Helpful Posts Helpful Posts:  0
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 25

Thread: Basic TeleConverter question

  1. #1

    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Dallas, TX
    Posts
    83
    Real Name
    John

    Basic TeleConverter question

    Hi, apologies for a very basic question about tc's. I was on the canon website and noticed that both tc's available from them only appear to work with fixed focal length lenses. Is this true of all tc's? I think I've seen people mention them with zoom lenses, but I just can't believe canon would not offer any if they existed. Thanks!

  2. #2
    New Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    kent,uk
    Posts
    9
    Real Name
    david

    Re: Basic TeleConverter question

    canon tc's will work with L series zoom lenses or I SHOULD SAY SOME L SERIES ZOOMS

  3. #3

    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    South Devon, UK
    Posts
    11,604

    Re: Basic TeleConverter question

    It is a physical design thing with Canon converters. Their shape only allows a connection with certain lenses.

    Some third party converters will be accepted by most lenses. However, quality may be substantially reduced with cheaper zooms and you can lose auto focus.

    It is something of a 'ask before purchase' situation.

  4. #4

    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    New Zealand
    Posts
    17,662
    Real Name
    Have a guess :)

    Re: Basic TeleConverter question


  5. #5
    Jim B.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    West Virginia
    Posts
    1,219
    Real Name
    Jim

    Re: Basic TeleConverter question


  6. #6
    Glenn NK's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Victoria BC
    Posts
    1,510

    Re: Basic TeleConverter question

    Quote Originally Posted by dksm View Post
    canon tc's will work with L series zoom lenses or I SHOULD SAY SOME L SERIES ZOOMS
    Yes, be careful. The Canon TCs won't fit the 24-105L or the 100mm macro (I tried them both in a camera shop). They won't fit the newer 70-300 L either, but I believe they will fit the 70-200 zooms. They will fit my TSE24, but it's not recommended (during shifting the image may not fall completely on the sensor).

    Oddly, the TC will fit my old 30D.

    The problem with the TCs is that the front element of the TC protrudes and "runs into" the rear element of many Canon lenses.

    Glenn

  7. #7
    William W's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Sraylya
    Posts
    3,918
    Real Name
    William (call me Bill)

    Re: Basic TeleConverter question

    Quote Originally Posted by Glenn NK View Post
    Oddly, the TC will fit my old 30D.

    That should not be an odd occurrence.

    It is necessary to consider that the Extender has two ends and to think of those two ends as separate entities.

    Whilst both the MkII and MkIII Canon EF Extenders mate with ONLY a select number of Canon EF LENSES, (because a physical intrusion prohibits connection).

    All four of those extenders have an EF Mount on the camera side (the MALE END) of the Extender - and ALL Canon Cameras in the EOS SERIES accept the EF MALE Mount.

    Therefore the EF Extenders will mount to ALL CANON EOS Cameras.

    WW

  8. #8
    rpcrowe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Southern California, USA
    Posts
    12,976
    Real Name
    Richard

    Re: Basic TeleConverter question

    Even if a TC can physically mount to a camera/lens, usually only the very best quality lenses will retain enough image quality to make their use worthwhile. Additionally, most often 1.4x converters will provide far better image quality than 2x TCs. Often the quality achieved with a 2x TC (Canon or third party) is not satisfactory.

    There is at least one exception to the above blanket statement. The Canon 70-200mm f/2.8 IS ii lens will match with the Canon 2x iii TC and provide very acceptable image quality.

  9. #9
    William W's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Sraylya
    Posts
    3,918
    Real Name
    William (call me Bill)

    Re: Basic TeleConverter question

    . . . additionally, the x2.0 MkII EF Extender mated to the EF70 to 200F/2.8L USM was the superior of the (then available) FOUR 70 to 200L Series Lenses in regard to the IQ attainable with the x2.0 Extender.

    This combination consistently produced very good to superior results, at F/6.3 (only one third stopped down).
    The AF is inhibited, but not so greatly that it cannot be worked around.

    As Richard implied, the new EF70 to 200F/2.8 L IS MkII USM and the new x2.0MkIII EF Extender is a superior combination to that which I mentioned.

    In either case: the understanding of Post Production sharpening and application is important to attain the results which are possible.

    Samples (View Large):

    Basic TeleConverter question
    EF70 to 200F/2.8L USM + 2.0MkII used at 400mm
    F/6.3 @ 1/640s @ ISO250 (Transverse Motion) - Hand Held



    Basic TeleConverter question
    EF70 to 200F/2.8L USM + x2.0MkII @ 280mm
    F/8 @ 1/1250s @ ISO800 Hand Held



    Basic TeleConverter question
    EF70 to 200F/2.8L USM + x2.0MkII @ Various FL
    F/9 @ 1/1250s @ ISO1600 Hand Held

    WW

  10. #10

    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    New Zealand
    Posts
    17,662
    Real Name
    Have a guess :)

    Re: Basic TeleConverter question

    Quote Originally Posted by rpcrowe View Post
    Even if a TC can physically mount to a camera/lens, usually only the very best quality lenses will retain enough image quality to make their use worthwhile. Additionally, most often 1.4x converters will provide far better image quality than 2x TCs. Often the quality achieved with a 2x TC (Canon or third party) is not satisfactory.

    There is at least one exception to the above blanket statement. The Canon 70-200mm f/2.8 IS ii lens will match with the Canon 2x iii TC and provide very acceptable image quality.
    I hear what you're saying Richard - I don't disagree per se - but I probably should make the point that it's possible to get good results with a Canon 2x II TC on even older L-Glass, but one has to be VERY careful with sharpening.

