Lens info...

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by www.kevinkienlein.com, Nov 10, 2006.

  1. I have a canon digital rebel and a tamron 28-200 f3.8-5.6, I am looking at buying a 2x teleconverter on eBay for under $100.



    Are any brands better than others, are they bad news or should I just buy a canon 75-300 for around $300 and not waste my money... ?





    kk



    --
    =>Kevin Kienlein - Entertainer/Inspirational Speaker
    =>Vernon, BC, Canada
    =>See my NEW WEBSITE http://www.kevinkienlein.com
    =>Never give in, NEVER, NEVER, NEVER!
    =>Life is the Gig, THIS AIN'T NO REHEARSAL!
    =>Age 46/Tricuspid, Atresia, Atrial & Vent, Septal Defects.
    =>My Congenital Heart Defects
     
    www.kevinkienlein.com, Nov 10, 2006
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. www.kevinkienlein.com <> wrote:
    : [-- text/plain, encoding quoted-printable, charset: iso-8859-1, 25 lines --]

    : I have a canon digital rebel and a tamron 28-200 f3.8-5.6, I am looking
    : at buying a 2x teleconverter on eBay for under $100.

    : Are any brands better than others, are they bad news or should I just
    : buy a canon 75-300 for around $300 and not waste my money... ?

    Either choice could be the right one for you. Only you will know your own
    needs and desires. But Since you ask for opinion I will give you my
    philosophy of lens selection. Feel free to use or reject it as you will.

    First I like zoom lenses. Not everyone agrees but they work for me. I also
    try to have a good bit of overlap between them. When I am composing the
    desired image I tend to pendulum back and forth to find the right
    composition. If the limits of my lenses either have a gap or are directly
    adjacent this pendulum can run afowl of the gap, making it difficult to
    get the image I want. I also feel that all converters subtly come in
    second for image quality than a zoom of the appropriate length. So I try
    to keep the majority of my normal shooting within the range of a
    non-converted lens. I Do have both a .5x and a 2x converter for those very
    rare shots that are just beyond the range of my lenses. But their use is
    generally rare. If I find myself using a converter regularly I would start
    searching (and saving for) for a lens that included that range of focal
    lengths.

    So IMHO if you think you will be wanting to frequently use focal lengths
    above your current zoom range, I would tend to search for a lens that will
    extend to that length. But if it is more likley that the extension
    provided by a 2x converter will only be rarely needed then I would go for
    the 2x.

    As to which brands or makes are best, this is fairly subjective. But in
    general I would think that quality of the optics will be reflected in the
    price (to some extent). So it would likely come down to choosing the best
    converter that you can afford. As with many SLR lenses, unless you are
    Bill Gates, there will always be a better quality lens that would cost you
    your entire yearly income for the next several years. You have to balance
    what you can pay with what you can be happy with. And if you can actually
    make that balance work, you have hit one of the rare fortunate situations.
    Celebrate it. If not, join the rest of us who use what we can afford while
    drooling over new lens offerings. :)

    Hope this helps.

    Randy

    ==========
    Randy Berbaum
    Champaign, IL
     
    Randy Berbaum, Nov 10, 2006
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. On Fri, 10 Nov 2006 01:29:52 -0800, in rec.photo.digital
    "www.kevinkienlein.com" <> wrote:

    >I have a canon digital rebel and a tamron 28-200 f3.8-5.6, I am looking at buying a 2x teleconverter on eBay for under $100.
    >
    >
    >
    >Are any brands better than others, are they bad news or should I just buy a canon 75-300 for around $300 and not waste my money... ?


    You lose two stops with the 2x converter so your tamaron with a 2x will
    have a maximum aperture smaller than f/5.6 and the AF will not function.
    If you want AF look at another avenue.
    --
    Ed Ruf ()
    http://edwardgruf.com/Digital_Photography/General/index.html
     
    Ed Ruf (REPLY to E-MAIL IN SIG!), Nov 10, 2006
    #3
  4. www.kevinkienlein.com

    SimonLW Guest

    "Ed Ruf (REPLY to E-MAIL IN SIG!)" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > On Fri, 10 Nov 2006 01:29:52 -0800, in rec.photo.digital
    > "www.kevinkienlein.com" <> wrote:
    >
    >>I have a canon digital rebel and a tamron 28-200 f3.8-5.6, I am looking at
    >>buying a 2x teleconverter on eBay for under $100.
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >>Are any brands better than others, are they bad news or should I just buy
    >>a canon 75-300 for around $300 and not waste my money... ?

    >
    > You lose two stops with the 2x converter so your tamaron with a 2x will
    > have a maximum aperture smaller than f/5.6 and the AF will not function.
    > If you want AF look at another avenue.
    > --
    > Ed Ruf ()
    > http://edwardgruf.com/Digital_Photography/General/index.html


    Not only that, your image quality goes into the proverbial toilet.
    Teleconverters don't work so well on these types of zoom lenses. Don't waste
    your money.
    -S
     
    SimonLW, Nov 10, 2006
    #4
  5. www.kevinkienlein.com

    jacksonmacd Guest

    On Fri, 10 Nov 2006 07:28:43 -0500, "SimonLW" <>
    wrote:

    >>
    >>>I have a canon digital rebel and a tamron 28-200 f3.8-5.6, I am looking at
    >>>buying a 2x teleconverter on eBay for under $100.

    [snip]

    >> --
    >> Ed Ruf ()
    >> http://edwardgruf.com/Digital_Photography/General/index.html

    >
    >Not only that, your image quality goes into the proverbial toilet.
    >Teleconverters don't work so well on these types of zoom lenses. Don't waste
    >your money.
    >-S
    >


    I second that motion.

    After several years of digital P&S camera, I recently purchased a
    Nikon D-80 DSLR with 18-135 zoom lens. Prior to that, I had a 35 mm
    Nikon SLR for which I had purchased, but hardly ever used, a 1.4x
    Tamron teleconverter. Tried the teleconverter on the D-80. Very
    disappointing image quality, so the teleconverter is now relegated to
    the closet.

    --

    remove uppercase letters for true email
    http://www.geocities.com/jacksonmacd/ for info on MS Access security
     
    jacksonmacd, Nov 10, 2006
    #5
  6. On Fri, 10 Nov 2006 16:40:32 GMT, in rec.photo.digital jacksonmacd
    <> wrote:


    >I second that motion.
    >
    >After several years of digital P&S camera, I recently purchased a
    >Nikon D-80 DSLR with 18-135 zoom lens. Prior to that, I had a 35 mm
    >Nikon SLR for which I had purchased, but hardly ever used, a 1.4x
    >Tamron teleconverter. Tried the teleconverter on the D-80. Very
    >disappointing image quality, so the teleconverter is now relegated to
    >the closet.


    I'm not knocking the use of TC's in general. In fact I use a Nikon
    TC-20E-II all the time with my 70-200mm f/2.8 VR lens. A good TC with a
    good lens can equal good results. However even a good TC will just magnify
    the short comings of a so-so lens. Many of the photos on this page were
    taken with this combo, including the last one taken this morning.
    http://edwardgruf.com/Digital_Photography/dSLR/wildlife/index.html
    --
    Ed Ruf ()
    http://edwardgruf.com/Digital_Photography/General/index.html
     
    Ed Ruf (REPLY to E-MAIL IN SIG!), Nov 10, 2006
    #6
  7. tnx... kk

    "Randy Berbaum" <> wrote in message
    news:ej1jie$jcj$...
    > www.kevinkienlein.com <> wrote:
    > : [-- text/plain, encoding quoted-printable, charset: iso-8859-1, 25
    > lines --]
    >
    > : I have a canon digital rebel and a tamron 28-200 f3.8-5.6, I am looking
    > : at buying a 2x teleconverter on eBay for under $100.
    >
    > : Are any brands better than others, are they bad news or should I just
    > : buy a canon 75-300 for around $300 and not waste my money... ?
    >
    > Either choice could be the right one for you. Only you will know your own
    > needs and desires. But Since you ask for opinion I will give you my
    > philosophy of lens selection. Feel free to use or reject it as you will.
    >
    > First I like zoom lenses. Not everyone agrees but they work for me. I also
    > try to have a good bit of overlap between them. When I am composing the
    > desired image I tend to pendulum back and forth to find the right
    > composition. If the limits of my lenses either have a gap or are directly
    > adjacent this pendulum can run afowl of the gap, making it difficult to
    > get the image I want. I also feel that all converters subtly come in
    > second for image quality than a zoom of the appropriate length. So I try
    > to keep the majority of my normal shooting within the range of a
    > non-converted lens. I Do have both a .5x and a 2x converter for those very
    > rare shots that are just beyond the range of my lenses. But their use is
    > generally rare. If I find myself using a converter regularly I would start
    > searching (and saving for) for a lens that included that range of focal
    > lengths.
    >
    > So IMHO if you think you will be wanting to frequently use focal lengths
    > above your current zoom range, I would tend to search for a lens that will
    > extend to that length. But if it is more likley that the extension
    > provided by a 2x converter will only be rarely needed then I would go for
    > the 2x.
    >
    > As to which brands or makes are best, this is fairly subjective. But in
    > general I would think that quality of the optics will be reflected in the
    > price (to some extent). So it would likely come down to choosing the best
    > converter that you can afford. As with many SLR lenses, unless you are
    > Bill Gates, there will always be a better quality lens that would cost you
    > your entire yearly income for the next several years. You have to balance
    > what you can pay with what you can be happy with. And if you can actually
    > make that balance work, you have hit one of the rare fortunate situations.
    > Celebrate it. If not, join the rest of us who use what we can afford while
    > drooling over new lens offerings. :)
    >
    > Hope this helps.
    >
    > Randy
    >
    > ==========
    > Randy Berbaum
    > Champaign, IL
    >
     
    www.kevinkienlein.com, Nov 10, 2006
    #7
  8. tnx.. kk

    "Randy Berbaum" <> wrote in message
    news:ej1jie$jcj$...
    > www.kevinkienlein.com <> wrote:
    > : [-- text/plain, encoding quoted-printable, charset: iso-8859-1, 25
    > lines --]
    >
    > : I have a canon digital rebel and a tamron 28-200 f3.8-5.6, I am looking
    > : at buying a 2x teleconverter on eBay for under $100.
    >
    > : Are any brands better than others, are they bad news or should I just
    > : buy a canon 75-300 for around $300 and not waste my money... ?
    >
    > Either choice could be the right one for you. Only you will know your own
    > needs and desires. But Since you ask for opinion I will give you my
    > philosophy of lens selection. Feel free to use or reject it as you will.
    >
    > First I like zoom lenses. Not everyone agrees but they work for me. I also
    > try to have a good bit of overlap between them. When I am composing the
    > desired image I tend to pendulum back and forth to find the right
    > composition. If the limits of my lenses either have a gap or are directly
    > adjacent this pendulum can run afowl of the gap, making it difficult to
    > get the image I want. I also feel that all converters subtly come in
    > second for image quality than a zoom of the appropriate length. So I try
    > to keep the majority of my normal shooting within the range of a
    > non-converted lens. I Do have both a .5x and a 2x converter for those very
    > rare shots that are just beyond the range of my lenses. But their use is
    > generally rare. If I find myself using a converter regularly I would start
    > searching (and saving for) for a lens that included that range of focal
    > lengths.
    >
    > So IMHO if you think you will be wanting to frequently use focal lengths
    > above your current zoom range, I would tend to search for a lens that will
    > extend to that length. But if it is more likley that the extension
    > provided by a 2x converter will only be rarely needed then I would go for
    > the 2x.
    >
    > As to which brands or makes are best, this is fairly subjective. But in
    > general I would think that quality of the optics will be reflected in the
    > price (to some extent). So it would likely come down to choosing the best
    > converter that you can afford. As with many SLR lenses, unless you are
    > Bill Gates, there will always be a better quality lens that would cost you
    > your entire yearly income for the next several years. You have to balance
    > what you can pay with what you can be happy with. And if you can actually
    > make that balance work, you have hit one of the rare fortunate situations.
    > Celebrate it. If not, join the rest of us who use what we can afford while
    > drooling over new lens offerings. :)
    >
    > Hope this helps.
    >
    > Randy
    >
    > ==========
    > Randy Berbaum
    > Champaign, IL
    >
     
    www.kevinkienlein.com, Nov 10, 2006
    #8
  9. tnx... kk

    "SimonLW" <> wrote in message
    news:45543da3$...
    > "Ed Ruf (REPLY to E-MAIL IN SIG!)" <> wrote in
    > message news:...
    >> On Fri, 10 Nov 2006 01:29:52 -0800, in rec.photo.digital
    >> "www.kevinkienlein.com" <> wrote:
    >>
    >>>I have a canon digital rebel and a tamron 28-200 f3.8-5.6, I am looking
    >>>at buying a 2x teleconverter on eBay for under $100.
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>Are any brands better than others, are they bad news or should I just buy
    >>>a canon 75-300 for around $300 and not waste my money... ?

    >>
    >> You lose two stops with the 2x converter so your tamaron with a 2x will
    >> have a maximum aperture smaller than f/5.6 and the AF will not function.
    >> If you want AF look at another avenue.
    >> --
    >> Ed Ruf ()
    >> http://edwardgruf.com/Digital_Photography/General/index.html

    >
    > Not only that, your image quality goes into the proverbial toilet.
    > Teleconverters don't work so well on these types of zoom lenses. Don't
    > waste your money.
    > -S
    >
     
    www.kevinkienlein.com, Nov 10, 2006
    #9
  10. tnx... kk

    "jacksonmacd" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > On Fri, 10 Nov 2006 07:28:43 -0500, "SimonLW" <>
    > wrote:
    >
    >>>
    >>>>I have a canon digital rebel and a tamron 28-200 f3.8-5.6, I am looking
    >>>>at
    >>>>buying a 2x teleconverter on eBay for under $100.

    > [snip]
    >
    >>> --
    >>> Ed Ruf ()
    >>> http://edwardgruf.com/Digital_Photography/General/index.html

    >>
    >>Not only that, your image quality goes into the proverbial toilet.
    >>Teleconverters don't work so well on these types of zoom lenses. Don't
    >>waste
    >>your money.
    >>-S
    >>

    >
    > I second that motion.
    >
    > After several years of digital P&S camera, I recently purchased a
    > Nikon D-80 DSLR with 18-135 zoom lens. Prior to that, I had a 35 mm
    > Nikon SLR for which I had purchased, but hardly ever used, a 1.4x
    > Tamron teleconverter. Tried the teleconverter on the D-80. Very
    > disappointing image quality, so the teleconverter is now relegated to
    > the closet.
    >
    > --
    >
    > remove uppercase letters for true email
    > http://www.geocities.com/jacksonmacd/ for info on MS Access security
     
    www.kevinkienlein.com, Nov 10, 2006
    #10
  11. I understand better now after all the feed back I rec'd... if it was a
    faster lens it would be ok... will be doing more shopping around too!! kk

    "Ed Ruf (REPLY to E-MAIL IN SIG!)" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > On Fri, 10 Nov 2006 16:40:32 GMT, in rec.photo.digital jacksonmacd
    > <> wrote:
    >
    >
    >>I second that motion.
    >>
    >>After several years of digital P&S camera, I recently purchased a
    >>Nikon D-80 DSLR with 18-135 zoom lens. Prior to that, I had a 35 mm
    >>Nikon SLR for which I had purchased, but hardly ever used, a 1.4x
    >>Tamron teleconverter. Tried the teleconverter on the D-80. Very
    >>disappointing image quality, so the teleconverter is now relegated to
    >>the closet.

    >
    > I'm not knocking the use of TC's in general. In fact I use a Nikon
    > TC-20E-II all the time with my 70-200mm f/2.8 VR lens. A good TC with a
    > good lens can equal good results. However even a good TC will just magnify
    > the short comings of a so-so lens. Many of the photos on this page were
    > taken with this combo, including the last one taken this morning.
    > http://edwardgruf.com/Digital_Photography/dSLR/wildlife/index.html
    > --
    > Ed Ruf ()
    > http://edwardgruf.com/Digital_Photography/General/index.html
     
    www.kevinkienlein.com, Nov 10, 2006
    #11
  12. After all the input I received I am now looking at a sigma or tamron
    28-300mm... is the tamron worth the extra $100?? opinions?/ tnx... kk


    "www.kevinkienlein.com" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    >I understand better now after all the feed back I rec'd... if it was a
    >faster lens it would be ok... will be doing more shopping around too!! kk
    >
    > "Ed Ruf (REPLY to E-MAIL IN SIG!)" <> wrote in
    > message news:...
    >> On Fri, 10 Nov 2006 16:40:32 GMT, in rec.photo.digital jacksonmacd
    >> <> wrote:
    >>
    >>
    >>>I second that motion.
    >>>
    >>>After several years of digital P&S camera, I recently purchased a
    >>>Nikon D-80 DSLR with 18-135 zoom lens. Prior to that, I had a 35 mm
    >>>Nikon SLR for which I had purchased, but hardly ever used, a 1.4x
    >>>Tamron teleconverter. Tried the teleconverter on the D-80. Very
    >>>disappointing image quality, so the teleconverter is now relegated to
    >>>the closet.

    >>
    >> I'm not knocking the use of TC's in general. In fact I use a Nikon
    >> TC-20E-II all the time with my 70-200mm f/2.8 VR lens. A good TC with a
    >> good lens can equal good results. However even a good TC will just
    >> magnify
    >> the short comings of a so-so lens. Many of the photos on this page were
    >> taken with this combo, including the last one taken this morning.
    >> http://edwardgruf.com/Digital_Photography/dSLR/wildlife/index.html
    >> --
    >> Ed Ruf ()
    >> http://edwardgruf.com/Digital_Photography/General/index.html

    >
    >
     
    www.kevinkienlein.com, Nov 11, 2006
    #12
  13. www.kevinkienlein.com wrote:

    > After all the input I received I am now looking at a sigma or tamron
    > 28-300mm... is the tamron worth the extra $100?? opinions?/ tnx... kk


    The higher the zoom range, the more compromises that must be made
    in the lens design, from sharpness, flair, f/ratio, minimum focus
    distance, and others. A 10:1 zoom range is extreme for a sensor
    as high of quality as a digital rebel (which has similar
    spatial resolution in the focal plane as fine grained iso 50 slide
    film). In my opinion, a 28-300 zoom will give you soft
    images, regardless of who makes it or how much it costs
    (at least for all those that I've seen and/or read reviews on).

    Roger
    Photos at: http://www.clarkvision.com
     
    Roger N. Clark (change username to rnclark), Nov 11, 2006
    #13
  14. thanks... I get to learn so much... I think I will have a hard drive crash!!
    kk

    "Roger N. Clark (change username to rnclark)" <> wrote in
    message news:...
    > www.kevinkienlein.com wrote:
    >
    >> After all the input I received I am now looking at a sigma or tamron
    >> 28-300mm... is the tamron worth the extra $100?? opinions?/ tnx... kk

    >
    > The higher the zoom range, the more compromises that must be made
    > in the lens design, from sharpness, flair, f/ratio, minimum focus
    > distance, and others. A 10:1 zoom range is extreme for a sensor
    > as high of quality as a digital rebel (which has similar
    > spatial resolution in the focal plane as fine grained iso 50 slide
    > film). In my opinion, a 28-300 zoom will give you soft
    > images, regardless of who makes it or how much it costs
    > (at least for all those that I've seen and/or read reviews on).
    >
    > Roger
    > Photos at: http://www.clarkvision.com
     
    www.kevinkienlein.com, Nov 12, 2006
    #14
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. PeterPan

    Wanted Info on UK-Info, & WebDesign

    PeterPan, Nov 27, 2003, in forum: Computer Support
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    887
  2. Michalkun

    Lens info

    Michalkun, Jul 18, 2003, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    5
    Views:
    695
    Mike Jenkins
    Jul 20, 2003
  3. Salle ®²ºº²

    Info on Canon EF 28-70mm lens (not L)

    Salle ®²ºº², Sep 6, 2003, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    407
    Stephen M. Dunn
    Sep 8, 2003
  4. Salle ®²ºº²

    Info Needed on Canon 28-70mm Lens (Non-L type)

    Salle ®²ºº², Sep 7, 2003, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    397
    Bob Sull
    Sep 7, 2003
  5. Replies:
    0
    Views:
    610
Loading...

Share This Page