Are Teleconverters worth it? Is cropping better? BIRD PHOTOGRAPHY Equipment
Vložit
- čas přidán 19. 07. 2024
- Buy a small piece of glass and double your focal length! Sounds amazing, but is it too good to be true? Well, it is and isn't at the same time! There are a few key factors that I want to show you today that determine whether teleconverters / extenders are for your bird photography or not!
Are you currently using extenders? If so with what lens? Are you happy with the image quality you are getting? let me know in the comments!
R5 Review
• EOS R5 - The BEST Bird...
R5 Settings you NEED to Know
• EOS R5 - The SETTINGS ...
Let me help you to take YOUR IMAGES to the NEXT LEVEL!
_____________________________________________
MASTERCLASS - Editing Your Bird Images To Perfection
👉 aviscapes.com/masterclass-edi...
_____________________________________________
How to Attract Amazing Birds Ebook & Video Perched
👉 aviscapes.com/video-and-ebook/
_____________________________________________
Free Ebook - 5 Common Mistakes Almost Every Bird Photographer Makes And How To Avoid Them-
👉 aviscapes.com/free-ebook
_____________________________________________
Instagram
👉 / jan_wegener_
_____________________________________________
This is the equipment I use:
Canon EOS R5
amzn.to/2FV1Fpq
Canon EOS 5D Mark IV
amzn.to/2ToffWf
Canon 600 L IS III (I have v. II)
amzn.to/3dZM7wn
Canon EF 5.6/400 L
amzn.to/2AJwbQk
Canon 1.4x TC III
amzn.to/2T7vAhz
Canon 2x TC III
amzn.to/3fPnYdr
Canon 600 EX - RT
amzn.to/3czhDRf
Wimberley Head II
amzn.to/3dOuqzI
Gitzo 5543LS (new version of my tripod)
amzn.to/3dRfxg3
Wimberley Flash Bracket
amzn.to/2LweMg5
Wimberley M-6 Extension Post
amzn.to/2LxCvfQ
Better Beamer (check for compatibility)
amzn.to/2AxbbfF
Flash Battery (Godox & Flashpoint is the same)
amzn.to/3fNDWVD
Power Cord
amzn.to/3cBJGzt
Y connector
amzn.to/2X22zoT
Novoflex STA-SET
amzn.to/2y5s1Bt
LensCoat LensHide
amzn.to/3bAkoAo
LensCoat Lens Hoodie
amzn.to/3fStHiI
Canon 2.8/70-200 II
amzn.to/3cArBSB
Canon 4/24-70
amzn.to/2AwjeJE
Canon 4/16-35 L IS
amzn.to/3fPqPDb
JBL Clip3 Speaker
amzn.to/36225D5
Sandisk Extreme Pro
amzn.to/2WXKt7n
Panasonic Eneloop Pro
amzn.to/2X2SQ1q
Minox 8x43
amzn.to/2Z7YxxQ
Canon LP-E6N
amzn.to/3byTSYg
Manfrotto Mini Ballhead
amzn.to/3dR2pYm
Time Stamps:
0:00 Intro
0:57 Why use Extenders?
1:40 How does using an extender in the field affect photography?
4:12 A common mistake
6:04 Sample Images Prime
7:37 Sample Images Zoom
10:59 Crop or Extender?
13:35 Why do I use big prime lenses?
14:21 Best way to use extenders
14:57 What's your experience?
15:30 Check this out :D
I have both 1.4x and 2x extenders for use in extreme situations. So far, I have only used the 1.4x on a limited number of occasions and have yet to use the 2x.
When I was learning photography I was constantly told that if I had to use an extender on a regular basis, then I needed a longer lens.
A very good detailed review Jan.
Two points I would raise for your viewers - firstly, don't just rely on (or blame) your equipment to get good results. Learn the trade, know your subjects and get closer. The skills involved in stealth and concealment should never be underestimated.
Secondly - learn to recognise and accept when the subject is too far away. Put the camera aside and enjoy the moment.
That is good advice. I shoot mostly owls in low light and that was one of the hardest lesson to learn for me. Accepting you won’t get a photo and just walking away
Indeed, sometimes you can't get a shot. But other times the extenders gives you just enough reach to get the image you want :)
i followed your advice and got me camo clothing instead lol
Fantastic video mate, agree with everything you said. I rarely take my 1.4 off my 500 and find having the 2x in good light a handy option. Cheers, Duade
Yes, they can work pretty well. I think most 500mm users use the 1.4 90+% of the time
Excellent demonstration, thank you for giving me a couple of things to try out to improve quality
Glad it was helpful!
Found your channel last week Jan. You've quickly become one of my very favorite channels. I'm new into birding and am a full time wedding photographer in NY. Going out tomorrow, January 1st to a grasslands bird sanctuary not far from home, known for attracting raptors. Thanks for your excellent advice, hard work and great bird content for new birders like me. Appreciate it very much!
Awesome! Thank you!
Sounds like a fun outing. Where is that sanctuary that you speak of.? 🤟🏼
Shawangunk Grasslands National Refuge. Wallkill, NY
thank you!! lots of great, useful, and difficult to find elsewhere information!!
Glad you enjoyed it!
Spot on commentary and mirrors my own findings. In addition to the distance being a factor with atmospheric conditions causing degradation I also find that low light is a killer for IQ with an extender. No matter how much I raise the ISO if I am shooting low light with an extender the images are always soft
Yes, low light and extender are not really friends. In my experience the typically lower shutter speeds in low light cause the bad IQ
Very precise Vid which confirms all my thoughts especially the cropping vs converters..keep up the great work..
Awesome, thank you!
Thanks, man! Finally, I got the video with all the necessary information I needed on using a teleconverter with a zoom lens. I wish there were side-to-side comparisons, but even without it is a great review!
Great to hear!
Thank you - you have outlined problems I have been having and now I know why, so can do something about it.
