I'm a hobbyst, once I was asked to shoot for the local soccer team... And things were going well for the team in the tournament, so when the time came to tour, I was asked again to shoot the games. My bag of lenses was stolen I had no option but improvise, went driving 2 hours and got a 500mm mirror lens from the 70's... Got the shoot done everybody happy. even the donut bokeh was a success..🤭 " shoot with what you have" though 🤷
@@DavidBergmanPhoto totally manual a royal pain in the **** f8 constant... But ... But when you're on the fly....You've gotta do what you've gotta do..
@@usuallyroamingrob3427 yup.. is really sad how some people can go so low as taking another man's tools... I'm a photo enthusiast.... And generally I put bread on the table by other means.... But this time I was committed and had persons memories in my hands... Glad to share the story... Still keep till today hat old lens🤭
I used to shoot bass fishing tournaments which meant two days every weekend in season. Maybe 800 shots a day with 70-100 teams. I got a lot of thanks even though my camera was clearly inferior to many others. The difference? I could be counted on to make the long drives in any weather and stick around from 7 am blast off to 4 o'clock onwards awards on stage. Guys said they appreciated someone was recording their participation especially if it was a payday for them. So yes, shoot with what you have.
The short answer, 2x tele converter will cut light twice. So, you will need to double ISO or make shutter speed lower. And this is more significant disadvantage than a litle bit (if any) degradation in image quality. I personally have teleconverters, for example it even hard or impossible to find 800mm or 1200mm native lens without wheels to tyransport it :) Very nice that Adorama makes and support those educational videos.
I use a 400 2.8 with both the 1.4x and 2x with great results. The 1.4x is so good you really have to look very close to see any difference. The 400 at 2.8 is just sublime for baseball infield work. The minor drop in image quality with extenders is totally acceptable. Using the 400 and a 70-200 gives me what I need using just two bodies.
First, let me just say that this is probably the best video I have ever seen on this topic, so bravo for that. One thing you didn’t touch on that is actually of huge importance is the resolving power of the lens in relation to the sensor of the camera. If the optics of the lens go beyond what the sensor can render, you effectively lose zero quality with a tele converter, at least the 1.4 X.
Great video showing the options for action photography. One option not covered, is using digital crop in camera. If you're shooting with a high megapixel sensor, using that digital crop is effective. I use it for bird in flight photography with a 200-600 lens.
@@DavidBergmanPhoto except when doing it later one has more options so it is better. But for some use it is way better to crop directly in the camera - speed matters and size sometimes too
Shoot with what you need to get the shot. You can crop and enlarge in post, but if you are shooting critical action, you probably are going to want to "see" it while shooting. More difficult to do if the image is small in the viewfinder.
My compromise - which served me very well with pics shot and published worldwide in major print and online publications around the world - was to use a 120-300mm F2.8 and add a 1.4x Teleconverter- essentially a 'poor man's' 200-400 F4...
For those who use the standard Canon DSLR cameras (with the flopping mirror), don't forget to fine-tune your camera's microfocus calibration inside the camera menu. This is to adjust front or back focusing, otherwise the image may be soft at the target focus. Those using mirrorless cameras have no need for this adjustment, in fact, not even found.
Thanks, David. I've found the Canon 2x TC on a 600 works well, but doesn't take a lot of cropping in post. I've found that cropping in more then about 25% on that combination start to get soft. But, I agree, that 600 is awesome.
This is one of the more informative and helpful (to me) videos that help me understand the hardware side of things. Well done. Keep 'em coming David! I'll be in New York in July staying on the Island. Hope to catch a baseball game and to watch the grandkids playing LaCrosse. I'll be putting the new gear to good use, I think. Nothing fancy like that hubble telescope that you're holding in the image above (RF100-400 and EF70-200L f2.8 on the R6). Have to pack light. Qantas, like most airlines, I think, is tightening up on its luggage allowances with hefty fees for overweight bags.
