Teleconverter Test

petal666 · 24th November 2004, 10:57 PM

This'll have to be quick 'cause I have to get off to bed.

After disci's cricket photos with a 70-200f2.8 and my 2x tele i thought I'd do some tests with my converters and my 120-300f2.8 lens to see how the image quality goes.

I took some quick images (had it set on auto white balance and all

). At 300mm f8 with no tele, 1.4x Sigma and 2x Canon. The first lot are 100% crops with no processing at all. The 2nd image is the original 100% of no tele and then the 1.4x image and the 2x image resampled down to the same size. You can see hwo much image degredation there is on the 2x at 100% crop but without any processing, the 1.4x image and the 2x image aren't all that bad when reduced to the 300mm image size.

300mm f8

420mm f8 (300mm x 1.4x)

600mm f8 (300mm x 2x)

Resampled images.

FranchiseJuan · 24th November 2004, 11:22 PM

Looks to me like the obvious choice is to crop from non teleconverter.

Dinuc · 25th November 2004, 6:59 AM

Hello officer ?

Yes, I'd like to report a white Hyundai car stolen.

Yes, that's right, licence plates number 185-FIC.

Queensland plates, yes.

You'll be on the lookout, excellent.

I did know that the teleconverter degraded the image, but not that much.
But then if you need the shot...

Dna

IXUS430 · 25th November 2004, 7:41 AM

Maybe just me, but the 2X canon looks better than the 1.4x.... Maybe after processing reducing size?

Still, not too bad with 2x, not something i own just yet, but even with this, the advantage would outweigh this slight picture quality hit...

doigal · 25th November 2004, 10:56 AM

[QUOTE=IXUS430]Maybe just me, but the 2X canon looks better than the 1.4x.... Maybe after processing reducing size?
QUOTE]

Agreed.

insular · 25th November 2004, 11:42 AM

would results vary from the nikon range of teleconverters?

a777 · 25th November 2004, 11:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by IXUS430

Maybe just me, but the 2X canon looks better than the 1.4x.... Maybe after processing reducing size?

Still, not too bad with 2x, not something i own just yet, but even with this, the advantage would outweigh this slight picture quality hit...

The 2x TC is a Canon
the 1.4x TC is a Sigma

I'd be interested to see the 1.4x Canon against the 1.4x Sigma

becubed · 25th November 2004, 12:21 PM

This might be on interest
Canon 100~400mm f/4.5-f/5.6L IS Zoom Versus Canon 70~200mm f/2.8L IS Zoom With Canon 2X Extender

The results appear to get better at higher f's

Frozen_Hell · 25th November 2004, 12:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by insular

would results vary from the nikon range of teleconverters?

From the reading I've done... same thing happens on Nikon with teleconverters on zooms, there is noticeable image degradation.

I'm curious as to whether stopping down (rather than shooting wide open) makes a difference when using a TC?

petal666 · 25th November 2004, 1:43 PM

f8 is hardly wide open by maybe I should have gone f11 but I was running out of light!!

Also to note I was using the original 2x tele. There is a comparison with the mkII model here

Also the Sigma 1.4x is supposed to be comparable to the Canon 1.4x and it had had some great images with it on my 120-300mm.

justakid · 28th November 2004, 12:18 AM

just for curiousty sake - is it possible to enlarge the original (w/o converter) to a size so it would similar to having a converter on it - just to see if using the converter has any benefits at all

Liam · 28th November 2004, 3:13 AM

before i saw your reply, i did just that for curiosity's sake, so i'll post it up here. Just a smart size resize in PSP5, nothing else done to it obviously. I'm sure someone adept in PS could clean it up a little.

300mm f8 (resized 200%, uncompressed)

600mm f8 (300mm x 2x)

justakid · 28th November 2004, 3:20 AM

wow i guess the using 2x is pointless - man kinda makes me think i should try this test with my V1 & 1.8x....