Happy to help :)
Thank you very much, I'm currently looking at 1.4 extenders & your vid has been very helpful, atb
Glad it was helpful!
Hi Jan, thanks for the video. I currently use the 400 f5.6 and a 1.4x extender and I have been doing exactly what you said not to do i.e. shooting birds too far away. I'll try to remember that in future. When I used it on my 7d mkii it was great, no auto focus issues (that I noticed anyway) but the 5d mkii was a different story. I have switched to the R system now and I will certainly pay close attention to the differences in performance between shooting with v shooting without the 1.4x. Thanks again for your very informative videos. All the best, Brian.
Glad you enjoyed the video and thanks for your comment :)
Finally, a straight answer as to why I can't seem to get any good, consistent results using my Canon EF 100-400 with a 1.4 extender. Thank you Jan
Happy to help. That combo isn't awful, but stopping down helps a lot
TY Jan. You just saved me the cost of an teleconverter. It's off of my shopping list, and I've put a new prime lens onto my shopping list. Cheers mate!
Glad I could help!
great comments - I am still waiting for my R5 - supposed to be here tomorrow- I use the 1.4 with my 400 Do II - it is very good will use your stop down tip a bit more -
I hope it has arrived by now! Yes, that combo should work well, especially stopped down one stop
This was super helpful, thanks man!
Glad to hear it!
Sehr guter Beitrag und klasse erklärt! Habe wieder was dazu gelernt 👍Danke für die tolle Arbeit! Jetzt brauche Ich doch das 600 F4 😉
hehe!, vielen Dank :) Vielleicht wirft der Weihnachtsmann ja eins ab :D
I Thanks for the time you take tp produce your blog. have found that Dx mode is a very quick and easy way for someone entering into phography to get a closer image using a Fx . camera i have the nikon z two times converter.this i use on DX mode. However the knowledge from your technical expertise i find really usefull.i use a nikon z 7-2:and z 8 .with The z 70-200 and await the 180-600mm a combination of 2x z converter add in DX mood . Then see what images i get .... Then compose around the lens and camrea capability. I noticed your skill was to get the best out of what you have available. That is i guess because you worked you way up over the years to learn how to produce an image. I live in the north if England .A very diverse range of chocies to chose from. Some native wild life and a history of centuries of bullding and structures. I am retired so on the worse days get to paint create and watch youtude. I do admire your photos , and find you very informative. So a big thanks. From marico to birds in flight flowers and churchs to town halls . Learning how a camera works with the lens we put on and the settings make for the ultatermate joy in ones work. Cheers .👍
Hi Jan thank you for this video, Just Recent I bought the EOS R6 and I have to say I am very happy with it using bought 1.4x and 2x version II.
Great to hear!
On which lens?
Interesting analysis. I fully agree with your conclusions. I have 100-500, 300 Mk1 and 500Mk2 with 1.4 and 2 times extenders - Canon. I very rarely have used the 2 times converter and a year ago was planning a trip to the Falkland Islands. Simply ran out of space for the light aircraft use around the Falkland Islands, where both the luggage AND me were weighed! Did some research and found some work that a photographer did - and the much loved 300mm was paired with the times 2 and seemingly gave great results. I decided to take my times 2 using my 1DX and 300mm prime. The result - astonishingly good images - loved the portability/hand held capability of this combination - it worked for me!
Yes, for portability, a 2.8/300 is a great lens
Great Video and advice to give all young upcoming photographers. The biggest mistake with long lenses and especially zoom lenses is that they are very prone to heat haze/distortion and you get you best and sharpest images at close distance. A lot of people go on GAS because they do not fully understand the impact of distance, heat and other atmospheric aspects on the sharpness of images in nature. Poor decisions, ignorance a poor techniques has let a lot of people spend big money to buy expensive equipment to fix something that cannot be fixed other then through knowledge and experience. Well done and thanks..
Totally agree with all you said! Cheers
Excellent Video indeed. I was planning to buy Fujifilm 1.4 TC for use with a zoom lens 70-300 mm. but dropped the idea after watching your video. .
Going to receive my Sony 600mm f4 in 2 weeks. Your tips for extenders are really going to help. Thanks for sharing very useful info, your videos are as usual top quality and very informative. Thank you sir.
Nice, enjoy that!!
Great to hear!
Great should get mine today! I am assuming both Teleconverters will work very well with this lens although don't plan on using them unless really required!
Great information about stopping down with the 1.4x and 2x I was thinking about getting the 2x with the RF100-500 F7.1 but now not so sure, thank you for the video
With that lens the main issue will be the wide open F stop you will be getting with the 2x. It will be F13 or 14 and if you stop down one more stop, you will be only really able to use it in very good light. I think the 1.4 will be ok on it. 2x will be tricky
Well done Jan, seen a few on this topic and as usual you have raised the bar. I use both on my Canon 500mmF4 v2 and they work well. I almost always use them in burst mode and find there is often on or two shots just a bit sharper than the rest. I will try stopping down a bit more, usually shoot them wide open. In your backyard set up have you tried extension tube/s on your 600 yet? Can focus closer on the birds and bugs that let you and they are super sharp. Cheers mate.
Yes, a burst makes sense in almost all cases. I am not the biggest fan on the tubes, because you get a lot less DOF and moving closer also gives me less DOF. SO because of that I am actually happy to be a bit further away and crop slightly, because I get more DOF that way
Great information and advice! I will crop my images more now.
Glad it was helpful!
Hi Jan,
Great vid mate and a subject that, as a Nikon user, I am very envious of. I have always been amazed by the quality achieved by Canon shooters when they attach teleconverters to their lenses. When I attach t/c's to my lenses, you can basically forget about the result being an image with great detail and more like a regular paddock profile shot. I have given it quite a bit of thought and in my opinion, I believe that the Canon research techs have spent considerable time making great quality converters, but have taken the extra time to make sure that these converters match, and work with, their lenses as best as possible. On the other hand, Nikon has done the same amount of research and made the absolute best quality teleconverters that they can, but they have overlooked the idea of matching their converters with their lenses?
