ARE EXTENDERS WORTH IT? Find out from someone who's taken 500K images with them!

[@simon_dentremont]

I should have said more plainly...don't buy the 2x until you've mastered the 1.4x...it's much harder to get good results from it!

[@samiam1025]

Never had good results with the Nikon 2x on the 400mm f/2.8.

[@howardhack655]

This was great practical incformation that I will use

[@juanjaramillo1854]

I first had the 2x and sold it to buy the 1.4x. Much better results (in my case)

[@martinstepalavich]

Simone slow your feed to much of a good thing. You are rhe best teacher.

[@nassimabed]

@@samiam1025 I got the Nikon 2XTC for the Micro-NIKKOR 105mm and I get super-tack sharp images with that combo. However, when I tried the TC on the NIKKOR 80-400mm (type G) I got very, very bad loss of sharpness. On its own the type G NIKKOR 80-400 is a lot sharper at 400mm even "wide open" (f/5.6).

[@MidwestRider559]

Love how you're straight to the point and don't have 15 minutes of fluff and 3 minutes of actual information like most youtubers

[@davidalbert9387]

I came to say the same thing!

[@lericher7876]

Exactly!!

[@LindonSlaght]

Best part is the videos are still 15 minutes... Beautiful

[@edrader]

the answer was in the title, too

[@David-yt6kp]

A LOT of other youtubers could take lessons from you on how NOT to waste the viewers time. I learned more from you in 13 minutes than some 1 hour videos I've watched. Well done sir. Well done.

[@kevinanderson853]

I bet it takes him a lot longer to make these excellent info-dense videos, too!

[@inhumanna2003]

thats because he is ia really great photographer doing youtube videos...not a youtuber that takes pictures with fancy equipment

[@CapturedByKen]

This is random but I work as a wildlife photographer for a Nature Educational Center (very large wetlands) …and I actually made a new photography bud recently because while I was out shooting, another photographer walked up and we started small talking …next thing I knew, we found out that we both watched your videos haha. Thanks for sharing your knowledge and bringing photographers together!

[@simon_dentremont]

Cool, thanks!

[@adrikrotten880]

I swear this is the first video that explains this topic super well. Thank you so much!

[@simon_dentremont]

Welcome!

[@bryanotero123]

@@simon_dentremont straight to the point. Informative like a book. Excellent

[@funknick]

Simon, the way you edited this is excellent. I can tell you really care about conveying information clearly and quickly. The way you cut the talking head portions makes this come across super sharp and intense, like a professional TED talk dialed in for max impact. When I say intense, I mean, it's engaging, it catches your attention, keeps your focus, and ensures that each point sticks. It's a really effective style. Solid video and props to you for taking the time to edit and cut appropriately to refine your message. Much appreciated!

[@simon_dentremont]

Thanks very much Nick!

[@sheldonspock5566]

funny you should say that because he's actually done a TED talk already. :D

[@funknick]

@@sheldonspock5566 hah! I did not know that, makes a lot of sense!

[@dychui]

Yes the cuts are very well done ! Totally agree !

[@jesuiskiwi4033]

Easily one of if not the best photography channels on KZbin

[@882952]

Also, great job on this video - starts up and just starts dropping the facts right away. No fluff, no filler, no padding it out to increase your run-time. I love it!

[@guermeisterdoodlebug7980]

This really is good information and clearly presented. Beyond that, I personally think too many photographers become obsessed with examining subtle differences as shown in some of your comparison photos, rather than the overall image and what it conveys (or should). Non-photographers rarely get caught up in this as they are content appreciating the image or story captured. This is not to suggest we shouldn’t be aware of the tips you provide and trying to capture the sharpest images possible, but rather keeping all photographic elements in perspective. And, I think my comment relates more to amateurs and even serious enthusiasts rather than dedicated pros who are at or near the top of their game.

