2 x converter, opinions please

[dvp82 10]

The longest lens i have is a Canon 70-200 f4 L IS which for 99.9% of the stuff i photograph 200mm is plenty, but once in a while i do wish i did have a bit more reach. Now i have no intensions of splashing out on a new tele zoom so was thinking of buying a 2x converter.

 

Still dont fancy spending the money on a Canon one, and like i said it would only get used every once in a while for the odd pic or 2 at the most and if i did take more pics at over 200mm i would just invest in a longer lens, but Jessops do sell their own 2x converter for around £75.

 

At £75 are they any good / worth the money or are converters just a bag of <removed>.

[astraman 10]

I've got one of the Jessops ones.

It really does work.

It is swings and roundabouts though. Gives you a longer reach, but apparently reduces aperture by 2 stops.

 

I don't use it very much, so would consider some kind of swap deal if you have a spare canon kit lens or similar.

[GrinderBloke 10]

If you can run to it go for a Canon 1.4x or 2x extender matched to your lens.

[mattsando 10]

I'm sure the Jessops one is fine, but if you're using a decent piece of glass (which you are) then you want a decent TC to match.

[ImpInaBox 10]

With a 1.4x converter you'll get a 1 stop aperture reduction and with a 2x you'll loose 2 stops.

 

The biigest problem with tele-converters tho is the loss of quality which in my experience is severe. If you really must get a converter then get the best you can but don't expect miracles.

[bigoffroader 10]

I've got a canon 2x converter they are ok if you have to use them

[ndegwa 10]

from what i have heard the 70-200 is a really sharp lens and although there is a drop in IQ with the 1.4 TC the 2x converter is really intended for use on a prime lens. It will degrade you IQ and you will lose autofoucs as it will be at f/8 which only 1D bodies can focus with.

 

the 1.4 will give you an effective range of 280mm. If you need anything over that on a regular basis then i would suggest another lens. Hwever you will be talking serious money for equal IQ at longer reach.

[Grissom 10]

The Canon converters are good as they have weather sealing and stuff to minimise reflections inside. I have a 1.4x but having moved to a full-frame body I've just ordered a 2x (£205 including special delivery ). Did that before my new years resolution of not ordering more lenses and things

[Squiggs 11]

With a 1.4x converter you'll get a 1 stop aperture reduction and with a 2x you'll loose 2 stops.

 

The biigest problem with tele-converters tho is the loss of quality which in my experience is severe. If you really must get a converter then get the best you can but don't expect miracles.

 

Late response I know, but I have a Kiron 2X converter. And it is pants with a zoom - I had it from my film days with a prime lens which seemed to couple better with it. But on a DSLR with zoom It's like ramping up the ISO to 3200 quality-wise, and unusable hand-held even with SR on the camera (not on the lens) due to the stopping-down.

 

By far a better purchase was the Tamron 70-300, which at Jessops is on offer at about £60 for the PK Mount but £195 for the Canon...really don't understand that at all... But even at such a budget price, performs far better than any of my other lenses with a converter.

 

 

What I would advise is not being too influenced just by price. On the opposite end of the scale I bought a wide-angle attachment as a frugal moneysaver for those times when I needed less than 20mm - all that did was persuade me to go out and buy a sigma 10-20 as having bought the cheap option I was really unhappy with it. The same may well hold true for a teleconverter.