Really good presentation IMO. One comment about using TCs and that they aren't compatible with all lenses so might not physically fit on some of the less expensive tele zooms.
Fantastic info, as always, David! The other thing to keep in mind in all scenarios (and I'm replying to this in Nov. 2023) is that with the proliferation of AI tools now available, we can be a little less worried about noise - maybe even a bit of motion blur - than in the past. This is no excuse to not aim for the best possible image quality in-camera, but having that extra tool in the toolbelt is a very good thing. Specifically, the Topaz AI tools for both photo and video are just incredible! Thanks for all your great content!
Amazing. Thank you! This was not )only a video about Teleconverters but also about the differences with zoom and super zoom lenses. I'm a Fuji X-H2S owner, with the 1.4 and 2.0x's the lenses I it will be just fantastic ... including the FX150-600 purchased from Adorama! (JUST purchased the Fuji 2.0x a few minutes ago because of this video). Chuck M
I got a Tamron MC4 used mint for $15. Quality is great, but not a $500+ TC obviously. The best use case I've found is on a macro lens to get over 1:1 reproduction or further working distance. You're already diffraction limited, manual focus and likely shooting with flash at ISO 100 so light/quality/AF loss are no concern, far outweighed by greater magnification.
👍🏻☺👍🏻 As always, great video David! Very interresting! Some may want to throw rocks at me for that suggestion 😉 But, it would have been nice to see how a crop sensor would have done against a full frame with TC. Some years ago, I did try this with my EOS 5D MKIII vs my EOS 7D MKII. Both have the same Megapixels so I did compare the full frame + EF 1.4 III TC vs the cropped sensor, both on an EF 500 F4 MKII. The photos turned out to be quite similar. I mostly shoot wildlife and sports with that lens and found myself using the 7D MKII most of the time. In my opinion, the image quality was at least as good as the full frame + 1.4 x and there was no chance of slowing down the AF speed. The 7D MKII also had better frame rate. So I ended up using the 5D MKIII in low light situations or when shooting other (closer) things. Of course, that logic may no longer apply with today's R series but still...🤔... The R7 just came out...And since I always want more photo stuff😉 I wish that one will also be thrown into the mix for a part II of this video. And I also would like the see a comparison of the resulting photos against a crop done in post processing 🤓📷🔭 🦉
In my opinion 1) autofocus and image quality get worse when using an extender, and the 2x extender is even worse than the 1.4. 2) they are only useful on very expensive fixed lenses like the 500 mm f4. 3) most of the times it's better not to use an extender and crop the image
True. They are best on lenses they are matched with and designed to be used with. However, given such a combination my experience is that there is virtually zero degradation using a 1.4. In choosing between a 1.4 and cropping I will always choose the 1.4. Who knows? I may want to crop from THAT! A 2x is different. It is possible, but more difficult, to get sharp images from a 2x. They are best reserved for filling the frame with something close, like a songbird eight or ten yards away, not trying to bring distant subjects closer.
The Canon 2X version III is magical .......I use it on my 1DX MK III with my 70-200mm 2.8L USM II and the images are sharper than using my Canon EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS II USM Lens .......so this is the reason why I sold the 100mm-400mm lens......
Actually, you do lose resolution using in-camera crop mode. It's essentially the same as cropping in post. You camera just used a smaller portion of the sensor.
Great video. Very good expatiation of technical issues. Give us some more technical stuff. Not everyone who watches your videos are complete newbies to photography. I look forward to your videos every Monday. Keep up the good work.
Hi David, great video. I have a canon R and speaking about cropping, which option will give me a better quality? Using the crop option in camera or to crop in post? All the best
It's the same quality. I think cropping in post gives you more options to choose where to crop, etc. But it takes some time to do, whereas cropping in camera is done and ready straight out of camera (if that's important to you).
I guess, it depends on the magnification from the final picture. If you don´t need it in billboard size, or 800% magnification, you might get even an acceptable picture with a Kenko Teleplus Pro 300 3X Teleconverter, because you didn´t lose pixels.
