Put a 1.4x TC on Sigma 120-300mm?

Caporegime
Joined
13 Jan 2010
Posts
32,927
Location
Llaneirwg
So I see a lot of people generally say 1.4tc is ok on this lens

Far as I can understand it will inevitably make pictures less sharp than they would be

All things being equal.. How do you way up the benefits of having to crop in without a Tc to having a slightly less sharp image but not having to crop to get the same size image?

It's probably my technique etc but I expect if I loose sharpness I won't be happy with the results on my sigma 120-300

I don't know if I will ever be able to justify a fast 400mm tbh
 
You could always hire a 400mm prime for the occassional time that you need it ;)

Then I will just want one! I don't know if it would be worth hiring a lens like that. As it woul be for difficult wildlife. Hiring it with no good pics would be tough. I have never hired a piece of kit

If I continue for years investing iI may well end up with a 400mm prime that is faster than f5.6..but without making money I just can't see the justification in it.. The prices are eyewatering tnh

I can't imagine 400f5.6 without IS being useful
My 120-300mm f2.8 with IS.. I often find I'm using this faster than han f5.6 for the times I would want more reach
Although the IS isn't a touch on my 100mm L macro (I cannot get over how good the IS is on that lens.. My favourite lens)
 
I had a 1.4x extender for my 120-300 F2.8 and it worked great. There is a quality difference but unless you're printing big then it's not noticeable.
 
On good lenses a 1.4xTC lens has very little degradation. More noticible is a slower jumpier AF, the stop less light, the need to have an even faster shutter speed (see point 1), and even harder to hand hold. I wouldn't worry about IQ reduction but general technical issues vs shooter the lens bare.
 
Was it a sigma?

Yup
Not the best photo ever - shooting through a fence but it's not soft. Focus point on the blue number 5 bike

Sigma 120-300 with 1.4x TC - 420mm, F6.3 : April 2008.

14441090051_fb9d43a293_o.jpg
 
Is hiring photography equipment ever worth it? The prices seem be a around 1/5 of the purchase price, for a couple of days rental. It's like charging £10k a month to rent a £100k flat!

Yeah it does look a tad costly. If I was going to a very specific event and I was better than I am I might consider it
But seems renting is either the above or to try before buying

Well no harm in giving it a go with the Tc.

I think I am very critical of my pictures.. Or I'm rubbish haha

Thanks for the bike pic. I'd be happy with that
 
I've no idea about the Sigma lens, but I've just bought a x2 Canon t/c and the drop in IQ is tiny. MUCH better than the Kenko one I had. I haven't actually done anything with it yet so I can't offer any examples. All I've done is test it to make sure it works :D
 
Sitting by Amp34, on Flickr

Cayman by Amp34, on Flickr

Both taken with the 1.4 Sigma TC on my 120-300 OS

There is basically no image degradation from the 1.4 TC but as mentioned by D.P. the obvious issues of the loss of a stop and slightly slower AF raise their head. The difference in AF speed is basically minimal in my experience with the 1.4. Even with the TC on the lens still seems to out resolve the D7000 sensor at most focal lengths.

The 2x TC is very different however, a reasonable amount of degradation and slows down the the AF a bit as well.
 
Yeah the AF is slower with the x2, but it's not world ending. If you're used to using an 85L then you don't care :D Depending on what you're doing obviously, because if you need fast AF or you'll miss the shot, there's no guarantee you'd get the shot!
 
I hired a Canon 70-200 f2.8 II for 11 days earlier this month and it was £170 all in.

Is hiring photography equipment ever worth it? The prices seem be a around 1/5 of the purchase price, for a couple of days rental. It's like charging £10k a month to rent a £100k flat!
 
Back
Top Bottom