[@dennislyons3095]

I'm an amateur who has primarily taken photos of airplanes & details of them. I've ben watching your videos & they are full of helpful (when I can remember everything!) information. I have watched a few multiple times to try to remember & put into practice what you present. Thank you! Your videos are very helpful to even an amateur.

[@snuwan]

I have 2x and use it with 100-500mm and it works great. I love it. But it is not always the easiest to use. But in certain situations it is extremely helpful.

[@simon_dentremont]

Great to hear!

[@stephenconnor1847]

I'm not a professional but have had no issues using my Sony 100-400mm with a 2x teleconverter. It practically lives on the lens. I rarely use a tripod, but am generally in good light.

[@Harry-tm2bt]

Thank you for sharing your experience and knowledge in layman’s terms. Very informative and helpful.

[@bradgreen5860]

As always you have to be the most informative guy on KZbin.

[@anonymouscoward9643]

As a bird lover myself, your work is fantastic. For people with the SLR, they should be able to program mirror lockup and use a “bulb” to avoid the largest sources of vibration.

[@simon_dentremont]

yes, I used to do that with my 2x and a trigger release

[@MrBooojangles]

Yes I forgot to add that to my comment above, but I often use live view when using a tripod, to view things better with my eye sight and I believe the mirror is automatically locked up when you do that. Plus I use manual focus more then auto now too, so the slower auto focus won't really affect me if I used a teleconverter.

[@SmallSpoonBrigade]

Depending upon the camera, you can even use an external monitor as well. But, in that case, you'd need some method of keeping everything charged. If you're taking pictures of something like the moon, that might be reasonable, but if you're waiting on a bird, that could be an issue.

[@kokilalf01]

The difference in sharpness between the two lenses is extraordinary

[@nickcrispe1321]

I've used a x1.4 and a x2 teleconverter with an Olympus EM-1 Mark II mirrorless micro four thirds camera, and all your points hold true. Even with a micro four thirds sensor, you can get added value from a x1.4 converter at the price of slower AF, but the x2 teleconverter only gives you anything extra in brilliant light, with the best prime lens, and if you can afford to wait for the sluggish AF.

[@simon_dentremont]

Thanks for sharing!

[@Windsurfingaddict]

May have been two years ago but nothing will change in October 2024, only just recently bought the R5 and still on my bucket list the 100-400 or 500 and seen the Tel converters for sale, thank you for a very informative detailed video on this subject, watching from the Uk 🇬🇧🥳

[@virtualworldsbyloff]

The pixel count was something I was underestimating and also the shutter shake, great stuf, thank you

[@PhDuh42]

This is the best teleconverter video that I have seen. You explain the pros and cons in a logical order and provide specific use cases for 1.4x and 2.0x converters.

[@luckydarling2137]

Your tutorials are really good. I have watch loads of videos like yours but you definitely explain everything clearly. I have an old 600d with 55-250mm lens and started going out a bit taking photos but unfortunately a got diagnosed with cancer. Its really nice taking picture with prime lenses like you explain. With entry level its difficult to have a result like that. Great video.

[@simon_dentremont]

Thanks. Best wishes for your health.

[@linovinn7011]

Great lesson, maybe the best on youtube concerning this topic! Thank you very much and greetings from Germany.

[@shanewilliams613]

Exceptionally well put together video. Your information is very clear, relevant and easily understood, much like all your other videos. Really enjoy your content, keep up the great work!

[@simon_dentremont]

Thanks Shane!

[@Ezrabastian]

Sign of a true professional.

[@przybylskipawel]

TCs doing you the most favour when you have HQ glass but low res body. So what can benefit the most from using one is video, where the sharpness is reduced by subject movement and long shutter speeds or even byt the image nit being oversampled.

[@photobeast]

Actually I've been using the 1.4 and the two times teleconverter for years now. While I was saving up for my 100 to 400 sometime back. I used the 1.4 on my 70 to 200 and got absolutely sharp sharp sharp images with it. The two times I don't use as much. I don't like losing two stops of light.

