, even when viewing the images zoomed in tight on a large monitor.
For those who are interested, below I am attaching an example of a doubler being used in the right situation. The Tom was close, and I didn't particularly want a full body shot. The light was nice - direct morning sun on the turkey, so I put the doubler on, rotated the camera to a vertical orientation, and filled the viewfinder with the gobbler's head!
The first image is just how I shot it - uncropped and unsharpened. The second image is a tight crop of the first image, to better show how well the doubler was able to resolve the fine detail. Besides the cropping, no other changes were made. No sharpening whatsoever. I think the fine detail is resolved very well, and, in my opinion, images such as this make a strong case for using the doubler when conditions allow for it.
The final image posted is just an example of the type of skyline silhouette shots that often use the doubler for. That image has been sharpened.
Post by: Alchase on December 10, 2012, 12:57:07 PM
Thanks Tom, I have learned allot from this thread.
Post by: quadrafire on December 11, 2012, 10:01:36 AM
Wow, that's awesome.:yeah:
Thanks Tom, I have learned allot from this thread.
I was wondering what the 2x would do. I have a 70-200 f4 IS and use a 1.4x quite frequently. I think it works pretty well with this setup. When I put it on for a photo outing it stays on, until I get home. Maybe I need to start playing around with and without it some on the same trips to do a good comparison.
Post by: huntnphool on December 11, 2012, 10:21:03 AM
Canon 70-200 f4 IS with a 1.4XWow, that's awesome.:yeah:
Thanks Tom, I have learned allot from this thread.
I was wondering what the 2x would do. I have a 70-200 f4 IS and use a 1.4x quite frequently. I think it works pretty well with this setup. When I put it on for a photo outing it stays on, until I get home. Maybe I need to start playing around with and without it some on the same trips to do a good comparison.
Post by: quadrafire on December 11, 2012, 11:12:52 AM
Do you remember how close you were for that pic? I think that has been a lot of my problem is distance. I tend to use a monopod as well which helps.
Post by: Tom Reichner on March 08, 2013, 03:21:02 PM
He says, "The 2x is a really important tool." He also says, "If you're not using the 2x tele converters, you're not getting the full advantage (of your lens)."
It's a really good instructional video for those interested in photographing wildlife and birds. Here's the link:
Lenses for Bird and Nature Photography: Birds As Art Style (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pas-GiB9jzo#ws)
Post by: quadrafire on March 08, 2013, 08:01:27 PM