Since I am about to buy a teleconverter for Canon R6 M ii + 100/500 lens, and couldn't decide whether 1.4 or 2.0, but now I have decided to buy RF 1.4x, also the best part of the whole video The good part--"I'm nowhere near where I want to be but I will get there with time", were the words I needed when I started photography at the age of 63. ~from india.
these are more for the prime zoom lens for sony ....yes you can use them on the 100-400 and 200-600 ....but since there not a prime it makes it hard to use and have then give great photos ....i use it on my 300mm f2.8 gm and its great for football and soccer ....it gives me a 420mm f4 and i can crop in camera to get a 500mm f4 ....it you just have to make sure ur shutter speed it faster then normal to get sharp photos ...i use this on the sony a9iii and its great combo to have
Get a 200-600mm and an a6600. That's what I use for wildlife. 300-900mm equivalent is NICE. Even just adding a good crop sensor body is an excellent 4th option, probably with better results than a TC.
Have considered getting the 200-600 many times. Having a crop sensor body is an option however with the body i use i can use it in apsc mode and get the same results as you do with the a6600 ☺️
I just purchased the same 1.4 teleconverter to use with my Sony 100-400mm alongside my A7r5 and A74. I've noticed my hit rate for birds in flight and even perched birds has gone down, most of the images just seems a little softer (doesn't matter which body) . I'm still testing it but your video added some helpful info for my trying to figure out why my images are worse - Thanks!
It's a tough one! It's definitely not the body I feel, my a7siii is the same. You can get sharp images, I've managed it, but I'd say it's probably 10-20% of the time they are tac sharp, another 50% are salvageable and the rest don't get touched. It's hard! Ultimately you cannot beat just having the right optics to begin with, a 200-600 would be ideal. But I just can't be bothered to spend more money -_- Good luck with it!
@@DannyBlighWell this is good (?) to know - hearing someone else is having the same results is sorta reassuring. I also own the 200-600mm so I'm going to throw the 1.4 on that and do some testing and see if I get the same results. I bought the 1.4 to use with the 100-400mm and the A74 for my wife because it's such a nice lightweight set-up for the reach you get and she doesn't like carrying the 200-600mm. I hope I'm missing something or just need to hone my technique for wildlife because I've heard such good things about the 1.4 teleconverter. Anyway, thanks for taking your time to reply - cheers
@@JohnScaneArt i definitely think there’s skill involved with a TC. Something Simon said in the call which isn’t in this video is that he sees so many TC’s for sale and he suspects it’s because people (such as me and perhaps you) expect too much straight away rather than learning how to use the equipment the correct way. I’d love the 200-600 but like you said, the 100-400 is lightweight and sometimes I prefer that
@@DannyBligh Yea, I'd believe Simon on this! I'm pretty sure my technique is in the "average to poor" range LOL. I really like the setup so i'm not getting rid of the 1.4 - It provides me a challenge to get better 👍 Keep up the great videos!
I'm considering teleconverters at the moment and have been watching videos about them. I recall a comment about the magnified camera shake and as well as losing stops of light for the length of the extended lens also losing stops of light in shutter speed. So raise the shutter speed or put your gear on a tripod. Looking forward to testing the theory. 😅
Simon nailed it. Perfect your 1.4 TC first. I had learned on my Nikon APS-C cameras + 1.4 TC to get amazing photos. Respecting the need to stop down at least 2/3 of a stop and have excellent long lens technique. Then I switch to Olympus M43 and bought their 300 F4. An amazingly sharp lens and equivalent to 400 mm on APS-C. Every bit as sharp as the Nikon 500 F4. Since the magnification was less than my Nikon, the use of the 1.4 TC should be easier, right? Wrong. Everything was worse. Way worse. The diff? The heavy Nikon setup was always on a tripod with a Gimbal head. The Olympus system is lightweight and always handheld. Despite Olympus' great stabilization technology, my handshake was still ruining everything. I had to redevelop my handheld technique. I also had to relearn to stop down.