[@eyoung6943]

I’m so grateful that you go into the AF considerations here, including DSLR vs. mirrorless, not just body + lens combo. This explanation is so helpful and very valuable in helping me understand why some combos aren’t satisfying - and how I might get better results!

[@AndreMonz]

The Sony 200-600 isn't exactly a premium lens ready for teleconverters. More like the new 70-200 GM II and, one step behind, the 100-400 GM. It would be awesome to see how the new generation of teleconverters perform since there has been big steps in the optical industry during the last 2-3 years. Sony teleconverters are fairly outdated when compared to their new lens. Great content as always!

[@Karkawry1970]

Sony are in the process of updating their TC range, although like all camera companies seemingly at the moment, they are taking their sweet time! I have seen some incredible results with the Sony 200-600 with the 1.4TC in GOOD light. I own the lens and shoot on an A9, so the speed somewhat increases the keeper rate of my shoots, and the ISO sensitivity is such that it also pulls shadows well in post. Been thinking about getting the 1.4TC, but am keeping the savings for a 600mm prime, and just getting physically closer to my subjects in the mean time

[@simon_dentremont]

Interesting…thanks for sharing!

[@AndreMonz]

@@Karkawry1970 that's great news for the ones who are waiting those new teleconverters! Thanks for sharing your thoughts and experiences.

[@Karkawry1970]

@@AndreMonz You are most welcome 🙏

[@michelebullock9867]

You are so generous sharing your knowledge and I get so much more out of your videos than the majority of KZbin photogs. You are succinct but thorough. My time with you is well spent. Helpful to hear how long it took you to be proficient. You are the first pro to tell me to “mash” my eye against the camera. Thank you cause I needed to hear that!

[@simon_dentremont]

Happy to help!

[@luisferreira8939]

Congratulations on another great video. Your explanations are always crystal clear, that's a great skill. Thank you.

[@simon_dentremont]

Glad you like them!

[@dps6198]

The EF 70-200mm f/2.8 L IS USM II is another. My wife uses her EOS RP with the EF to RP adapter, 2x extender and the EF 70-200mm L f/2.8 IS USM with a very sturdy Manfrotto tripod to take excellent images of a full moon. She's woken me up at 1pm to check the moon and we have all the equipment ready to set up on the back patio. We buy nearly all of our high end equipment used from the popular sources and the condition has always been gently used with very low shutter count. The combination of low prices to get into the best lenses and nearly new camera bodies and accessories has made photography very enjoyable.

[@B_vids]

I bought the 2x III to use with the 70-200 f/2.8 L II on the R6 MK II w/EF to RF adapter and the results are *very* soft wide open vs the same framing without the teleconverter. I have to stop down to f/8 to get better sharpness, though haven't compared that to the non-teleconverter setup yet.

[@stanpiper8158]

Another terrific video. This is the best discussion/video of TCs that I have heard. You seem to cover more than anyone else I have heard, in a fraction of the time. The comparative images were helpful in putting your words into perspective. If a TC buyer is unaware that a TC significantly increases susceptibility to distortion from a variety of sources, that buyer is very likely to be disappointed with their purchase.

[@simon_dentremont]

I’ve never bought a new TC. You can get them used everywhere from disappointed buyers.

[@quazisanjeed6395]

Thank you for the video. Viewers might not have a clear idea what the teleconverters are all about watching this video. I use both Canon EF 1.4x and 2x TCs both version III on my EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II USM. Mount this combo on my 5D Mark III or 1D Mark IV for my wildlife shots and never encounter the issues mentioned in this video. Good enough for a hobbyist like me. I use this rig in all situations, good light and low light sometimes on tripod/monopod and sometimes handheld as well. Even at night I shot owls with the 5DIII + EF 300mm 2.8 + 1.4x by lighting up the subject with a good flashlight. Yes, there is noise however, the image is presentable not as an exhibition piece but as a descriptive evidence. Therefore, my suggestion to photographers like me is; use 2x teleconverters with the fastest telephoto lenses like the EF 300mm 2.8L or EF 400mm 2.8L. Thanks again.