I have owned a couple of Nikons F2.8 lenses and there was no way in hell that I could get those converters to work with my D850, and as a matter of fact, Nikon told me that if I wanted to use my F2.8 300mm G VR II lens with my 850 that they would have to adjust the 950 so much that I wouldn't get "the greatest" results from the rest of my lenses. Food for thought. . .
Yes, that's one of the biggest reason I have never really considered Nikon, because the performance with the extenders was not the same compared to Canon.
Nikon also always had more issues when it comes to the microadjustment of lenses and cameras and them working together well right out of the box. That might be part of the reason for the extenders not working as well seemingly. Like you said, camera and lens and extender don't really "talk" well to each other
Great video. Totally agree with you.
Awesome, thank you!
Hi Jan, thanks for the video. Very helpful overall. For videos like this where you're comparing images, personally I think displaying the comparably cropped images side by side would be much more helpful - showing one after the other for me makes the visual comparison more difficult.
That's a great point, I will do that going forward!
I used my new 2x extender on the Canon 100-400mm lens attached to an EOS R. I found it was good as I had that reach to capture birds in the wild although depth of field is a real issue. Heat haze was certainly an issue in 44 degree C heat in outback Australia. I hope to get an R5 with better auto focus and more pixels so it will be interesting to see if I only crop in on the 400mm or use the 2x. Thanks Jan for you videos.
On the version II 100-400 the 1.4 x is pretty good. Personally I think a 2x might be pushing it. Much more mpix, will show flaws a bit more, too. Glad you like my videos.
I own a few teleconverters. But I rarely use them for the reasons you mentioned.
When I started in photography in 1996 there were no digital cameras and no computer programs for post. Images were as they came out of camera. A few times I had larger prints made with disappointing results, so realistically if I wanted to crop, I had to do it in camera. I bought a Sigma 2X extender and used it with my Tamron 200-400 f/5.6, and yes, the image quality did suffer, but although AF didn’t work it did give me a few images that I wasn’t too unhappy with, and which I wouldn’t have been able to get otherwise. It helped that I had an extremely sturdy tripod! (Manfrotto 161mk2b with 229 3-way head - a rock solid combination).
There was a gap between 2006 and 2012, where I only used a compact camera. The 7.1 mp Olympus SP510UZ gave me better image quality than I ever got on film, and I didn’t buy a DSLR until 2012. And as my old film era lenses simply weren’t sharp enough for an APS-C camera, I didn’t get into using long lenses again until I invested in a Sigma 150-600 contemporary just a few years ago. I also bought a 1.4X and a 2X teleconverter, and I went with Kenko Teleplus because they will fit just about any lens. I have to say I rarely use them. Even the 1.4X doesn’t allow my 150-600 to autofocus with focal lengths above 380 mm, except in live view. The 1.4X does work pretty well with my wonderful Canon EF-S 55-250 STM, increasing the maximum focal length to a 560 mm full frame equivalent. But I prefer the Sigma without extender.
Yes, for most zoom lenses, it is better to not use extenders. They can work, but not with all lenses
This video was most informative. This is definitively the best I seen this topic explained. Can you do a video on optimal distance from subjects as small birds.
Great suggestion! Thanks
Hi Jan, interesting video - this helps a lot . I find the 1.4x and 2x and even both stacked work quite well with my old EF300 f/2.8 (non IS) but with my EF100-400 ii only the 1.4x is useable and only with very slow AF.
I use these with my 7Dii and had assumed that if I ever go mirrorless then I could use the T.Cs all the time but now I know there are still some limitations.
I was tempted to save up for the R5 (which seems the best current camera for wildlife/birds) but I'm waiting to see whether the rumoured R7 crop sensor body would be better still and hopefully a bit more affordable.
The most interesting thing I learnt was avoiding using them when the bird is very distant and only for close up and I tend to stop down anyway as this helps to get the birds in focus better.
I do use them with my zoom a bit for macro/close up though and also I sometimes add my 500D close up diopter lens which is particularly good for spiders and insects as the working distance is great at about 30cm and magnification is doubled (without the T.Cs) to about 0.6:1
Cheers
Noel
The new converters from version II onwards cannot be stacked anymore unfortunately.
There has been no word on the street about an R7 at all, so it might be a while before and if it comes.
Glad I could share some new info with you :)
Outstanding coverage of a really important subject. I just bought the RF 100-500 plus a 1.4x for my R5. I love that lens but haven’t used the extender much. I would love to have a big white prime but it’s hard to justify more than $10K for an amateur photographer. One take away from this video is to stop down when using a converter. You proved that there is a vast improvement by doing this. Thanks for another great video.
You like your RF 100-500?
@@frostybe3r Yes I do. I just sold my trusty EF 100-400 which I shot 10’s of thousands of photos on my 7d mii. The extra 100mm is huge on a full frame body. It’s noticeably lighter. Eliminating the adapter shaves weight off as well. It’s sharp, fast to focus, and a worthy successor to the 100-400
Absolutely. I am hoping to get a 100-500 for a bit to make some videos, soon :)
Stopping down is definitely the way to go.
@@dav14pawest I have done the same and am enjoying the 100-500 for the same reasons and I love the R5
I've used a 1.4x with my 100-400 II on my old 7D2 and now on a R5. The experience on the R5 is so much better than the 7D2 with full sensor autofocus and the ISO performance of the R5 is also streets ahead of the 7D2. In bad light which now we're coming into winter here in the UK is the norm I usually crop. It's like everything else you need to get used to your equipment and understand the limitations. If you only load to Instagram or view your shots on a small laptop screen then save some money and just crop!
Absolutely. Low light is one of those moments where an extender really struggles
Agree with what you say. Soon gave up using extenders on 100-400mm - cropping gives better results. But 1.4x is great with 500 f/4 and 300 f/2.8 and 2x is also ok.