Which lens to buy depends on how much money you make.. How much money can you make being a sports photographer? And what are the ways to make money as a sports photographer?
I considered getting a TC but am afraid the field of view will be so small at 800-1000mm focal length that it would be almost impossible to quickly find an in-flight bird/plane/whatever, and hold it in-frame panning while shooting. For people who have done this: Is this a concern? Does the subject move away before you can compose, focus and shoot? Is it much easier with a 1.4x TC (instead of 2x)? Thanks for another informative video David and Adorama!
This was a great video. I'm not a sports photographer and don't have a need for huge lenses at this time. I was considering getting a 1.4x for my Z camera just for the occasions where I might want a little extra reach.
It is actualy called an extender it extents the focal length. A it does not convert never got that. There is extender on it not converter. Converters are used for macro photography as it converts any lens to an macro lens.
I shoot airshows so I know long telephoto are best bet to get good shots I have superzoom lense but it bit on hard to handle when shooting military jets so a 100 to 400 zoom with 1.4 teleconverter on a 1Dx no III give at better reach. Guess depend on the lighting conditions but what are your ideas on this subject. Nice coverage on the teleconverters. Thanks David
Can Nikon d750 camera work with new z series lenses ftz adapter because all videos in social media can use z series camera with f mount lens ftz adapter.But my question is f mount cameras with z series lenses Can it be used through any other adapter?
Great thanks, have been wondering which is best option. What are your thoughts on Lightroom etc 'enhance' feature or Topaz Gigapixel AI after cropping?
Using a Canon teleconverter (1.4x or 2x extender) with either the 70-200mm f/2.8L or 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L or similar Canon EF lenses works fine in both autofocus and image quality when associated with a Canon mirrorless body (R5 for example), since these bodies have many more focus points across the entire frame, in a live-view function / manner through viewfinder or back screen. This is not the case with the earlier SLR mirror type bodies (5D MK4, etc) which have much fewer focus points across the sensor field.
the auto focus on my D90 with a 70-200 + 2x EF goes berzerk when I am in shutter priority mode or auto. is that because my aperture is too big? do i need to lock it off at at least 5.6? thank you!
Hi, I just want to plan to have 2x tc to my cam to shoot aviation photos. My setup will be like 90D + 70-200mm F2.8l + 2x tc (planning), is that OK for aviation photos? If do like that which mean my max focal length become 200mm × 3.6 (1.6x crop apsc sensor on 90D + 2x tc) = 720mm?
Thoughts on Sony a7r3 (42mp), 70-200 f/2.8ii (super sharp), 1.4x AND using crop mode(18mp)? Hobby but looking for good quality. Currently using crop mode but considering 1.4x teleconverter to keep higher shutter speeds.
Not for any optical reasons though, just so the electronics don't get confused. I had a few times where I did it 'wrong' and the camera wasn't recognizing the lens till I remounted it properly.
Kenko did made a 3x extender (Kenko Teleplus Pro 300 3X Teleconverter) a lot of years ago. You might find a used one. I have one in my treasure chest 😁
Physically, yes, it's possible. Practically, image quality suffers so much that it isn't advisable. Having said that, a few years ago George Lepp published photos in Outdoor Photographer magazine of a bald eagle nest that he had taken with stacked teleconverters. If nothing else, he proved that if you have no other option to get physically closer it's worth a shot. The planets really have to align, however. Cool temperatures to reduce atmospheric waves and absolutely no vibration, meaning the use of a remote trigger and (with DSLRs) mirror lockup are essential. Even then, don't expect more than a few usable images out of hundreds shot. One nice thing, mirrorless cameras, such as the R5, will still autofocus with this combo, making the task slightly easier.