24th November 2004, 10:57 PM	#1
petal666 Member Join Date: Jun 2001 Location: Red Hill, QLD Posts: 4,598	Teleconverter Test This'll have to be quick 'cause I have to get off to bed. After disci's cricket photos with a 70-200f2.8 and my 2x tele i thought I'd do some tests with my converters and my 120-300f2.8 lens to see how the image quality goes. I took some quick images (had it set on auto white balance and all ). At 300mm f8 with no tele, 1.4x Sigma and 2x Canon. The first lot are 100% crops with no processing at all. The 2nd image is the original 100% of no tele and then the 1.4x image and the 2x image resampled down to the same size. You can see hwo much image degredation there is on the 2x at 100% crop but without any processing, the 1.4x image and the 2x image aren't all that bad when reduced to the 300mm image size. 300mm f8 420mm f8 (300mm x 1.4x) 600mm f8 (300mm x 2x) Resampled images. __________________ i5 2500K, GA-Z68MA-D2H-B3, 8GB 1600MHz, 1GB HD6770, 120SSD, 3TB, Liteon 24x DVD, 2x Dell 30" LCD, iPod touch Canon 5D3 + Lenses FS: SR Cranks $300

24th November 2004, 11:22 PM	#2
FranchiseJuan Member Join Date: Aug 2002 Location: Somewhere Exotic Posts: 2,619	Looks to me like the obvious choice is to crop from non teleconverter. __________________ Quad Core Intel i5/20 inch LCD ----- HP 2760P i5 2.3 GHz ----- Phenom II X4/24 inch/20+tb of storage combined. My Photographic Equipment zhenphotography.co

25th November 2004, 6:59 AM	#3
Dinuc Member Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Melbourne Posts: 4,428	Hello officer ? Yes, I'd like to report a white Hyundai car stolen. Yes, that's right, licence plates number 185-FIC. Queensland plates, yes. You'll be on the lookout, excellent. I did know that the teleconverter degraded the image, but not that much. But then if you need the shot... Dna __________________ www.andrewmurdoch.com.au

25th November 2004, 1:43 PM	#10
petal666 Member Join Date: Jun 2001 Location: Red Hill, QLD Posts: 4,598	f8 is hardly wide open by maybe I should have gone f11 but I was running out of light!! Also to note I was using the original 2x tele. There is a comparison with the mkII model here Also the Sigma 1.4x is supposed to be comparable to the Canon 1.4x and it had had some great images with it on my 120-300mm. __________________ i5 2500K, GA-Z68MA-D2H-B3, 8GB 1600MHz, 1GB HD6770, 120SSD, 3TB, Liteon 24x DVD, 2x Dell 30" LCD, iPod touch Canon 5D3 + Lenses FS: SR Cranks $300

25th November 2004, 7:41 AM	#4
IXUS430 (Banned or Deleted) Join Date: Oct 2004 Posts: 258	Maybe just me, but the 2X canon looks better than the 1.4x.... Maybe after processing reducing size? Still, not too bad with 2x, not something i own just yet, but even with this, the advantage would outweigh this slight picture quality hit...

25th November 2004, 10:56 AM	#5
doigal Member Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: Augsburg, Germany Posts: 2,789	[QUOTE=IXUS430]Maybe just me, but the 2X canon looks better than the 1.4x.... Maybe after processing reducing size? QUOTE] Agreed.

25th November 2004, 11:42 AM	#6
insular Member Join Date: Aug 2004 Location: Adelaide Posts: 735	would results vary from the nikon range of teleconverters?

25th November 2004, 12:21 PM	#8
becubed Member Join Date: Jan 2002 Posts: 470	This might be on interest Canon 100~400mm f/4.5-f/5.6L IS Zoom Versus Canon 70~200mm f/2.8L IS Zoom With Canon 2X Extender The results appear to get better at higher f's

28th November 2004, 12:18 AM	#11
justakid Member Join Date: Jun 2001 Location: Sydney Posts: 1,536	just for curiousty sake - is it possible to enlarge the original (w/o converter) to a size so it would similar to having a converter on it - just to see if using the converter has any benefits at all

28th November 2004, 3:13 AM	#12
Liam Member Join Date: Jul 2001 Posts: 3,031	before i saw your reply, i did just that for curiosity's sake, so i'll post it up here. Just a smart size resize in PSP5, nothing else done to it obviously. I'm sure someone adept in PS could clean it up a little. 300mm f8 (resized 200%, uncompressed) 600mm f8 (300mm x 2x)

28th November 2004, 3:20 AM	#13
justakid Member Join Date: Jun 2001 Location: Sydney Posts: 1,536	wow i guess the using 2x is pointless - man kinda makes me think i should try this test with my V1 & 1.8x....