Yep! Similar to my experience
It is handy to analyze your image as to what you did incorrect. At the same time I find it handy to analyze the excellent shot as to what I managed to get correct . The tack sharp image mentioned below could be analyzed as thus. Shooting at f8 with a high enough shutterspeed (Thanks to Jan), changed my perspective to get a lighter background, help eliminate noise (Thanks Jan). Used a tripod and a Gimbal head the wrong way around (Thanks Jan). Composition in order to show the main identification features of the bird (Thanks Jan) also the patience used to wait for the moment to happen, the proper calibration of my lens to body and use of the "sweet spot" of the lens as well as good software choice and post processing. Jan, you cannot claim influencing all of my good image but you definitely played a significant role with your excellent videos and eBooks, so thank you for helping me to improve my photography. Hope to get together one day in the future when I can again visit Australia. In the meantime keep the informative videos coming!
Thanks for the kind words mate. It's great to see that my videos can help you and others so much :)
Hi Jan, I am just starting to experiment with my R5 and canon 100-400 IS II lens. With a 1.4x III which I have not used much but will now try higher f stops to see a difference. The biggest issue I see with 1.4 so far is that focus slows down if the light is dim. Thanks for the demonstration. The few backyard birds without extender have been very sharp even after high ISO and cropping due to the 45mp R5.
Yes, low light and extenders don't go well together, because Af performance becomes challenging.
great video and tutorial, cheers
Glad you enjoyed it
Continue to love your hands on approach. Thanks for making an educational video that educates. I believe a fellow CZcamsr "Steve Perry" did a thorough comparison between bare lens, equivalent TC IQ, and even APS-C vs TC IQ. Another very helpful video. To your point: I use TC on the 600mm f/4 sparingly when I feel filling the frame is more important. On Zooms I've found it pointless most of the time with loss of AF speed especially on the 200-500mm f/5.6 which has slower AF speed to begin with. Take the minimum AP to f/8 or higher and your limit on active AF points is just too limiting except for static bright light shots. I'm jealous of your backyard setup! BTW: you mentioned in one of your comments that switching from FF to APS-C is not practical in the field. I wear the APS-C on my belt with a special quick release belt clip and can switch between FF and APS-C in just a few seconds. It takes another few seconds to readjust the setup on the tripod for balance, so for me, far easier than putting on or taking off a TC.
Thanks! I am glad my videos give you some good insights. Yes, for most zooms I would not recommend TCs at all.
Personally I can have the extender without lens caps in my pocket and whack it on and off really quick, without having to fumble around with any lens caps. So that makes it faster than another camera. At the same time, i do not own a APS-C body I am happy with or that I would want to swap out for my R5, so that's really the main reason for not doing it. If there were a great quality APS-C body, I think it might become an appealing option in the future
@@jan_wegener Love your work Jan. Thank you and Happy Holidays. Keep up the awesome efforts and quality videos. Enjoy seeing what you get out of the R5 and waiting for Nikon to "catch up". File away the idea (if an excellent cheaper mirrorless APS-C Canon version is made) of at least testing it on your 600mm f/4 + TC1.4 vs APS-C. Believe the CF for Canon is 1.6 if I remember correctly). Till your next video, happy shooting.
@@dance2jam Thanks, will do! Yes1.6 on Canon.
Thanks for a nuanced review. Although I prefer using my RF100-500 and cropping, I do use it with the Canon 1.4x extender, but only in good light, where I can afford to lose 2 stops (e.g. stepping down from F10 to F14). I think this works, at least in part, because of the optical quality of the underlying lens, and I'm not sure it applies equally with less robust optics. With that caveat, I'm happy with the added functionality, as long as I don't regard it as an all-purpose super-telephoto. Like everything else, it requires familiarity with and respect for its limitations. For what it's worth, I also have a sense that the bird eye tracking has an easier time "locking on" when the subject fills more of the frame, though again this presumes good light. But I don't spend much time in dark, Australian rainforests :)
Thanks for this, I use them on my 500mm F4 and in good light it works fine. I will try stop down extra.
That will help, cheers :)
Well done..........thanks Jan
Most welcome 😊
Another great and informative video, thanks. I've got to say that the sulphur-crested cockatoo is very well behaved!
He is! :D Thank you
My Sony 600f4 comes this week👍already decided to now get the 2 times teleconverter, only used the 1.4 on the Sony 200-600mm f5.6-6.3 makes it an f9. So can't wait to get my hands on the quality that goes with the fixed length lens. Just working on my upper body though! 👌😀Very good review of using teleconverters especially exploring the difference of use with primes and zooms excellent agree 100%
Congratulations for big prime 600 mm. Mine is coming in mid December..my craving is on top.
Awesome, that must be a great lens! I would assume that both extenders will work well on it
@@jan_wegener I am assuming that will be the case, mostly plan to use it at 600mm f4
Agree on all points with primes, except as an olympus shooter the high end 40-150 2.8 works a treat with extenders. At 300mm (600mm equiv) f5.6 its sharper then the non tc panasonic 100-300 and 100-400 lenses.
interesting
My experience as well. Although I do not use the 40-150 anymore since the Leica 50-200 serves my needs better. I still use both teleconverters with my 300mm f4 Pro and get excellent results even with the 2x teleconverter. I didn't get good results on my Canon 300mm f2.8L with the 2x TC. Olympus and Panasonic made a very good decision by greatly restricting the compatibility of TC's to just a select few lenses. It would be interesting to see if the teleconverters would be as effective if m43 got a 30MP or 40MP sensor.
Good advice. Thanks
Glad it was helpful!
Not only will you have to deal with the light degradation. you also have to deal with atmospheric distortion, particularly when you have a large swing in ambient temperatures.
Very informative video Jan.
Glad you think so!
