Lens extender

bwana

bwana

MyBroadband
Super Moderator
Joined
Feb 23, 2005
Messages
97,644
Reaction score
37,758
Location
Plz
Anyone use a lens extender? I've got my new lens arriving next month and I was considering getting the 2x one.

If I'm understanding things correctly . . . . because I'm not using a full frame dSLR I'm already getting a 1.6x multiplier so the 70-200 is effectively a 112-320mm which means the extender would take it up to 640? Perfect for taking photos of the moon and other brightly lit subjects (the extender reduces the amount of available light) right?

Or should I rather go for the 1.4x extender? They're both the same price by the looks of things.

Any thoughts - is it worth the $279?
 
Which 70-200mm do you have?

If you have the f4.0 you will loose auto focus with the 2x seeing as your aperture will be an effective f8.0 and only a 1 series digital will autofocus at f8.0 (Unless you use the tape trick which can work under good lighting.) The 1.4x will take your aperture up to f5.6 so you will still get auto focus.

If you have the f2.8 model the 2x will give you f5.6 so you will still have auto focus.

You will of course get better image quality from the 1.4x regardless, although I have heard that the f2.8 and 2x combo is not too bad. If you have the f4.0 I would probably favour the 1.4x

I think it really depends on what you are wanting to take pics of and what you see in your future lens line up.
 
Thanks for the advice - I'm getting the f4 so I guess its the 1.4x for me.
 
I have both convertors and use them with a 300mm f/2.8 attached to a 350D. The 1.4x is remarkable and pinsharp all the time. I find the 2x you have to really steady it or rest it well. Still produces some awesome shots.
 
Maybe I was being unrealistic or over ambitious thinking I should get a 2x. :)
 
I found that photography is like any other addiction, it eats away at all your money :D
As rave says, depends on what you see yourself taking photo's of and where, and the budget of course.

Bought all my kit from 'BH' and will continue to do so for ever, they are very very efficient indeed.
 
Sneeky said:
Bought all my kit from 'BH' and will continue to do so for ever, they are very very efficient indeed.
Click to expand...
Yeah - I ordered the lens from them and its sitting at my folks house until they come out mid-Jan :eek: SACamera wanted r8000+ for the same $540 lens!

My folks just told me that they have a friend who gets a dealer discount from B&H so I'll be ordering through him in future :D
 
bwana said:
My folks just told me that they have a friend who gets a dealer discount from B&H so I'll be ordering through him in future :D
Click to expand...

:eek: am bwana's newest bestest friend!!
hehe

The price differential between the 'local advertised price' for my lense (300mm F/2.8 IS), and what the actual landed cost was importing it from the USA (including shipping and vat) equated to a R19 000 saving in my back pocket.

The more expensive the kit, the bigger the local rip-off.
 
That is a seriously nice lens :eek:
 
Last edited:
bwana said:
If I'm understanding things correctly . . . . because I'm not using a full frame dSLR I'm already getting a 1.6x multiplier so the 70-200 is effectively a 112-320mm....
Click to expand...

bwana, this might sound like a stupid question but my SLR experience is limited to a Pentax K1000 so I really just don't know.

I understand (perhaps incorrectly) that the smaller sensor has the effect of a bigger zoom factor. Is the viewfinder/pentaprism adjusted to reflect this?
 
koffiejunkie said:
So you see slightly less in the viewfinder than what actually makes it onto the picture? Or the other way around?
Click to expand...

Yes, you see slightly less. The specs of the camera usually indicate the viewfinder coverage, but if they don't you can usually find it at dpreview.com. The higher models tend to be closer to 100%
 
OK, I see, thanks. So, aside from the zoom factor, are there any advantages/disadvantage to a full-size CCD?
 
Full frame (i.e. the same size as 35mm film)?

Major advantages:
1. at the same resolution, each pixel site is bigger which equates to better S/N.
2. The lenses that you use on a 35mm camera work the same way - there are many really high quality lenses developed for 35mm, but fewer exceptional lenses developed for APS-C.
3. Wide angle photography gets a bit easier as good 24mm lenses are much more affordable than 16mm ones.

Disadvantages:
1. Full frame cameras are really expensive.
2. If you tend to work at the zoom end of lenses, the extra 60% magnification is quite nice on an APS-C size sensor.

The Canon EOS5D is pro'lly the most popular full frame camera on the market at the moment.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X