[@simon_dentremont]

Yes, those super sharp fast telephoto primes can handle them well.

[@sgrsgrsgrsgrsgr]

The Info is on-point, clear, concise, and without useless theatrics, Simon did it again! Thank you so much! I was looking to get into a teleconverter for a Sony 70-350 G OSS , instead, I am going to rent one for a day and try it. Might put the money towards a bigger lens instead ;-)

[@simon_dentremont]

Glad it was helpful!

[@Wellin220365]

Excellent and straight to the point video. This has enlightened me so much on the use and impact of teleconverters. I am just about to order the 2x mkiii for my EF 600mm f4. Thank you for taking the time to make and post this video.

[@paularger2841]

I have been debating wether to buy a tele converter but had only heard bad things about them. I use mostly prime lenses with manual focus and aperture to shoot still subjects. Thanks to your brilliant explanation of pros and cons I’m going to invest in one. Thanks so much for another great educational video!

[@MaartenOtto]

If you’re only shooting stills then rent an extender for a week or two and give it a try. If the results are good then ask if you can take-over their “for rent” model and get a little discount. If the results are bad, then you have tried it without breaking the bank. In either case you gain a lot of information and knowledge.

[@andreasoberg2021]

1.4 has near perfect optical results. A bit less good autofocus but totally worth it

[@mwwhited]

My favorite shooting is live macro such as bees on flowers. Shooting my 2x teleconverter on my 70-200mm f2.8 with an addition 24mm extension tube gives me a 400mm macro with about 18inches (460mm) working distance. The tubes and teleconverters give a wide range from 70 to 400mm and pretty light hiking... but like you said I need good light. It’s pretty good for airshows and car races and works well for flat water kayaking but it leaves much to be desired in the woods and on cloudy days.

[@philiprugh3592]

Very informative Simon. I was hesitant as I had a cheaper 1.4X and wasn't happy with results. After your response to my comment on last video, I went for the Canon 1.4X and have very satisfying results. As you say in this video, it does take a bit of care to do so. Thank you!

[@simon_dentremont]

Excellent

[@chrisbartlett8146]

Very Interesting especially as I use a fuji crop camera. I have a 2 x but never use it but almost always shoot my fuji 150-600 mm with the 1.4 mm Incidentally I shoot handheld as the IS on both the lens and the camera virtually eliminate any shake but I will change to just electronic shutter. I do take the teleconverter off for low light.

[@duane.hewitt]

Definitely helped my decision making. Currently using R5 and 100-500RF lens. I think I'm going to prioritise getting one of the RF primes before I start getting converters.

[@chrisvg1966]

As always, another genuinely terrific instructional lesson with ZERO BS and subversive sale routines👍 You remain a most pleasant anomaly. Thank you, sincerely

[@GregCoonrod]

What a great and informative video! This really helped me better understand the factors involved in deciding to purchase/use a teleconverter.

[@simon_dentremont]

Glad it was helpful!

[@thomaseriksson6256]

good info thank you. I'm in the prosess to upgrade my old F-system to D850 standard. I saving for a 70-200mmF2.8 E VR, and I decided to get a 200-500mmF5.6 E VR and a 2nd hand AFS400mmF2.8 G VR. I have a oldQAF 300mmF2.8 IF-ED screw drive AF that I used on a D300 with Tele converters and a AFS200mmF2.0 VR with Tele converters. I have D800E and D700 today that replaced my D300 2 years ago and I will get a D850 when the D700 stop working and Z8 in the future

[@kilik92]

Another excellent video! Just the type of content I was looking for. Keep up the good work, your channel will grow quickly. I would love to see a video about; The big primes vs zooms (500f4 be 100-400/500, the difference between the sharpness/contrast especially the “microcontrast” and of course the bokeh. When is it worth it for a advanced amateur to make the move over to a big expensive prime.