Hi Jan. I shoot with an EF 300 f2.8 L latest version with both the 1.4 and 2.0 Canon converters. IQ is great with both but at 2.0 the AF is a slightly hindered. I still get f5.6 @600mm. I also sometimes use the 100-400ii with the 1.4 TC with full af function. I also have noticed the narrower DOF. I shoot with a 5DIV and an R5 both handheld and on a tripod. And yes when handholding you need higher shutter speeds ..
Nice combo! yes, AF performance suffers by 50% with a 2x TC
Hi Jan
Interesting video. I have used teleconverters with Sigma, Tamron and Nikon zooms. I have also experimented like you did with cropping and comparing. For a long time I ran into the issue with atmospherics degrading the image and thought it was the optics! Currently my conclusions are: use full frame lenses and teleconverters on full frame bodies. TCs on FF lenses on APS-C bodies have more image degradation because the image is being magnified twice. Sigma 100-400 F6.3 works fine and autofocus es with matching Sigma 1.4 TC on full frame Nikon D850, so does Nikon 200-500 F5.6 with Nikon 1.4 TC. In both cases, I think TC is better than cropping. With TC & Sigma and Tamron 150-600 zooms I was less impressed with using TCs but that may be because I was shooting too far from the subject.
Regards,
Tony
Thanks for sharing.
One thing to consider with teleconverters is as well, that Canon's have been the best by far. Most other brands struggled a lot more in terms of IQ.
You need good glass to use TCs.
Jan, another great video mate. Curious if you have tried shooting in crop mode on the R5. I know you are losing mega pixels but it’s with a 45meg sensor. I think it makes it a 17meg image. Curious if crop mode works better at f5.6 or f8 on your prime lens v 1.4 TC at f5.6 v f8. Im thinking image quality similar but you have the restriction of smaller image if you want to print. I’d test with my own R5 but still on backorder here in Europe :-(
I haven't and I don't really see the benefit, because all the camera does is cropping the image for me, instead of me cropping it. The bird will be bigger in the viewfinder, so that's nice. Crop mode should have no impact on IQ at all.
My go to lens is a 300mm f2.8 which I often use a 1.4 extender. I try to shoot at f8 with as high as possible shutterspeed generally aiming at 1600 to 4000 th of a second while keeping the ISO on my 7D mk ii to about 800 if I can. i will go quite readily to 1600 ISO if required. An image taken with this setup was recently rated by two well known bird photographers in the USA as being one of the sharpest and most detailed images they had seen. With my 600 f4 lens I will also readily use the 1.4 extender if required and with excellent results. Although I have a 2x extender it is rarely used. Generally I try to get close to my subjects using hides and blinds so very rarely suffer from heat haze and try to use a tripod or some form of stabilization whenever possible. Recently took an image of a tern in flight using the 300 mm setup handheld in a 60 km gale, managed to get the image sharp enough for a BIF shot.
Yes, the 1.4 works really well on all Canon prime lenses.
The more you can prepare and set up, the better the results generally.
Tyvm :)
Very helpful Jan. I wish I had seen this earlier. I just bought a 2x to use with my100-400 usm and the R6 which I am waiting for. Auto focus would not work when I tried that lens on my 700d with the extender.
The autofocus will work on the R6, but AF speed and Image quality will slow down. It's best to stop down at least one extra stop to get more sharpness
I'm just an enthusiast photographer. I've been debating where to spend my next $600 because I don't make money from my photos: 2x TC to use with my Nikon Z 70-200/2.8, or an 18 or 24 fast prime to cover large group shots I sometimes need to take.
This video has really steered me toward the latter option, for now at least.
I think that's the better choice. The 2x on the 70-200 won't be that great
Great analysis. And helpful, to analyze the stop-down-need on my gear (Fuji 200F2 with or w/o TC 1.4).
One question/remark: What is the quality and how compare the details, if you enlarge the non-TC images to exact the same size as the TC images ... and then enhance the image by sharpening?
My experience is that on good lenses (200F2, 50-140F2.8) their is practically no difference anymore.
I think I showed that in the video, where I cropped the image to the same size as the TC image. The quality wasn't quite as good, especially when it comes to the 2x TC since the crop is so big
I totally agree with you. I was excited when I got my canon 100-400 II planning to use an extender. Luckily I only rented the newest 1.4 extender and my photos were terrible. I didn’t know about your trick to stopping down. I have since discovered by talking to other Photogs that they really work best with prime lenses. I did talk to a guy who uses the 100-400 with the canon 1DX WITH an extender who gets wonderful photos. He suggested “every individual lens and extender combination needs to have its own micro-focus adjustment done, and the body saves it in memory so when ever you use that lens/extender it re-calls the setting.” Have you heard of this?
Thanks
Linda
Hi,
Yes, if you are using a DSLR micro adjusting your lens and the lens with extenders is highly recommended. Sometimes they're fine out of the box, other times they need adjusting a fair bit. Either way, stopping down will help with that, too.
I talk a bout it a bit in this video.
czcams.com/video/GljQh3hVgks/video.html
Hi Jan. Thanks always for your great videos and images. Mate, I have a question. I know you and many bird pros normally shoot to the right to get a flat image. I saw some info about how much stronger the new mirrorless cameras (R5,R6)are in low light. The info suggests it's better to shoot to the left because the data recovery is stronger. Can you please do a video on this notion and explore this issue. Thanks again.
Thanks. Just because you can recover shadows more shouldn't me you can just underexpose for no reason. Exposing to the right will still give you better image quality.
The 100-400 mkII was reasonable with the 1.4 surprisingly on the EOS R. Now, with my Nikon converters I'm reluctant to use the 2x... the 1.4 i use frequently on my 400/2.8
Yes, that lens takes the 1.4 well. It's a very good zoom lens. Nikon overall has struggled a bit more with extender quality.
Great video. You just saved me $350 from buying a teleconverter, when I would have been using it in ALL of the conditions that are inappropriate for teleconverter!
hehe, glad I could help.
i know a guy who is very happy with the extender ...he just got some amazing photos bc of it. i did crappy so i don't know.it
0:54 our guy has some anger issues lol :D that fist!