I can say now I would like to get back the 1.4x teleconverter that I have returned as I was experiencing the same issues you have mentioned. Thanks for this advices. Initially I was following Jared Polin stating that you can just crop the image and get the same results, which is indeed fair enough. Although, you research brought some extra details that put my thoughts on the table and wanting to get it back and try more to give it a shot and master them. Very nice video and very well build video. thanks!
I gave up on teleconverters years ago because they degraded the image too much. But, it had been years, so I thought I'd try the Sony 1.4x. And I was impressed. So much so that I sold my 100-400 GM and even bought a 2x. I also have the Sony 200-600mm G which I like. But, when I travel I usually take the 70-200 GM II and the 1.4x.
@@bluwasabi7635 I wouldn't hesitate to use the 1.4 with the 70-200 GM II. I don't think it degrades the image much if at all and it's only a one stop hit. The 2.0 degrades the image a bit and you take a 2 stop hit which is more than I like. But, I would still use the 2x in a pinch.
Great video Danny! I love Simon’s videos, and I really appreciate you bringing him as an expert for advise. I just found your channel, but I will be checking the rest of your videos.
Thank you!! Yeah, i’ll never claim i’m an expert in anything 😂 if I can learn from somebody, I will take others along for the ride and learn together. Appreciate the support!
Hi Danny, I also follow Simon. As in this item good explanations from you both. Thinkin about buying the RF 1.4 converter for my R6M2 and the RF 100-500MM.
Very interesting discussion, particularly in relation to the high mpixel cameras. I use the 1.4tc with the 200-600mm and A7iii and it is more of a challenge in low light, but my experience is that in good light, it’s been excellent when needing the extra focal length. For sharpness on the 200-600 range, the G lens is definitely the better option.. unless you have the substantial budget required for the primes. Some seem to get good results on the 70-200 f2.8 GM ii on the A7rIV and A7rV and I’m planning both the lens and likely the rV as my next purchase.
Sorry for only just responding firstly! Yeah, i hadn’t even noticed anything with the MP situation myself but it’s a common topic on forums. I’m in two minds with the 200-600, i’d like the range however i don’t want the size or weight 😂 plus, i want to save some money for once! The a7rv is a great camera body though, i’m really enjoying it. Thanks for watching!!
Hey man, interesting video. I used to own 1.4x that I had been using with 100-400mm. It crossed my mind few times that maybe my 100-400 just isn’t the best copy of that lens, but I sold that tc and never looked back. I get the comments about the technique but I just did many simple back to back tests in real life scenarios and conclusion was always that the trade-offs are pretty horrible. So yeah you can buy it and sweat about making your life harder with less light hitting the sensor, inherit sharpness loss and worse af performance, you can put all the tricks you know to get you ahead of these issues ….or you can crop your pictures in post, which in my experience was giving between same or better results. Maybe it’s different when you own 400mm 2.8 or if you are really about this particular form factor and really need slightly soft and more noisy 560mm, but otherwise just save that money towards 200-600
No matter what, if you want the best quality image just buy the focal length you need. If TC’s delivered the same quality image as a longer lens but for a fraction of the price then nobody would but the lenses 😂 Thanks for watching! ✌🏻
@@DannyBligh very true, and sorry for coming across as cranky old person, just the idea of TC brings back mixed feelings ✌ your video is a sound advice for people who own it
ha, that had actually never crossed my mind! I expected more from it as I said in the video, I expected it to just work like my 100-400 is always on the money. But that isn't the case clearly and many people have a similar experience. I just wanted to share my experience and try and help others get the best results from the TC rather than just selling it and thinking they don't work at all. I'd happily go out and get the 200-600 to be honest, I did consider it before the 100-400 (and I do think it's even cheaper than the 100-400) but they are so large in comparison and for how much I'd use it, there not much point. Thanks for watching (and responding) crack old person ;) ha! Just kidding
I have both the 1.4x and 2x teleconverters, but rarely use, even on 400mm F2.8 lens. I just find I get better results without and crop image in Lightroom as required. Just consider teleconverters for emergency use in specific situations and if you require more focal length regularly, use a 600mm lens.