[@simon_dentremont]

Thats a great suggestion.

[@kilik92]

I would love to see that! Similar side-by-side comparison like the R6 vs r5 video showing the extra sharpness/contrast that you can expect from the expensive prime!

[@martinhommel9967]

Thanks for the vid. I found that I can get sharp pics with the R7, Canon EF 100 - 400 L II and the 1.4 III extender. Using a monopod helps greatly

[@DavidCentaura]

Putting a $550.00 tele on a $13,000.00, 600mm f/4 lens to lose a stop and quality doesn’t add up for me. Informative video, thanks for sharing.

[@simon_dentremont]

In short, with good technique, it’s better than cropping. But, if close enough that cropping isn’t needed, no point of using one.

[@RobinVA69]

Just bought my first full frame camera, the Canon R6 mk ii to replace my 7d mk ii as my primary camera. I plan to buy the Canon 1.4x iii to pair with my new camera and 100-400L mk ii Lens. I could have spent all day getting into reddit, dpforum & youtube rabbit holes regarding this combination and am delighted that you covered everything I needed to know in this video. Straight to the point and no bulls**t approach. Thanks for the video Simon, massive help! I do wonder if using the likes of Topaz Labs to denoise in post would give one an extra life line to combat the cost of the higher iso?

[@yspegel]

In short, you just need to spend a lot of money for good tele photo's. Well, the good news is this video saves some money by not buying an item that has no benefit hehe.

[@prsearls]

Mr. d"Entremont, this is the best, specific and detailed discussion of teleconverters I've ever seen. I trust your experience so I can use your recommendations with confidence. Thank you, sir.

[@p--p3029]

To me - the best teleconverter advices on the net sofar. Thank you !

[@Linkman247]

Great explanation. I was looking at these not knowing much about them. I have an older d5100. But it sounds like the drawbacks to these will make them a nonstarter for my kinds of lenses and camera.

[@jasreneeteo4065]

You are the best person to watch explanations about photography from!

[@justinleard7661]

You are excellent at explaining / educating and bringing practical use cases!

[@Hampton72]

I just bought my first full sensor camera. Before i use cropsensor m50mkii. All glasses was 1.6 crop. I was very happy with my Tamron 18-400. In cropsensor it was 640mm. My new camera is R8 and i have to buy adapter for that. Thank´s for every great videos!!

[@magicalred7802]

My god. this is the clearest explanation of this topic ever. Very well presented. Thank you.

[@georgedavall9449]

This Man is ‘sharper’ than the lenses he uses !!!!!!!!!!!! 😊 Excellent Video Sir! Like all your Videos; Helpful and Informative! 👍✌📷😊

[@notcirrious]

Excellent! I've been experimenting with the 2x Canon and a 300mm prine 2.8- technique is everything here!...

[@kathleeneveritt5340]

Brilliant explanation of using convertors thanks for posting

[@erikersson5032]

Very interesting video, quality all the way through and no useless filling talk, impressive!

[@bartjes2509]

Thanks for sharing. All good tips also. In many cases 3rd party lenses are less bright than the premium lenses so this is also to be taken into account. Finally for instance Sony only allows Sony lenses to be used with Sony extenders. I've been thinking of buying the Tamron 50-400 and maybe later a Sigma 150-600 or save a little more for the 100-400 GM and an extender. Budget-wise it is similar except the converter + 100-400 is easier to carry on trips than bringing 2 telelenses. Difficult choices....

[@vzshadow1]

Thanks for this and your other videos. Your presentation is straight forward and very clear which enables you to keep them short. Overly long videos is a quick way to lose my viewership. I shoot Nikon and can vouch for excellent quality and sharpness of images shot with a Nikon 1.4 teleconverter and the PF lenses, 300 (f/4) and 500 (f/5.6) mm. Being an amateur enthusiast, not a professional, I have difficulty justifying buying the large F/4 primes. It works well with the 200-500mm zoom too.