I bought the sigma 150-600c with the 1.4 teleconverter, but I may have to retire the converter after watching this video haha. I was going up 3 stops to get the sharpest pics and upping the ISO. Thanks for the video 👍
Extenders can be tricky on these lenses and you will have to see what works best
i am about to get a 1x4 extender... so have you been using it? what's the results?
Wow, in one video you've cleared up a lot of my problems with extenders. Never knew why the images looked soft with a 2x on a 600 prime--but I only shoot in the afternoon. Now it's obvious. One thing I still don't know, though. How far can I crop my new R5 and still have acceptable image quality? If I cropped half away it would still be larger than the file from my 1Dx3, but with smaller pixels. Got time for a video on that? Though I know I really need to do my own experimentation. Thanks for all the great info on this video!
That's great to hear! The only time you cannot crop a lot is when you want to print large or sell to High-end magazines. Every other time you can basically go nuts
thanks for the great video!! Now the same with the 100-500 RF with the 1,4 and 2,0 Konverter...thats would be awesome. I think many of the users are unsure if the new generation is better in Quality/Sharpness with the new generation RF.
I am hopeful to get my hands on the lens very soon
@@jan_wegener cant wait:) good work!!!!
Jan, I have quit good experience with the R5, the EF 100-400 II and the 1.4 teleconverter MK III at F 8. Best regards Eckhard
Yes, that lens performs well with extender, but you should get even better results stopped down a bit
I use that combo with my 5d4, but it is noticeably better stopped down from f8 to f9, and is a litttle better again @ f10. In good midday sun, I use f10 all the time.
Great video - as usual. However - DOF does actually not change using a teleconverter but stays exactly the same - if the distance to the subject is constant. Stopping down is still a good idea though, since a teleconverter also magnifies whatever weaknesses your lens might have - and those weaknesses tend to diminish when stopping down. Cheers, Johan, Denmark.
Why does the Extender image have less DOF then? Stopping down helps for sure with IQ
@@jan_wegener Hi Jan, you are right. I have always been of the opinion that a teleconverter didnt affect the DOF since the shallower DOF due to the increased focal length was cancelled out by the slower f-stop - given the distance to the subject was constant. But - after reading various articles on the internet I am a bit confused (a lot of diverging opinions on the topic!) but still convinced you are right. Cheers.
I use both the 1.4 and 2x extenders on my Canon 300mm f2.8. It sounds like I should be stopping down to F8 when possible. I use the Tamron 150-600mm and found extenders to to work well on either my Canon 5D MKIV or my Canon 7D MKII. I think I'll stay with no extender with the 150mm-600mm and stop down if possible, on my 7D MKII.
Thanks for good info!
Great! Yes, stopping down when possible will help for sure
Good information friend👍
Many thanks
Brilliant video. I was wondering if my Sony 200-600mm post-crop or even shooting in APS-C mode on the Sony Full-frame bodes was as good as using a 1.4 extender. Now I know part of the answer. Sadly the 600mm Prime is $13,000! What is your opinion of shooting in APS-C vs Post cropping in quality terms? I crop since I get to choose where the crop is, once shot in APS-C it's set in concrete so to speak, but I am curious about the relative quality between those two options.
It's the same really, on once you crop in post and the other in camera. I prefer to set the crop myself like you. Quality should be identical. What's nice tho, with APS-C mode the bird is larger in your viewfinder
I’ve used the 1.4 and 2x with my 600/4 and 5dsr and 1DX2 and with the 1.4 didn’t see any loss of quality. With the 5dsr and 2x it did lose sharpness but the 1DX2 still did ok. Now using the R5 and R6 but haven’t used the TC’s enough on them to get a good feel for how they will perform.
I see people complain about quality with and without TC’s on images when the subject is so far away it’s only the size of one or two focal points and then they crop in. You will never get great results with something so far away.
Absolutely. Anything small in the frame is expected to be worse IQ. The 5DsR has much denser pixels, so the flaws with an extender and any small camera shake are amplified and show up a lot more and quicker compared to the 20mpix file of the 1Dx
One combination that may work better is a full frame lens on a crop body camera. I would rather use a D500 or D7200 on your 600mm f4. I would think that would give you the benefits of more reach without effecting your fstop or the detail in your image. You could use Topaz Labs Gigapixel if you need a higher resolution image for printing.
Yes, swapping bodies would be a decent option, but it's less practical in the field and takes a lot more time.
I am using my extenders without a lot of hesitation on my 300mm F2.8 and 600mm F4. Sometimes it's quite hard to convince other photographers to do the same. Some are convinced cropping will result in the same image quality. I don't buy that.
I don't either and My texts clearly proof that using the extender on the primes lenses, even the 2x is far superior. If you use them right extenders are a no brainer
1.4 ex works well on the canon 100-400 Sii, not good on the 400 5.6 prime. The other option for those of us who do most photography hand held and do not want the weight and or expense of a large prime, is to use a crop sensor camera. My 7D Mk 2's still perform very well and the IQ short comings can now be overcome to a large extent with the latest Topaz software. Hoping an R series crop sensor camera is on the way.
Yes, that can be a good solution to avoid F stop loss.
Great explanation
Glad you think so!
@@jan_wegener just got my RF 100-500, feel it’s not enough for small birds. Will try converter anyway
@@helloianzakharov Yes, just 500mm isn't that much, as crazy as it sounds. The 1.4 should do ok on it stopped down
Very nice tnx
Most welcome
Hi. Thanks for the best Teleconverter report so far! I have the R5 and the 100-500 lens and am considering a Teleconverter as the reports are good that the loss in IQ is very small. Interesting about stopping down for a better image . I have never heard that said before. a question. On the 100-500 with the teleconverter .It is at f10 at 1.4 so do I need to stop down for a clearer image? Thanks.