Great video, very informative and well done!! Unstable air is a HUGE issue!!!! When I go chasing owls up in the northern Boreal Forests of Minnesota in the winter any warmer air source causes issues. If it is -20 c don't shoot over a road! Don't shoot out of a car (the warm air going out the window is a killer!). Same applies to warm air rising in the summer (heck...glider pilots use it to gain altitude!) uniform surfaces like a grassland help, but not if there is a walking trail between you and your target! I use the 100/400 on the new a7R V and the images are spectacular with and without the TC. BUT, the bird autofocus suffers significantly. It is very noticeable. 100% eye lock without the TC, and autofocus struggles with the TC in low(er) light conditions. There is an easy solution that us old farts know all about....Manual Focus! The a7R V focus peaking works exceptionally well in manual focus. Give it a try!!
What’s manual focus? - Just kidding!! 😂😂 It’s been such a learning curve shooting at the longer distances, really different to what i’m use to. But it’s good to get out of your comfort zone. Thanks for the tips 👌🏻
Yeahhhhh…. This is why I said last week hang on until this video. You may get on with it perfectly fine, we’re all different but i’ve had so many hit and misses with just the 1.4x. I personally wouldn’t buy a 2x, i’d sooner buy a longer lens
@@DannyBligh then the decision is back to between the sony 100-400 and tamron 50-400. My use would be mostly for landscape photography but I’ll be going in Yellowstone in July and the lens I end up with should also be capable of wild life…..
![Lethal Company Music Video 🎵 "Follow The Orders" [VERSION A]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/QeooZB4Z7RA/mqdefault.jpg)
Thanks buddy! It was fun!
Thanks for being part of the journey Simon!
I love your videos Simon
Since I am about to buy a teleconverter for Canon R6 M ii + 100/500 lens, and couldn't decide whether 1.4 or 2.0, but now I have decided to buy RF 1.4x, also the best part of the whole video The good part--"I'm nowhere near where I want to be but I will get there with time", were the words I needed when I started photography at the age of 63.
~from india.
these are more for the prime zoom lens for sony ....yes you can use them on the 100-400 and 200-600 ....but since there not a prime it makes it hard to use and have then give great photos ....i use it on my 300mm f2.8 gm and its great for football and soccer ....it gives me a 420mm f4 and i can crop in camera to get a 500mm f4 ....it you just have to make sure ur shutter speed it faster then normal to get sharp photos ...i use this on the sony a9iii and its great combo to have
Get a 200-600mm and an a6600. That's what I use for wildlife. 300-900mm equivalent is NICE. Even just adding a good crop sensor body is an excellent 4th option, probably with better results than a TC.
Have considered getting the 200-600 many times. Having a crop sensor body is an option however with the body i use i can use it in apsc mode and get the same results as you do with the a6600 ☺️
@@DannyBligh ahh, gotcha
I just purchased the same 1.4 teleconverter to use with my Sony 100-400mm alongside my A7r5 and A74. I've noticed my hit rate for birds in flight and even perched birds has gone down, most of the images just seems a little softer (doesn't matter which body) . I'm still testing it but your video added some helpful info for my trying to figure out why my images are worse - Thanks!
It's a tough one! It's definitely not the body I feel, my a7siii is the same. You can get sharp images, I've managed it, but I'd say it's probably 10-20% of the time they are tac sharp, another 50% are salvageable and the rest don't get touched. It's hard! Ultimately you cannot beat just having the right optics to begin with, a 200-600 would be ideal. But I just can't be bothered to spend more money -_- Good luck with it!
@@DannyBlighWell this is good (?) to know - hearing someone else is having the same results is sorta reassuring. I also own the 200-600mm so I'm going to throw the 1.4 on that and do some testing and see if I get the same results. I bought the 1.4 to use with the 100-400mm and the A74 for my wife because it's such a nice lightweight set-up for the reach you get and she doesn't like carrying the 200-600mm. I hope I'm missing something or just need to hone my technique for wildlife because I've heard such good things about the 1.4 teleconverter. Anyway, thanks for taking your time to reply - cheers
@@JohnScaneArt i definitely think there’s skill involved with a TC. Something Simon said in the call which isn’t in this video is that he sees so many TC’s for sale and he suspects it’s because people (such as me and perhaps you) expect too much straight away rather than learning how to use the equipment the correct way. I’d love the 200-600 but like you said, the 100-400 is lightweight and sometimes I prefer that
@@DannyBligh Yea, I'd believe Simon on this! I'm pretty sure my technique is in the "average to poor" range LOL. I really like the setup so i'm not getting rid of the 1.4 - It provides me a challenge to get better 👍 Keep up the great videos!
I'm considering teleconverters at the moment and have been watching videos about them. I recall a comment about the magnified camera shake and as well as losing stops of light for the length of the extended lens also losing stops of light in shutter speed. So raise the shutter speed or put your gear on a tripod. Looking forward to testing the theory. 😅
Simon nailed it. Perfect your 1.4 TC first. I had learned on my Nikon APS-C cameras + 1.4 TC to get amazing photos. Respecting the need to stop down at least 2/3 of a stop and have excellent long lens technique. Then I switch to Olympus M43 and bought their 300 F4. An amazingly sharp lens and equivalent to 400 mm on APS-C. Every bit as sharp as the Nikon 500 F4. Since the magnification was less than my Nikon, the use of the 1.4 TC should be easier, right? Wrong. Everything was worse. Way worse. The diff? The heavy Nikon setup was always on a tripod with a Gimbal head. The Olympus system is lightweight and always handheld. Despite Olympus' great stabilization technology, my handshake was still ruining everything. I had to redevelop my handheld technique. I also had to relearn to stop down.
I can say now I would like to get back the 1.4x teleconverter that I have returned as I was experiencing the same issues you have mentioned. Thanks for this advices. Initially I was following Jared Polin stating that you can just crop the image and get the same results, which is indeed fair enough. Although, you research brought some extra details that put my thoughts on the table and wanting to get it back and try more to give it a shot and master them. Very nice video and very well build video. thanks!
I gave up on teleconverters years ago because they degraded the image too much. But, it had been years, so I thought I'd try the Sony 1.4x. And I was impressed. So much so that I sold my 100-400 GM and even bought a 2x. I also have the Sony 200-600mm G which I like. But, when I travel I usually take the 70-200 GM II and the 1.4x.
Why do you personally prefer the 1.4 over the 2.0?
@@bluwasabi7635 I wouldn't hesitate to use the 1.4 with the 70-200 GM II. I don't think it degrades the image much if at all and it's only a one stop hit. The 2.0 degrades the image a bit and you take a 2 stop hit which is more than I like. But, I would still use the 2x in a pinch.
@@PhotoTrekr thank you!
Does the same rule of thumn @DannyBligh apply to video when working with either 2x or 1.4 tele?
Great clip, and recognition, and the interview of teleconverters.
Great video Danny! I love Simon’s videos, and I really appreciate you bringing him as an expert for advise. I just found your channel, but I will be checking the rest of your videos.
Thank you!! Yeah, i’ll never claim i’m an expert in anything 😂 if I can learn from somebody, I will take others along for the ride and learn together. Appreciate the support!
Very helpful tips from Simon. Great video on the TC's thank you.
Hi Danny, I also follow Simon. As in this item good explanations from you both. Thinkin about buying the RF 1.4 converter for my R6M2 and the RF 100-500MM.
Simon is the man!!!! Good video, thanks for sharing!
That was a learning curve 😂😂 but so much fun!
Huge learning curve wow didn't think about the air hit causing issues great tips looking forward to putting them into practice with my Rf 100 to 500 !
Everyday is a school day right?! Thanks for watching
Very interesting discussion, particularly in relation to the high mpixel cameras. I use the 1.4tc with the 200-600mm and A7iii and it is more of a challenge in low light, but my experience is that in good light, it’s been excellent when needing the extra focal length.
For sharpness on the 200-600 range, the G lens is definitely the better option.. unless you have the substantial budget required for the primes. Some seem to get good results on the 70-200 f2.8 GM ii on the A7rIV and A7rV and I’m planning both the lens and likely the rV as my next purchase.