WITHOUT watching the video - ANYONE remember the 80's when 3X converters came out , and pretty much anyone with a cheap telephoto zoom was trying their luck at " long range " photography !!! , ( am not sure if there was an M42 screw version of the 3X converter , it wouldn't surprise me !!! ) ( now to the video )
@@DavidBergmanPhoto if you STILL have an old ( SLR ) camera using Soligor, Vivitar or Pentax K lenses , then e-bay have a 3 X teleconverter waiting for your cash !!!
I'm a hobbyst, once I was asked to shoot for the local soccer team... And things were going well for the team in the tournament, so when the time came to tour, I was asked again to shoot the games. My bag of lenses was stolen I had no option but improvise, went driving 2 hours and got a 500mm mirror lens from the 70's... Got the shoot done everybody happy. even the donut bokeh was a success..🤭 " shoot with what you have" though 🤷
Wow, that really sucks that you lost your gear.
That stinks but glad you made it work! Those lenses are manual focus if I remember correctly. :)
@@DavidBergmanPhoto totally manual a royal pain in the **** f8 constant... But ... But when you're on the fly....You've gotta do what you've gotta do..
@@usuallyroamingrob3427 yup.. is really sad how some people can go so low as taking another man's tools... I'm a photo enthusiast.... And generally I put bread on the table by other means.... But this time I was committed and had persons memories in my hands... Glad to share the story... Still keep till today hat old lens🤭
I used to shoot bass fishing tournaments which meant two days every weekend in season. Maybe 800 shots a day with 70-100 teams. I got a lot of thanks even though my camera was clearly inferior to many others. The difference? I could be counted on to make the long drives in any weather and stick around from 7 am blast off to 4 o'clock onwards awards on stage. Guys said they appreciated someone was recording their participation especially if it was a payday for them. So yes, shoot with what you have.
The short answer, 2x tele converter will cut light twice. So, you will need to double ISO or make shutter speed lower. And this is more significant disadvantage than a litle bit (if any) degradation in image quality. I personally have teleconverters, for example it even hard or impossible to find 800mm or 1200mm native lens without wheels to tyransport it :) Very nice that Adorama makes and support those educational videos.
I use a 400 2.8 with both the 1.4x and 2x with great results. The 1.4x is so good you really have to look very close to see any difference. The 400 at 2.8 is just sublime for baseball infield work. The minor drop in image quality with extenders is totally acceptable. Using the 400 and a 70-200 gives me what I need using just two bodies.
First, let me just say that this is probably the best video I have ever seen on this topic, so bravo for that. One thing you didn’t touch on that is actually of huge importance is the resolving power of the lens in relation to the sensor of the camera. If the optics of the lens go beyond what the sensor can render, you effectively lose zero quality with a tele converter, at least the 1.4 X.
Great video showing the options for action photography.
One option not covered, is using digital crop in camera. If you're shooting with a high megapixel sensor, using that digital crop is effective. I use it for bird in flight photography with a 200-600 lens.
It's really the same as cropping in post.
@@DavidBergmanPhoto except when doing it later one has more options so it is better. But for some use it is way better to crop directly in the camera - speed matters and size sometimes too
@@DavidBergmanPhoto Isn't the difference that you are able to see what you're going to get in the final image on the EFV?
Shoot with what you need to get the shot. You can crop and enlarge in post, but if you are shooting critical action, you probably are going to want to "see" it while shooting. More difficult to do if the image is small in the viewfinder.
Awesome info!! I am thinking of adding a 2x converter to my 70-200 2.8L. This is exactly the video I needed! Thanks Dave!
My compromise - which served me very well with pics shot and published worldwide in major print and online publications around the world - was to use a 120-300mm F2.8 and add a 1.4x Teleconverter- essentially a 'poor man's' 200-400 F4...
For those who use the standard Canon DSLR cameras (with the flopping mirror), don't forget to fine-tune your camera's microfocus calibration inside the camera menu. This is to adjust front or back focusing, otherwise the image may be soft at the target focus. Those using mirrorless cameras have no need for this adjustment, in fact, not even found.