[@simon_dentremont]

Nice! Thanks for sharing

[@andreasoberg2021]

1.4 is absolutely worth it. Use it all the time with 600. 2.0 is much less used but still always have it with me

[@kerry5586]

I love videos like that this are straight to the point and where the voice isn't drowned out by music. A lot of youtubers could learn from your technique in making videos!

[@luzr6613]

I had watched this months ago, but since that time i bought both a large and fast prime and similar zoom second hand and they came with OEM 1.4 and a 2x TC's. I've done a couple of thousand frames with them, both HH and TP, and some of the results (and repeated attempts) have left me both disappointed and perplexed. Aside from the run through and great tips, what i thought was excellent in this video were your comments linking that to the variation you have in the quality of your hits. Reassuring to know that, even while you may rarely be as perplexed as i am, you do at least occasionally register disappointment. All the very best, mon ami, and thank you as always. Cheers from NZ.

[@mmiYTB]

Already the crop camera is a sort of teleconverter. 200D with 24MP is a "1.6x TC" related to R6/2 with 24MP. I do have EF 1.4x TC Mk3, works pretty well with EF 70-200/2.8 L IS II, thinking about getting the 2x, so that I can leave Sigma 100-400 Contemporary at home sometimes ;-)

[@jamespitman3357]

It's just a crop. Anyway wack it in photoshop blow it up and crop again if needed works fine for most purposes.

[@pilot74sparki]

Great video explanation of teleconverters! @ 6:30 you state that crop frame cameras aren't as good as full frame cameras at using teleconverters, which is very true. But you forget to re-state at this point, that the crop frame sensor is like having a 1.6x teleconverter already attached without the optical disadvantage of light reduction or extra glass. Maybe your option should be, use a crop frame body instead of a 1.4x converter if you don't require the extra features of the full frame body?

[@mikafoxx2717]

But by raising the iso a stop on FF, essentially you make them an equal playing field.

[@jonathanscherer8567]

I have the Olympus 40-150 f/2.8 pro, and the corresponding Oly 2x teleconvertor. This pairing works quite well, as long as you have sufficient light. Losing the light gathering ability of the 40-150 is the drawback, but in some situations it's worth it. The lens is so sharp it doesn't negatively impact it. It's slightly softer than a shot without the TC, but not nearly as noticeable as digitally zooming in post would be. I still find myself using the 12-100 f/4 pro more than my other lenses combined. It's just versatile enough to be convenient in most situations.

[@buyaport]

Thanks. Clearly explains the difference between optically enlarging the lens image with a teleconverter and enlarging the pixels by cropping. -- Some people are disappointed that they cannot put a teleconverter on their lower priced lenses (and then use third party converters), but I guess the lens manufacturers know what they are doing...

[@gruncletim]

Simon, although your videos make my brain explode with all the incredible information you provide, I still love how you get into the whys and why nots. The trade offs between aperture, shutter speed, and ISO are perhaps the most difficult for me to master. When you lose (or gain) stops depending on what accessory you have (filter, lens, teleconverter, etc), knowing which setting to adjust to try for the same exposure is an adventure for me. 😁

[@arildthingvoll5967]

You are a good educator, straight to the point!

[@rejkk]

the best and most informative video on teleconverters I have ever seen, thank you for sharing!

[@brianward7724]

Thanks for this, Simon! From my experience, teleconverters work fine. Early this century, I bought a Canon 200mm f2.8L lens and, a little later, I bought the 2x Canon Extender that was designed to work with my lens. I ended up with a 400mm f5.6 set-up that focussed down to just under 1.5 metres. (I was 'into' photographing insects, etc. at the time.) I was always really happy with the results. This was while using that set-up with the Canon EOS33 film camera that I absolutely loved.

[@simon_dentremont]

If you start with a fast, sharp lens like you did, they do.