Sorry for only just responding firstly!
Yeah, i hadn’t even noticed anything with the MP situation myself but it’s a common topic on forums.
I’m in two minds with the 200-600, i’d like the range however i don’t want the size or weight 😂 plus, i want to save some money for once!
The a7rv is a great camera body though, i’m really enjoying it.
Thanks for watching!!
Hey man, interesting video. I used to own 1.4x that I had been using with 100-400mm. It crossed my mind few times that maybe my 100-400 just isn’t the best copy of that lens, but I sold that tc and never looked back. I get the comments about the technique but I just did many simple back to back tests in real life scenarios and conclusion was always that the trade-offs are pretty horrible. So yeah you can buy it and sweat about making your life harder with less light hitting the sensor, inherit sharpness loss and worse af performance, you can put all the tricks you know to get you ahead of these issues ….or you can crop your pictures in post, which in my experience was giving between same or better results. Maybe it’s different when you own 400mm 2.8 or if you are really about this particular form factor and really need slightly soft and more noisy 560mm, but otherwise just save that money towards 200-600
No matter what, if you want the best quality image just buy the focal length you need. If TC’s delivered the same quality image as a longer lens but for a fraction of the price then nobody would but the lenses 😂
Thanks for watching! ✌🏻
@@DannyBligh very true, and sorry for coming across as cranky old person, just the idea of TC brings back mixed feelings ✌ your video is a sound advice for people who own it
ha, that had actually never crossed my mind! I expected more from it as I said in the video, I expected it to just work like my 100-400 is always on the money. But that isn't the case clearly and many people have a similar experience. I just wanted to share my experience and try and help others get the best results from the TC rather than just selling it and thinking they don't work at all. I'd happily go out and get the 200-600 to be honest, I did consider it before the 100-400 (and I do think it's even cheaper than the 100-400) but they are so large in comparison and for how much I'd use it, there not much point.
Thanks for watching (and responding) crack old person ;) ha! Just kidding
I have both the 1.4x and 2x teleconverters, but rarely use, even on 400mm F2.8 lens. I just find I get better results without and crop image in Lightroom as required. Just consider teleconverters for emergency use in specific situations and if you require more focal length regularly, use a 600mm lens.
i wish i would have gotten the f2.8 70-200 vs the f4 😅 new sub💪🏽
Sell it, but the 2.8. Enjoy life 😂👏🏼 welcome to the channel
Great video, very informative and well done!!
Unstable air is a HUGE issue!!!! When I go chasing owls up in the northern Boreal Forests of Minnesota in the winter any warmer air source causes issues. If it is -20 c don't shoot over a road! Don't shoot out of a car (the warm air going out the window is a killer!). Same applies to warm air rising in the summer (heck...glider pilots use it to gain altitude!) uniform surfaces like a grassland help, but not if there is a walking trail between you and your target!
I use the 100/400 on the new a7R V and the images are spectacular with and without the TC. BUT, the bird autofocus suffers significantly. It is very noticeable. 100% eye lock without the TC, and autofocus struggles with the TC in low(er) light conditions.
There is an easy solution that us old farts know all about....Manual Focus! The a7R V focus peaking works exceptionally well in manual focus. Give it a try!!
What’s manual focus? - Just kidding!! 😂😂
It’s been such a learning curve shooting at the longer distances, really different to what i’m use to. But it’s good to get out of your comfort zone.
Thanks for the tips 👌🏻
Nice Video! Thank you for your advice ^^
Looking into the 70-200mm with TC2x. Now that doesn’t look like that exciting….
Yeahhhhh…. This is why I said last week hang on until this video. You may get on with it perfectly fine, we’re all different but i’ve had so many hit and misses with just the 1.4x. I personally wouldn’t buy a 2x, i’d sooner buy a longer lens
@@DannyBligh then the decision is back to between the sony 100-400 and tamron 50-400. My use would be mostly for landscape photography but I’ll be going in Yellowstone in July and the lens I end up with should also be capable of wild life…..
Glyn Dewis has a similar video, how he missed birfd photography, go and see the mistakes