I am not 100% sure, but I would assume stopping down one stop will improve image quality. So with that lens, that will get you in tricky territory, when it comes to shutter speed. I am hopeful to do some tests with that lens myself, soon.
hi i have canon rf 100-400 5.6-8 on a r6 body with a 1x4 converter what f stop would you recommend when using using the converter in good light and on dull days ok bill
Perhaps I'm in the minority, but I almost always use a 1.4x extender with my 300mm f/4. I find that combo on a crop sensor will give me almost 550-600mm of focal length on a TINY setup. (I use the Pentax K3II and Pentax 300 f/4 da*). I'm not really the "post up with a tripod and wait" sort of photographer so I appreciate a lighter system that I can handhold or just shoot with a monopod. Most 500 or 600 lenses either cost as much as a car or weigh as much as one.... I feel like for the cost, (300mm prime + 1.4x for Pentax gear is about 1500$ USD, plus a $1000 body) and weight the TC is the most bang for your buck. But if you have the cash for a 500mm or 600mm prime then by all means that's definitely the better image quality. It also packs lighter if you're traveling, but again the disadvantages are you either need to have nice, bright light or a body that can handle some high ISO, and a prime lens. I prefer primes anyway for better IQ but it's a matter of preference.
Yes, with gear what is the most important factor is that it suits your needs and budget! Just because a big lens might have better IQ, doesn't mean it would be the best lens for you.
I found that if I want more reach, put the lens on APS-C camera works better than adding a 1.4x extender on a full frame camera, in terms of sharpness.
Yes, that can work well, but not as practical in the field.
I wear the APS-C on my belt with a special quick release belt clip and can switch between FF and APS-C in just a few seconds. It takes another few seconds to readjust the setup on the tripod for balance, so for me, far easier than putting on or taking off a TC. So Xu Yi, I agree.
@@jan_wegener I have always 2 cams a least with me.
As I understand it, a TC just magnifies a portion of the image; it doesn't increase focal length.
One point you didn’t mention was that tc’s do not affect MFD! Otherwise, nice video.
yes, it stays the same
I'm using a 600mm mostly clean with an EOS 7D2. In the summer I might add an 1.4 TC. I use the 2.0 TC a lot less.
If I had an EOS R5 or R6, I might use a TC more often.
You'd have better results not using an extender on a crop body. Been there, done that.
Yes, on the 7D2 the 1.4 is probably as far as you want to go.
@@jan_wegener If he's got a 600 f/4, he'd actually get better results with no extender on that old 7DII. It would also depend on what version of lens and extender too, the newer the better. Faster focusing too without extender.
It all comes down what body & lens one has. I found that the 5DIV and 100-400 seemed to work pretty good with a 1.4, but others, not so much.
Nikon 1.7 and 2X extenders are terrible - avoid like the plague.
I'm loving the Sony system, as the a9 has no problem with both the 1.4 and 2X extenders on the 600 f/4, but shockingly on the 200-600 as well.
Telli's are good for niche situations in a pinch. for example. I had a choice between a 70-200 2.8 mkii and a mkiii 2x doubler or a 100-400 mk1
In that situations the 2x was superior. but the mkII 100-400 would probably be equal or slightly better. but even then the doubler is still better. as with the mkII that is all I. 100 to 400 at over f4
but with the 70-200 plus mkIII doubler (expensive) I can always remove the doubler and still have my lightning fast crazy sharp 70-200 2.8 mkII and THAT makes it worth it.
I even used my 2x doubler on my signam 150-600 so 1200mm plus my 7D so crop factor (nearly 2000mm) and got a usable not great but usable full frame shot of the lunar eclipse. hand held. PAIN to focus since the AF system really does not like trying to focus at 2000mm effective while I jitter around at over F11 !! it was not a happy camera but of the 20 useless shots I got ONE was in focus and that was enough 🙂
Of course if you HAVE the light and or iso space stop down and go for broke!! sometimes SLIGHTLY less sharp but a "usable number of pixels" to work with is superior to slightly sharper but subject does not encompass enough pixels to be useful.
IE if the subject is too small it does not matter how sharp it is. its still a useless shot. sometimes something is better than nothing.
Thanks for sharing
Great vide
thank you!
So here's the question I have, I have an R6 and I have a RF 100-500 on order. Cropping for me is limited and I'd like to be able to get birds larger in the frame at times so would I be better off getting the RF 800 F11 or for slightly less cash an extender? The less bag space and slightly less money extender seems more appealing. Great video Jan, I've just subbed.
I have been field testing the 100-500 and 11/600&800 the last few weeks and just starting to put together a video about them.
The 100-500 has crazy good IQ and is extremely versatile.
I think it will take the 1.4 Extender well, but you have to stop down a bit. I am planning to use the 1.4 on it from time to time. I have also made some tests for the videos with the 2x extender and it did reasonably well.
The 800 could actually be an intriguing second lens, though, that is very light.
@@jan_wegener I assume you have been
testing both extenders by now. I am thinking of a 1.4 or 2.0 extender from 100-500 with my R5. Cannot afford a prime. Which one should I get?
@@peterding4958 The 2x is wide open at F14, which makes it challenging to get enough light. It does work fairly well, tho. Overall the 1.4 is probably a bit easier to use. Also depends what you want to photograph, though
@@jan_wegener birds in flight. I guess I will just go for the 1.4x. When you say the 2x is ok. Does the image suffer?
@@peterding4958 will definitely help with the shutter speed. Don't think the 2x will be very good for BIF. I have used the 1.4 to photograph Gannets in flight before
Using a 1.4 mk iii extender with a 100-400Mk ii on both Canon 7D2 and a 5D3 I was never satisfied, Vernon Chalmers has found the same with his 400mm f5.6, he found the extenders worked far better on Prime lenses, I recently saw some photos using the 100-400 mk ii with a 1.4 extender on an R6 which were absolutely brilliant, fingers crossed or I will be moving my extender on. My R6 arrives this week.
I have been getting decent images with the 100-400 and 1.4x TC on the R5 and R6. I am making a video about that very soon. The key is to stop down at least one stop for great IQ.