[@wattyler6075]

I shoot with a Pentax K-1,only use Pentax lenses & converter,but they only make a 1.4x converter. It was recommended to me to only use prime lenses,I have 300 & 560mm. I haven't used the converter much coz I usually find the lens is sufficient for my needs with wildlife. I also do a lot of motor racing photography, but have never used a converter,shoot with 70-200 or 150-450. Found the tutorial you gave informative. Will try more with the converter.

[@KyleJones-kk8vw]

Glad I went back and watched this. I've seen people get wonderful results handholding the Canon RF 100-500 with a 1.4x teleconverter, but mine have been consistently fairly poor unless I have the subject quite large in the frame. I think it comes down to poor technique, hoping a monopod may provide better stability while not inhibiting mobility too badly.

[@noway8233]

The colors of that duck are amazing , very good equipement , and very good pictures , by the way yuo have the best models that can be , natural life is wonderfull,

[@ardscorner]

Forgot I had a 1.4. So thought I'd give it a go on my 300f4L. Awful results......then realised that it too needed calibrating as it caused the calibrated 300 to front focus again. After that I can now start getting to grips with it. Luckily you made this video so I have a great point of reference. Thanks as always

[@Monila72]

So glad I found this video! I was in the market for a teleconverter and didn’t know which one to get. After watching the video I got the 1.4x for my RF 100-500. Very informative.

[@bikeandsee1647]

One of the best vids on youtube I have ever seen. I watched it at 0.75x

[@simon_dentremont]

Haha awesome

[@Ihwaz13]

I find the old 300 F4 from Canon also works great with a 1.4x on my 7D and 7D mark II.

[@harrr53]

I have a Canon 800mm f/11. Excellent optical quality, but obviously with a big compromise with a fixed aperture of f/11. This is much more workable than it sounds. I come from a part of the world with 300 sunny days a year. I also have a x2 converter, which pushes my focal length to 1600mm, excellent for bird photography. And yes, even the autofocus works just fine. However, while I can still get decent shutter speeds thanks to the excellent ISO performance of the R5, I do notice an obvious decline in sharpness. So I only use the converter sparingly. In situations where I really cannot get closer to the subject. But more often than not, making the effort/preparation to find myself closer to the birds in the first place, is better by far than using the x2 converter.

[@wanneske1969]

Great video as usual ! I learned a lot ! I don't shoot birds a lot but I dare to use an 1.4x extender on my Canon 70-200 mm f2.8 IS III for festivals where I can't get close enough to the artist. Imho the teleconvertor works fine only if there is plenty of light. Autofocus gets slower, Iso gets higher and the image quality drops. With my 1.4x convertor it's still acceptable, but I would never use my 2x teleconvertor again.

[@richardjoyce1]

3:31 Dang! The reflection in the bird's eye, though!

[@wilfs1196]

Excellent video Simon !. Nice to learn something new that I knew very little about. Looks like technique, lens quality & light are the main items to success.

[@nikoladimitrijevic8172]

Best video on topic of teleconverters I watched and I watched many. I always left uncertain are they worth it, this is most consise nicely done summary. Thanks!

[@erikswenson2659]

Best teleconverter video that I have seen. On the FoV issue, even when your subject will fit in frame, it is much easier to keep a fast moving/unpredictable subject in frame and centered without the teleconverter. For birds in flight, I tend to leave my 2x off, as it is better to crop a smaller image that has the bird fully in frame than to go with a shot that has a wing tip out of frame. For pros, keeping your subject centered may not be difficult, but for an occasional wildlife shooter the ability to see and capture more area through the viewfinder is a huge plus. Also, where you will be cropping even with the 2x image, it can still result in a better image without the 2x if the straight shot is close to center, while you 2x shot is in a corner of the image.

[@simon_dentremont]

Great observations, and all accurate!