    This was shot on the original EF70-200 with Mk2 2x TC (100% crop)

    Basic TeleConverter question

  11. #11
    William W's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Sraylya
    Posts
    3,918
    Real Name
    William (call me Bill)

    Re: Basic TeleConverter question

    Quote Originally Posted by Colin Southern View Post
    This was shot on the original EF70-200 with Mk2 2x TC (100% crop)
    For clarity - this is the lens I was also referencing.
    In my experience, this lens is superior to the EF70 to 200 L IS USM, in this respect of attaching the x2.0MkII.

    WW

  12. #12

    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    New Zealand
    Posts
    17,662
    Real Name
    Have a guess :)

    Re: Basic TeleConverter question

    Quote Originally Posted by William W View Post
    For clarity - this is the lens I was also referencing.
    In my experience, this lens is superior to the EF70 to 200 L IS USM, in this respect of attaching the x2.0MkII.

    WW
    Oops - sorry Bill - me bad. Is was the IS version I was using - many have said that the non-IS version was factionally sharper though, so this would make sense.

  13. #13
    William W's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Sraylya
    Posts
    3,918
    Real Name
    William (call me Bill)

    Re: Basic TeleConverter question

    . . . I thought I had seen that chair before!

    . . . yes my experience is that the better performance of the NON IS version, is noticeable at F/5.6 and F/6.3 and F/7 . . . then, well, pretty close between the two.

    WW

  14. #14
    DouglasRC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Victoria, BC, Canada
    Posts
    49
    Real Name
    Douglas Cronk

    Re: Basic TeleConverter question

    Quote Originally Posted by woty87 View Post
    Hi, apologies for a very basic question about tc's. I was on the canon website and noticed that both tc's available from them only appear to work with fixed focal length lenses. Is this true of all tc's? I think I've seen people mention them with zoom lenses, but I just can't believe canon would not offer any if they existed. Thanks!
    Lots of good information here. I have the 1.4x mk III extender and it works well on my 70-200 mm f2.8 mkII, but it becomes an f4. Autofocus works fine. I can use it on my 100-400 mm f.4.5-5.6, but no autofocus (without fiddling with taping over contact points or whatever -- not something I want to try). I find it most useful on the 70-200 when I don't want to lug around the 100-400 as well.
    Cheers,
    Doug

  15. #15
    Glenn NK's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Victoria BC
    Posts
    1,510

    Re: Basic TeleConverter question

    Quote Originally Posted by William W View Post
    That should not be an odd occurrence.

    It is necessary to consider that the Extender has two ends and to think of those two ends as separate entities.

    Whilst both the MkII and MkIII Canon EF Extenders mate with ONLY a select number of Canon EF LENSES, (because a physical intrusion prohibits connection).

    All four of those extenders have an EF Mount on the camera side (the MALE END) of the Extender - and ALL Canon Cameras in the EOS SERIES accept the EF MALE Mount.

    Therefore the EF Extenders will mount to ALL CANON EOS Cameras.

    WW
    The word "oddly" should have been "fortunately".

    Maybe I was just looking at one end.

    Glenn

  16. #16
    William W's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Sraylya
    Posts
    3,918
    Real Name
    William (call me Bill)

    Re: Basic TeleConverter question

    Whether the AF works, or not, is dependent upon the Camera’s AF capacity.

    For example the x1.4MkIII EF Extender should keep AF when used with the EF100 to 400F/4.5~5.6 and when used with an EOS 1 Series Camera – because the AF Point of the Camera is efficient at F/8 (and not limited to F/5.6, as per other EOS models).

    WW

  17. #17
    William W's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Sraylya
    Posts
    3,918
    Real Name
    William (call me Bill)

    Re: Basic TeleConverter question

    Quote Originally Posted by Glenn NK View Post
    Maybe I was just looking at one end.
    . . . I mentioned the point - not as a comment on word usage, but because in some instances, this particular element of "which end fits what" is quite important and I was unsure if you were aware of this - (and anyway others might not have been).

    For example - looking at both ends is especially important if one is playing with Extension Tubes and Tele Extenders and Lenses with EF-S Mounts.

    WW

  18. #18
    William W's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Sraylya
    Posts
    3,918
    Real Name
    William (call me Bill)

    Re: Basic TeleConverter question

    Quote Originally Posted by Colin Southern View Post
    Is was the IS version I was using - many have said that the non-IS version was fractionally sharper though, so this would make sense.

    FYI - for those interested.

    This (small) difference (at F/2.8) of the native lenses is exacerbated when the X2.0MkII is added to each lens - and yes it can be seen in "real life"

    WW

  19. #19

    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Ontario (mostly)
    Posts
    6,620
    Real Name
    Bobo

    Re: Basic TeleConverter question

    If I may add a word specifically about the Kenko DGX 1.4. It will fit most Canon lens.

    However married to the 70-300L on any of the 1.6 crop cameras the IQ is not all that great. Can be fixed mostly in post but...

    On the other hand using this combo on a 5Dmk2, the results were astounding - almost no loss of IQ at all.

    Not sure why though.

  20. #20

    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    United States
    Posts
    21
    Real Name
    William

    Re: Basic TeleConverter question

    I have a newbie question somewhat related to the topic.

    While searching for teleconverters for my Canon, I ran across a "teleside" converter on ebay. (Link) I realize quality is going to be no where near a true teleconverter from Canon, but is this an acceptable accessory considering the price?

    I can accept the vignetting at the wide end. I also read that using a teleside does not affect aperture as much as a teleconverter. With a standard 2x converter you lose a full 2 f/ stops. Supposedly teleside do not have any f/ stop lose.

    Anyone care to chime in?

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •