They say don't do this!

[uplander]

1.4x Teleconvertors = good 2.0x TC = okay but not so good,
Stacking them = a no-no.
I've never been too good with obeying rules........Soooooooooo........
400mm + 2x TC + 1.4 TC = 1,120mm
Add in a little PS.......
And

Oh Yeah ...BTW the shot was handheld

 

[Overread39]

Neat!
But you're still cheating because you're using one of those God 400mm lenses (if I am not mistaken) which means that you'd have to start throwing mud on the glass to get poor quality image results from it

(though it does seem to be causing quite a bit of that purple fringing stuff under the branch right at the bottom of the shot - though I read that its correctable without much fuss, though I've never done it myself)

 

[mwcfarms]

Wicked shot. And I have to laugh at Overreads mud comment. So very true but beautiful nonetheless.

 

[Formatted]

The head is great! But I'm not completely sold on how the branches turned out. What does everyone else thinking? What camera are you using?

Most people I talk to say wack on the 2x TC but then just crop because you will get better results that way!

 

[ghache]

amazing. i never shot with that kind of crazy setup but at 1120mm, its should be hard to keep it steady right ?

 

[Big Mike]

Very nice.
I've briefly shot with a 1.4TC + 2.0TC + 70-200mm F2.8...results were better than I would have expected.
It might get a bit of slack among a bunch of pixel peepers...but I'm sure anyone else would love it as an 8x10 print.

 

[Overread39]

The head is great! But I'm not completely sold on how the branches turned out. What does everyone else thinking? What camera are you using?

Most people I talk to say wack on the 2x TC but then just crop because you will get better results that way!

I've seen a few people do tests (through forums) with teleconverters vs cropping the results and upscaling the image and most of the time teleconverters win over the cropping and upscaling. Though the latter is certianly a viable option and of coures the more you know about editing the power impressive the results you can get- but for most I would say a teleconverter is going to give you a better shot.

Very nice.
I've briefly shot with a 1.4TC + 2.0TC + 70-200mm F2.8...results were better than I would have expected.
It might get a bit of slack among a bunch of pixel peepers...but I'm sure anyone else would love it as an 8x10 print.

Interesting, though myself I've often found that the 2*TC alone was just too much of a drop in image quality with the 70-200mm f2.8. I have played around with two 2*TCs at one point - results were soft, but still better than I expected. From what I hear the new 70-200mm is doing even better with teleconverters as well

 

[reznap]

Wild eagles are the Holy Grail of nature photography I think.

You have some serious reach there and I think the quality is pretty great. The eye is about as sharp as you could hope for.

I think this is much better quality than you'd get with a bargain super telephoto... and the Canon lens that reaches this far costs what, $10,000?

 

[rufus5150]

and the Canon lens that reaches this far costs what, $10,000?

Add another zero. If it's on sale. The 1200mm runs around $100,000.

 

[Big Mike]

Yup, that's why the more common combination is the 600mm with a TC.

 

[pbelarge]

and the Canon lens that reaches this far costs what, $10,000?

Add another zero. If it's on sale. The 1200mm runs around $100,000.

Whoa...thats like a whole months pay.....:mrgreen:

 

[rufus5150]

You must not be a photographer.

 

[corralup]

Shoot I would'n't worry about the branches. Use CS5 Photoshop...One click and they are all gone! I have a love hate relationship with my 1.7TC by Nikon.
But we always make up. I have no beef for breaking the rules. I've done it with the birds in my back yard and was amazed. I used a tripod for the most part on my experiment. I stacked a 2XTC, !.7TC, 300mm.

House Sparrow photo - sandy kroeger photos at pbase.com

Example above of what I got!

 

[USM IS]

with or without the teleconverter.......I'd take it, and be overjoyed....Mike

 

[Formatted]

When I was talking about the branches. I was talking above the quality of the picture not the composition. Looks like the branch pixels are not as sharp!