[@L.Lyubomirov]

Very profedsional and great video and easy to understand !I am landscape photographer and i've ordered teleconverter 2x for my sigma 70-300...from what i understand i will not have almost any problem...landscape photography with tripod,and the lens stopped down + low iso,i think i will be fine...hope so :D

[@mvp_kryptonite]

Excellent video. I have both mark 3 extenders from Canon and pair with the 100-400ii or the 70-200/2.8ii. The R7 is a monster however so one needs to be careful. Electronic mode is the way to go and I mainly use without extenders as it’s naturally got the 1.6 crop sensor anyway. I am pondering adding a full frame (those benefits are well documented) but as a hobbyist the costs can easily ramp up. 1st is a general purpose RF-S 2.8 zoom and it that doesn’t come around then R3/R6ii & 28-70/2.

[@__Mr.White__]

2:42 this image was eye opening 👍🏻

[@hoorayforpentax3801]

Nice presentation. The flipside: buy yourself the cheapest possible second-hand, third-party teleconverter that offers full pass-through for AF and aperture-control functionality, then take out the glass. This will give you an inexpensive extension tube that will immediately turn ANY lens in that system into a macro lens, or at least an ultra-close-focus one. ETA: Your comments on the need for good quality lenses in front of a good quality teleconverter on a good-quality sensor are true. Just for fun, I was playing around in the camera shop one day a while back and they let me stack a 2X third-party teleconverter behind an 18-250mm superzoom on my 6MP Pentax IST-DL and step outside to take some shots with it. The reach was AMAZING! The quality was garbage. Somewhere in my collection, I have a film-era third-party K-mount teleconverter that offered THREE times magnification. That too was garbage, almost certainly sucker bait when it was first sold, but I bought it specifically in order to deglass it and use it as an extension tube, so its limitations were of no importance.

[@andygray7776]

Thanks Simon, that is the best explanation of range extenders I have seen / heard. Thank you!

[@brendallsterling4117]

You always give the best answer. I have a Canon rf 4 mark 11 using rf f4 70-200. I'm thinking about getting the 2x extension .

[@simon_dentremont]

It will be borderline for benefits

[@stavrosk.2868]

I own the Minolta 300mm F4 and have the 1.4 and X2 teleconverters. They are absolutely worth it.

[@matthewbell1968]

Top drawer, zero BS explanation of the subject 👍👍

[@simon_dentremont]

Glad you enjoyed it

[@nordic5490]

You didn't mention the difference in the DOF, ie, the 'look' between using a tc vs cropping. For a particular shot, let's make the assumption that iso, and AF were acceptable with the tc, The big difference is the look of the shot. Cropped will have a broader dof vs using the tc with tighter dof. Also, visible motion blur for a given fov and shutter speed affects both copping or using a tc, equally. Great video btw. I use the rf100-500 + 1.4x + 100mm Extn tube, all the time for 1:1 macro. Works great, and allows me to keep the lens far enough away from the critters to not disturb them.

[@simon_dentremont]

Thanks for adding! Yes, I like the blown out look to the background that I get with the TC.

[@moonchai152]

You are telling what I wanted to know. I just hope R7mk2 is coming. thanks,

[@dimitarpenkov4377]

Very detailed explanation, saved me a lot of time of research and money, a big THANK YOU from me!

[@nogroove3819]

Terrific review of teleconverter. Very helpful. I have been thinking of new Sony 300 f.2.8 with a teleconverter. This review gave me exactly information needed.

[@lcrouch67]

Truly an excellent presentation. I just bought the same Canon zoom lens shown for my 90D so thanks for your concise help!

[@marcbastien334]

Thank you again Simon for generously sharing your expertise .

[@simon_dentremont]

My pleasure!

[@daudiiCreates]

Honestly loving that I got your channel recently, really learning a lot. You eloquently explain and teach.

[@KoneStone1]

Best explanation. Nothing left behind other than tearing extender apart and looking inside one actual thing but i supose that would be too much :D