@@jan_wegener thank you, love your CZcams channel, already picked up lots of tips, thanks to @Duade Paton for the introduction 👍🏼
@@RogerJones-mountfield awesome, thanks :)
Ah good, a video for me. Was debating getting a 1.4X MK3 or not.
The other thing is you can crop the extender prime far beyond the capabilities of the non extended one, because you're already having to crop to that focal length, and you don't have the added bokeh of the extra let's say 200mm ontop of a 500mm at only f5.6, your cropped non-extender image is still at f4.
absolutely. Especially with the 2x TC, your potential reach is WAY more thna a cropped 600mm file, that's already maxed out at 1200mm equivalent
@@jan_wegener It may sound weird but I sold my 600mm for a 500mm, it's so much nicer to handhold, getting my 1.4X extender tomorrow.
@@frostybe3r The best lens is the one that fits your personal style the best :)
@@jan_wegener Genuinely surprised by the 1.4X however sometimes it feels too long, nobody ever acknowledges the fact that the 500mm has an almost 3 feet closer focusing distance than the 600, meaning it's not exactly a 100mm difference at same focus distances, 3 feet is actually quite alot when talking about a bird.
@@frostybe3r but you don't often get to go that close to a bird. It makes a difference for sure, though
Hi Jan, what do you think about using 2X for video? The lose of image quality is smaller?
Thank you for the video. I like your recommendation but Have you try this on moving subjects like bird in flight? Thanks in advance
You mean using extenders and stopping down? For fast moving action no extenders should always be the first choice, because of the much faster Af speeds.
@@jan_wegener Thank you Jan for your advice I appreciate it. On bird in flight without using the extenders do you recommend stopping down? Thanks Jan
@@peterb.7437 I would always stop down with an extender, unless shutter speed doesn't allow it
You should have a cool hashtag like #SchoolOfJan or something like that for those who study under you.
Speaking for myself, I wouldn't mind subscribing also, when the world returns to some form of normalcy in the future, even doing an Australian bird safari with you / group of people
Yes, that would be great. I had planned to offer some trips, but covid delayed that
Jan, Santa is bringing me an R5 for Christmas, but I’ll be using a RF to EF converter as I only have EF lenses at the moment. Can I use an RF 2x converter or do I have to use an EF converter?
As far as I know you need EF converters for EF lenses.
When you used the 70-200 lens with teleconverter, could you clarify which lens/TC. I understand that the RF teleconverters do not work with the RF 70-200.
It was EF 70-200 L IS II and EF extenders III. The RFs cannot take the extenders, correct.
Using very frequently the 1.4 extender on a canon 500 f4.0 mark I lens - doubting to get a 2.0 extender, want start photographing ducks on a more regular basis and was thinking a 2.0 extender could help as these ducks in belgiu stay most of the time too far - after your tips not sure if it can really help as using an extender when the subject is far doesn't really help.
It depends how far the ducks are away. If they're maybe 20-30m away a 2x extender will work pretty well on that lens.
My Nikon Coolpix P950 has a fixed lens, and since it's an ultrazoom I suppose it counts as using a teleconverter all the time. :)
Sorry for an off-topic, but I was recently told that a ground pod with gimbal head would be a good setup for taking shorebird pictures. Do you have any advice about that?
Yes indeed a 'frypod' is cheap to make and gets you low. Been using an old frying pan with a gimbal head held on with a single tripod head bolt for about 5 years. Google DIY frypod and you will likely find instructions as I did. Leave the handle on for pushing the pan around the rocks and sand.
Yes, the pods allow you to get low and they're easy to push forward in the mud.
Hi Jan, very good video. I have a question for you.
How about adding a 1,4 extender to the excellent canon 100-400 IS L II vs cropping ?
Does it worth buying the extender 1,4 v.III for that specific lens ?
Thanls for your help.
If you stop down to F11 the results are not too bad, I wouldn't to use it wide open. The best solution in that range would be 100-500, but that's obviously very pricy.
Thanks for your help and quick answer !
I still have a question for you Jan.
Using the 100-400 Mark II + 1.4 extender at f/8 VS 100-400 Mark II at f/8, what is the % loss in quality? 10% 20% 30% please let me know. Thanks!
@@rodsmoltz5996 I don't think it's that easy. There are so many factors that come into play. Weather, AF etc. Side by side at 100% you will see a difference. You will definitely see a decent jump in IQ from F8 with extender to F11 with extender
Tell me one thing. Can I use 1.7 TC with 300 mm f 4 lens which makes it f 6.7 and stopping down to f 8.0 as per your suggestion?.Thanks
you should be able to on the 300 prime lens
Hi Jan, thanks for sharing this video. One specific question :
With a fullframe sensor, say R6, is it better to crop in post or it's better to use a 1.4x teleconverter with the ef 100-400 ii
It's not an easy one to answer. But if you stop down to F11 the final files should be better overall. Cause if you crop a lot with the R6, you might end up with pretty small final files.
@@jan_wegener Hi Jan. Thanks for your answer. I'd already spent money in a 1.4x which I'd used only once with the 80D + ef100-400 with crapy results (for that on it's better to crop), so when when I get the R6 i'll give it a try. Thanks again, all the best
@@paulosilvapro It will definitely work much better on the R6 than an 80D
@@jan_wegener thanks a gain. I’ll give it a try
Hey jan where do you go bird watching is it a national park like Dandenong r in the country
Everywhere, really, but if possible, I prefer private properties with permission
Very helpful, but I have a question which I don't find anywhere...does tele converter crops down the image size and reduce resolution too..? thank you..
No they don't
@@jan_wegener thank you..
I’m finding carrying big lens during travel a major burden. Thinking of getting a 300mm f4 with 1.4 teleconverter to get a nice 420mm equivalent. In this case, the lens would not be a big prime but I assume it still fits in with your recommendations.
There’s also some fantastic zooms available these days