I read so many threads re the pros and cons of converters,one really can be very confused.The majority of cases where converters are used are surely for specific objects.In Stephens case aircraft,in my case and many others,wildlife.The object is to magnify the image and hope to keep quality and clarity.An image taken with a F2 lens,eg Canon 300mm is clear and sharp esp with a converter,but surely if one has a 400F5 lens,the lens is on a tripod,the day is bright and clear,the object is static and of reasonable size,(not a Wren 1/2 a mile away)then the image should be pretty reasonable.One will achieve the magnification,esp if using a higher iso,but not too high.A prof photographer would be using a 600mm lens ,but he is selling his shots,the amateurs amongst us just want to see a slightly enlarged image of reasonable quality.I have used a 2x with the 100-400.Acceptable.But I am hoping that with the prime 400 the quality should be better.Perhaps I am wrong,but I will find it easier to carry a lighter weight lens with the converters in my pocket then carry a huge heavy lens which is totally out of my price range.I did try a Sigma 800 last year.Too heavy to hoist onto the tripod.Much easier to digiscope,but not so easy to keep scope ,cam etc focussed on the moveing bird.
|