Canon Community Canon Community
 


Reply
Super Contributor
Posts: 266
Registered: ‎09-10-2019

Buy an 1.4 or 2.0 extender instead of another lens?

Here's where I'm coning from. I have a Canon T7 with the 75-300 lens. Some of you will recall I had inquired about the Sigma 150-600 lens. I was browsing through Lenses and found a conversation that mentioned keeping a lens that goes to 300mm and getting a converter. Canon's converter is cheaper than buying a new Sigma 150-600 lens. Would I be better off to buy one of the converters? Right now, I'm taking photos of birds, wildlife and flowers. Would like the extended magnification for wildlife that is difficult to approach as deer. Thanks for your input.

BTW, the wife would be happy if I could buy a less expensive lens.

Esteemed Contributor
Posts: 4,906
Registered: ‎02-17-2016

Re: Buy an 1.4 or 2.0 extender instead of another lens?

You certainly *can* but:

You may have autofocus problems, especially with a 2X

You are starting with a lens of questionable quality, using a 2X will make it worse, especially at the edges.

Without IS, you wil almost certainly have to use a tripod, except at shutterspeeds north of 1/500 sec. Framing will be difficult.

Super Contributor
Posts: 266
Registered: ‎09-10-2019

Re: Buy an 1.4 or 2.0 extender instead of another lens?

[ Edited ]

Thanks.

Edit- As for IS, my camera has it. Would the extender cancel it? So far, I like the T7. Out of curiousity, I looked at some of the cameras mentioned here. One new model was out of the budget at $2700. I'm just curious as how these people afford a lens that is $10K.

Highlighted
Esteemed Contributor
Posts: 4,906
Registered: ‎02-17-2016

Re: Buy an 1.4 or 2.0 extender instead of another lens?

The T7 does not have IS (IBIS), Canon depends on the lens for that. You might have some video electronic stabilization, but true stabilzation did not come along until the R series.

VIP
Posts: 8,292
Registered: ‎11-13-2012

Re: Buy an 1.4 or 2.0 extender instead of another lens?


@Tintype_18 wrote:

Here's where I'm coning from. I have a Canon T7 with the 75-300 lens. Some of you will recall I had inquired about the Sigma 150-600 lens. I was browsing through Lenses and found a conversation that mentioned keeping a lens that goes to 300mm and getting a converter. Canon's converter is cheaper than buying a new Sigma 150-600 lens. Would I be better off to buy one of the converters? Right now, I'm taking photos of birds, wildlife and flowers. Would like the extended magnification for wildlife that is difficult to approach as deer. Thanks for your input.

BTW, the wife would be happy if I could buy a less expensive lens.


The Canon 75-300mm lens is not compatible with the Canon telextenders (electronically or even physically - they won't even fit.) There are third party products that will fit, but electronic compatibility is hit or miss. And image quality will suffer.

 

A shot of Bigfoot with a third party converter will probably get you some money. A standard wild life image not likely.

 

I have a Canon 1D X that only has f/8 focusing with the center focus point. I purchased a third party converter that didn't report f/stop and my f/5.6 lens with the 1.4x converter (f/8 equivalent) would focus at all focus points.

 

When i purchased my 1D X Mark III, which has f/8 focusing at all focus points, the lens wouldn't focus at all. 

 

I ran some limited tests and found that cropping an image to 2x was no poorer quality than using a 1.4x converter.

 

My recommendation is to download a trial version of Topaz Gigapixel and run some cropped images through it. If that doesn't work for you the 150-600 lens option is a reasonable choice.

 

As far as the big white lenses, some folks that have them are professionals who amortize the cost through the sale of their products.

 

Other folks are serious hobbyists who have the disposable income, just like some folks have boats, second homes etc.

John Hoffman
Conway, NH

1D X Mark III, Many lenses, Pixma PRO-100, MX472, LR Classic
Super Contributor
Posts: 266
Registered: ‎09-10-2019

Re: Buy an 1.4 or 2.0 extender instead of another lens?