Thanks, David. I've found the Canon 2x TC on a 600 works well, but doesn't take a lot of cropping in post. I've found that cropping in more then about 25% on that combination start to get soft. But, I agree, that 600 is awesome.
This is one of the more informative and helpful (to me) videos that help me understand the hardware side of things. Well done. Keep 'em coming David!
I'll be in New York in July staying on the Island. Hope to catch a baseball game and to watch the grandkids playing LaCrosse. I'll be putting the new gear to good use, I think. Nothing fancy like that hubble telescope that you're holding in the image above (RF100-400 and EF70-200L f2.8 on the R6). Have to pack light. Qantas, like most airlines, I think, is tightening up on its luggage allowances with hefty fees for overweight bags.
Really good presentation IMO. One comment about using TCs and that they aren't compatible with all lenses so might not physically fit on some of the less expensive tele zooms.
Fantastic info, as always, David! The other thing to keep in mind in all scenarios (and I'm replying to this in Nov. 2023) is that with the proliferation of AI tools now available, we can be a little less worried about noise - maybe even a bit of motion blur - than in the past. This is no excuse to not aim for the best possible image quality in-camera, but having that extra tool in the toolbelt is a very good thing. Specifically, the Topaz AI tools for both photo and video are just incredible! Thanks for all your great content!
Amazing. Thank you! This was not )only a video about Teleconverters but also about the differences with zoom and super zoom lenses. I'm a Fuji X-H2S owner, with the 1.4 and 2.0x's the lenses I it will be just fantastic ... including the FX150-600 purchased from Adorama! (JUST purchased the Fuji 2.0x a few minutes ago because of this video). Chuck M
excellent video, David. Lots of great info.
A very good demonstration of the teleconverter, but glad that I don't need those big lenses for what I do. Thanks.
I use both EF 1.4x and EF 2x version III. They are great.
Thank you for the video.
I got a Tamron MC4 used mint for $15. Quality is great, but not a $500+ TC obviously. The best use case I've found is on a macro lens to get over 1:1 reproduction or further working distance. You're already diffraction limited, manual focus and likely shooting with flash at ISO 100 so light/quality/AF loss are no concern, far outweighed by greater magnification.
Very informative about teleconverter.. Thanks for sharing this wonderful VDO.
👍🏻☺👍🏻 As always, great video David! Very interresting! Some may want to throw rocks at me for that suggestion 😉 But, it would have been nice to see how a crop sensor would have done against a full frame with TC. Some years ago, I did try this with my EOS 5D MKIII vs my EOS 7D MKII. Both have the same Megapixels so I did compare the full frame + EF 1.4 III TC vs the cropped sensor, both on an EF 500 F4 MKII. The photos turned out to be quite similar. I mostly shoot wildlife and sports with that lens and found myself using the 7D MKII most of the time. In my opinion, the image quality was at least as good as the full frame + 1.4 x and there was no chance of slowing down the AF speed. The 7D MKII also had better frame rate. So I ended up using the 5D MKIII in low light situations or when shooting other (closer) things. Of course, that logic may no longer apply with today's R series but still...🤔... The R7 just came out...And since I always want more photo stuff😉 I wish that one will also be thrown into the mix for a part II of this video. And I also would like the see a comparison of the resulting photos against a crop done in post processing 🤓📷🔭 🦉
In my opinion 1) autofocus and image quality get worse when using an extender, and the 2x extender is even worse than the 1.4. 2) they are only useful on very expensive fixed lenses like the 500 mm f4. 3) most of the times it's better not to use an extender and crop the image
True. They are best on lenses they are matched with and designed to be used with. However, given such a combination my experience is that there is virtually zero degradation using a 1.4. In choosing between a 1.4 and cropping I will always choose the 1.4. Who knows? I may want to crop from THAT! A 2x is different. It is possible, but more difficult, to get sharp images from a 2x. They are best reserved for filling the frame with something close, like a songbird eight or ten yards away, not trying to bring distant subjects closer.
