Teleconverters and 70-300mm (600 35mm equiv) Olympus lens

[Dao]

I would caution however that when shooting things like the Grizlzy, or even black or brown bears, you want reach. Lots of reach. I have always maintained that with bears, if one fills the viewfinder and you are shooting anything shorter than 400mm ( an that's pretty D@^& short to me) then you are no longer a photographer, your dinner. :lmao:

My friend always tells me. Bring a friend with you and you do not need to out run the bear. You just need to make sure you can out run your friend.

 

[table1349]

Yes, there are issues with teleconverters. On the other hand, a good quality teleconverter matched to a lens for which it is designed (such as the Canon or Sigma EX series) can be used to make outstanding images. One only has to remember the limitations (e.g. reducing your lens effective speed). Of course the camera shake increases with increased focal length from the TC, but it also increases if you just buy a longer tele too. I would not write off TC's.

Yeah, I think it should be good. The techie guy from Olympus actually knew his stuff and I was impressed with his honesty. I mentioned my concerns with the TC20 and he said he had heard it can be a little dark too, and he felt the 14 was better for me. You lose less light with it, and I think it'll just be nice to have in the bag. For instance, I was hiking in Red Rock Canyon in April on a trip, and saw a scrub jay; my point and shoot Canon got me close, but would have been nice to have been even closer. Obviously a bird isn't going to stay in the same spot long, and animals move, but I think with good light it will be nice to have as an option. I do have plenty to learn, as this is my first SLR and I bought a lot of equipment this past week, but am looking forward to it.

A few things to keep in mind about teleconverters. They were designed originally to be used on prime lenses. A good prime lens as a rule will be sharper than a good zoom lens at the same focal length. They were designed to be used on lenses with a focal length of 100mm or longer. They were also designed to be used on top quality glass and were made with top quality glass as well.

A TC will magnify the focal length of the lens. That also means that it will magnify every flaw present in the lens. You put a TC on a lens that is soft, it will make the image softer etc. Every flaw is magnified.

To lessen the image quality issue, there are a few things to do. First, purchase a top quality TC. They cost more, but it makes more sense to spend $300 on a top quality TC that you will use than $100 on one that sits in the bag or on a shelf gathering dust because the images are terrible.

Use it on top quality glass. Canon makes mandatory with their TC's by manufacturing them to only fit on the appropriate L glass. Before you purchase a TC take your gear with the lens you intend to use it on with you to a good photography shop and give it a try. Go home, look at the shots and see if the image quality is acceptable to you. It will save you money in the long run.

I own both the Canon 1.4 and 2X TC. The 1.4 is used on my 70-200 f2.8 L. 300 f2.8 L and 400 f2.8L. The 2x TC is only used on the 300 and 400 as the image quality on the 70-200 is not up to my standards on it. On the two long primes it is fine.

 

[icassell]

Yes, there are issues with teleconverters. On the other hand, a good quality teleconverter matched to a lens for which it is designed (such as the Canon or Sigma EX series) can be used to make outstanding images. One only has to remember the limitations (e.g. reducing your lens effective speed). Of course the camera shake increases with increased focal length from the TC, but it also increases if you just buy a longer tele too. I would not write off TC's.

Yeah, I think it should be good. The techie guy from Olympus actually knew his stuff and I was impressed with his honesty. I mentioned my concerns with the TC20 and he said he had heard it can be a little dark too, and he felt the 14 was better for me. You lose less light with it, and I think it'll just be nice to have in the bag. For instance, I was hiking in Red Rock Canyon in April on a trip, and saw a scrub jay; my point and shoot Canon got me close, but would have been nice to have been even closer. Obviously a bird isn't going to stay in the same spot long, and animals move, but I think with good light it will be nice to have as an option. I do have plenty to learn, as this is my first SLR and I bought a lot of equipment this past week, but am looking forward to it.

A few things to keep in mind about teleconverters. They were designed originally to be used on prime lenses. A good prime lens as a rule will be sharper than a good zoom lens at the same focal length. They were designed to be used on lenses with a focal length of 100mm or longer. They were also designed to be used on top quality glass and were made with top quality glass as well.

A TC will magnify the focal length of the lens. That also means that it will magnify every flaw present in the lens. You put a TC on a lens that is soft, it will make the image softer etc. Every flaw is magnified.

To lessen the image quality issue, there are a few things to do. First, purchase a top quality TC. They cost more, but it makes more sense to spend $300 on a top quality TC that you will use than $100 on one that sits in the bag or on a shelf gathering dust because the images are terrible.

Use it on top quality glass. Canon makes mandatory with their TC's by manufacturing them to only fit on the appropriate L glass. Before you purchase a TC take your gear with the lens you intend to use it on with you to a good photography shop and give it a try. Go home, look at the shots and see if the image quality is acceptable to you. It will save you money in the long run.

I own both the Canon 1.4 and 2X TC. The 1.4 is used on my 70-200 f2.8 L. 300 f2.8 L and 400 f2.8L. The 2x TC is only used on the 300 and 400 as the image quality on the 70-200 is not up to my standards on it. On the two long primes it is fine.

:thumbup:

 

[Montana]

I'm and experienced tracker, but more importantly for me is this little piece of equipment.

Smith & Wesson Model 629, stainless steel, 44 Magnium.
Alternatly loaded with a 210 grain round with a 310 grain bullet cast in a Lee C430-310-RF mold (hand loaded) and [FONT=Arial, Helvetica]Garrett's Hammerhead 310-grain rounds. I never put my eggs in one basket with this thing. One of those two rounds should do the trick if called upon. :mrgreen:[/FONT]

Likely the sexiest handgun ever produced!

 

[KmH]

If you like wheel guns.