Guys, thanks for the clarification of cameras, lenses, clarity, etc. Still considering the Sigma 150-600. FWIW, a used one on fleabay went for $800 when a new one is $899.

I wonder how people took photographs in the good ol' days. I have my old Kodak Brownie camera somewhere. Should be about 65 years old.

Photos of Bigfoot are required to be fuzzy, no matter the quality of the equipment. That is a given.

Esteemed Contributor
Posts: 4,906
Registered: ‎02-17-2016

Re: Buy an 1.4 or 2.0 extender instead of another lens?

[ Edited ]

They did the best they could with what they had.

 

Yesterday, I used my 600mm because there was a B-25 flying around giving folks rides. He wasn't particularly close, but I got some pretty good shots.

 

Later I used my 70-300 II because a Hawk visited our birdbath while we were eating our lunch.

Respected Contributor
Posts: 1,513
Registered: ‎01-25-2018

Re: Buy an 1.4 or 2.0 extender instead of another lens?

If the 1.4X doesn't get the focal length you need, then the base lens focal length is just too short. 

 

I have tried the 2X with a lot of different Canon glass and with what I think is the sharpest (my EF 300 and 400 f2.8) the combined result isn't bad but only because the base lens is so sharp.  The 1.4X provides very nice results with these and many other lenses but I have tried both the version II and III of the 2X and neither impresses me.

 

Once you put a 2X on a lesser lens, it gets worse quickly.  I have a Canon EF 800 f5.6 which is a nice piece of glass but it is a step down in IQ from the 300 and 400 (most glass is).  By itself, the 800 is quite good and it also works well with the 1.4X but I just don't care for it with the 2X.

 

The three photos below are just examples of what I have taken with the various combinations, the first is the 800 bare, the second with the 1.4X, and the final with the 2X.  The bare lens and 1.4X are typical average captures with those setups while the 2X photo is "least bad" of the 2X examples I have. 

 

Also keep in mind that the 2X is going to slow the focus even on lenses and bodies that will AF with a 2X and that is not going to help your chances with capturing wildlife.

 

A mediocre bare lens is still going to be better than a good lens crippled by a 2X.  I think there is a Sigma 150-600 in your future.

 

Rodger

 

2A8A4140.jpg

 

AS0I5310.JPG

 

AS0I3616.jpg

 

 

EOS 1DX M3, 1DX M2, 1DX, 5DS R, 1D M2, EOS 650 (film), many lenses, XF400 video
Product Expert
Posts: 339
Registered: ‎07-03-2019

Re: Buy an 1.4 or 2.0 extender instead of another lens?

[ Edited ]

Hi there,

 

The lens you describe, the EF 75-300mm f/4-5.6 III which often comes in a kit with the EOS Rebel T7, is not compatible with either EF extender. The EF Extenders can only work with the lenses which have clearance in the back to allow space for the extender's protruding element to sit inside. The rear lens element of your lens will come into direct contact with the extender's front element before it reaches the lens mount.

Super Contributor
Posts: 266
Registered: ‎09-10-2019

Re: Buy an 1.4 or 2.0 extender instead of another lens?

Hmmm. Lots ot learn and many thanks for everyone's input, etc. Got some funds sitting in a FCU account. Just need to convince SWMBO to withdraw it to purchase the 150-600.

I joined a photography club last month. I'm going to see if anyone has the 150-600 lens that I can borrow or spend some time with the owner on a test drive.

Wish I had know of this forum/community about three years ago.

powered by Lithium

LIKE US on Facebook FOLLOW US on Twitter WATCH US on YouTube CONNECT WITH US on Linkedin WATCH US on Vimeo FOLLOW US on Instagram SHOP CANON at the Canon Online Store
© Canon U.S.A., Inc.   |    Terms of Use   |    Privacy Statement