Great video. Good comparison to learn from.
The Canon 2X version III is magical .......I use it on my 1DX MK III with my 70-200mm 2.8L USM II and the images are sharper than using my Canon EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS II USM Lens .......so this is the reason why I sold the 100mm-400mm lens......
A wildlife photographer I bumped into said the converter helped him locate the subjects & then frame the photo in camera.
So helpful. Great examples. Thanks David!
Shooting with crop sensors is a good alternative to get more reach. Its basically a digital crop without losing resolution.
Actually, you do lose resolution using in-camera crop mode. It's essentially the same as cropping in post. You camera just used a smaller portion of the sensor.
@@DavidBergmanPhoto crop sensors, not crop mode
Great video. Very good expatiation of technical issues. Give us some more technical stuff. Not everyone who watches your videos are complete newbies to photography. I look forward to your videos every Monday. Keep up the good work.
One thing to consider when cropping is to enhance the pixels in PS.
Hi David, great video.
I have a canon R and speaking about cropping, which option will give me a better quality? Using the crop option in camera or to crop in post?
All the best
It's the same quality. I think cropping in post gives you more options to choose where to crop, etc. But it takes some time to do, whereas cropping in camera is done and ready straight out of camera (if that's important to you).
@@DavidBergmanPhoto thank you so much.
I guess, it depends on the magnification from the final picture. If you don´t need it in billboard size, or 800% magnification, you might get even an acceptable picture with a Kenko Teleplus Pro 300 3X Teleconverter, because you didn´t lose pixels.
Which lens to buy depends on how much money you make..
How much money can you make being a sports photographer?
And what are the ways to make money as a sports photographer?
I considered getting a TC but am afraid the field of view will be so small at 800-1000mm focal length that it would be almost impossible to quickly find an in-flight bird/plane/whatever, and hold it in-frame panning while shooting. For people who have done this: Is this a concern? Does the subject move away before you can compose, focus and shoot? Is it much easier with a 1.4x TC (instead of 2x)? Thanks for another informative video David and Adorama!
Yes.
exactly
Thanks, excellent comparisons and a great informative video, I found it helpful 👍
Excellent
This was a great video. I'm not a sports photographer and don't have a need for huge lenses at this time. I was considering getting a 1.4x for my Z camera just for the occasions where I might want a little extra reach.
It is actualy called an extender it extents the focal length.
A it does not convert never got that.
There is extender on it not converter.
Converters are used for macro photography as it converts any lens to an macro lens.
Great info, thank you!
Canon ef 200-400mm x1.4 is the first of its kind. The ultimate in engineering.
What about shooting in DX mode on a full frame camera
Same as shooting full size and cropping after, but losing ability to crop how you want if you miss your framing.
13:00 you gave me anxiety just watching you handle that lens. You could have dropped it!!!!!! lol
And a telescope to observe the Andromeda stars instead a converter and a huuuuge lens?
I shoot airshows so I know long telephoto are best bet to get good shots I have superzoom lense but it bit on hard to handle when shooting military jets so a 100 to 400 zoom with 1.4 teleconverter on a 1Dx no III give at better reach. Guess depend on the lighting conditions but what are your ideas on this subject. Nice coverage on the teleconverters. Thanks David
"Couple of frames"
Shoots 20
Would love to see comparison using teleconverter or using camera in crop mode?
Crop mode is the same as cropping in post. You're just doing it in-camera before the shot
"Let's do a couple of frames here.... trrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr"
Can Nikon d750 camera work with new z series lenses ftz adapter because all videos in social media can use z series camera with f mount lens ftz adapter.But my question is f mount cameras with z series lenses Can it be used through any other adapter?
Great thanks, have been wondering which is best option. What are your thoughts on Lightroom etc 'enhance' feature or Topaz Gigapixel AI after cropping?
I haven't compared the directly, but it's always better to capture the highest possible image quality then try to enhance in post.
I lose autofocus on my EF 100_400 lens when I use my Cannon 2X teleconverter
I think it depends on the body. Some will not autofocus past a certain minimum aperture.
Using a Canon teleconverter (1.4x or 2x extender) with either the 70-200mm f/2.8L or 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L or similar Canon EF lenses works fine in both autofocus and image quality when associated with a Canon mirrorless body (R5 for example), since these bodies have many more focus points across the entire frame, in a live-view function / manner through viewfinder or back screen. This is not the case with the earlier SLR mirror type bodies (5D MK4, etc) which have much fewer focus points across the sensor field.
the auto focus on my D90 with a 70-200 + 2x EF goes berzerk when I am in shutter priority mode or auto. is that because my aperture is too big? do i need to lock it off at at least 5.6? thank you!
The canon RF 70-200 is not compatible with extenders. I real bummer imo. The EF lens is. But not the RF.
Hi, I just want to plan to have 2x tc to my cam to shoot aviation photos. My setup will be like 90D + 70-200mm F2.8l + 2x tc (planning), is that OK for aviation photos?
If do like that which mean my max focal length become 200mm × 3.6 (1.6x crop apsc sensor on 90D + 2x tc) = 720mm?
Thoughts on Sony a7r3 (42mp), 70-200 f/2.8ii (super sharp), 1.4x AND using crop mode(18mp)? Hobby but looking for good quality. Currently using crop mode but considering 1.4x teleconverter to keep higher shutter speeds.
I'd almost always prefer to have more megapixels, so I'd go with the TC. Then you can still crop even more in post if you need to.
Sadly, the Canon RF 70-200 2.8 does not accept a teleconverter. RF 100-500 yes, somewhat.
You're supposed to attach the Tele converter to the lens first, not the camera first, just read the manual of the Tele converter!
That's what it says, and what I normally do, but having experimented both ways, I have yet to see a difference.
Not for any optical reasons though, just so the electronics don't get confused. I had a few times where I did it 'wrong' and the camera wasn't recognizing the lens till I remounted it properly.
Can you stack the 1.4 and 2X teleconverter to give you even more reach? Is that even doable?
I tried it ONCE - NOT advisable
Kenko did made a 3x extender (Kenko Teleplus Pro 300 3X Teleconverter) a lot of years ago. You might find a used one. I have one in my treasure chest 😁
If it's physically possible (which isn't always the case), it's usually not recommended. You might lose autofocus and quite a bit of image quality.
@@DavidBergmanPhoto thank you. I'll stay away from that.
Physically, yes, it's possible. Practically, image quality suffers so much that it isn't advisable. Having said that, a few years ago George Lepp published photos in Outdoor Photographer magazine of a bald eagle nest that he had taken with stacked teleconverters. If nothing else, he proved that if you have no other option to get physically closer it's worth a shot. The planets really have to align, however. Cool temperatures to reduce atmospheric waves and absolutely no vibration, meaning the use of a remote trigger and (with DSLRs) mirror lockup are essential. Even then, don't expect more than a few usable images out of hundreds shot. One nice thing, mirrorless cameras, such as the R5, will still autofocus with this combo, making the task slightly easier.
WITHOUT watching the video - ANYONE remember the 80's when 3X converters came out , and pretty much anyone with a cheap telephoto zoom was trying their luck at " long range " photography !!! , ( am not sure if there was an M42 screw version of the 3X converter , it wouldn't surprise me !!! ) ( now to the video )
I've never used one of those!
@@DavidBergmanPhoto if you STILL have an old ( SLR ) camera using Soligor, Vivitar or Pentax K lenses , then e-bay have a 3 X teleconverter waiting for your cash !!!
Wow impressive 😎🤟🏼🤝
👍🏻
brb selling my car to get this rig.
Stay away from tc. They degrade the image quality just too much
👍🏾🙏🏾
Why not the Sigma bazooka ?
Out of my League, lol.