# Question about Sigma 1.4X - 2X teleconverter for canon



## Ockie (Feb 19, 2007)

I'm thinking about buying a Sigma teleconverter for my Sigma 70-200mm f2.8 lens (the HSM DG EX Macro). 

I've read some reviews and googled for some other thoughts about them, and well, I'm not too impressed by the reviews I've read...

Most shops I've checked for reviews didn't have any written by customers, Sigma's description looks (obviously) very nice...

On one forum I found googling they said that the 2X one was pretty bad compared to the 1.4X one...

Did anyone here have any experience with these converters?

I live in Spain, and the price on the internet, including sending costs, is around 250 euros for the 2X one... 


- Is there anything better (400mm) that I could get for that price?


My camera is a Canon EOS 400D.


PS: I hope I've posted this in the correct section, if not... sorry mods :blushing:
PS2: Oops, I just saw that I indeed posted this in the wrong section... arg... I shouldn't study and post on forums at the same time... sorry mods


----------



## darich (Feb 19, 2007)

I used to own a Jessops 2x TC. I found that after upgrading my lenses to the L series i now have, the poorer quality of the TC was quite evident.

I then decided that after spending several thousand pounds on a Canon 20D, 24-70 L f2.8 and a 70-200 L f2.8 that using a £65 TC was simply silly.
I also found myself not using it too much.
I eventually sold it.

I'm not familiar with the Sigma but i'd reckon that unless it's quite expensive then you'll possibly find yourself in that position i was in. Nice camera and lenses with cheap equipment in the middle. I'd also suspect that you'll lose autofocus unless you're using a lens with aperture around f2.8. Once you go to around f3 or smaller autofocus doesn't work

And your gear is only as good as the worst component.


----------



## Ockie (Feb 19, 2007)

Thanks for your reply darich.
As for the price: it is around 220 euros, which is around 150-170 pounds. 
About loosing AF: on the Sigma site it says it doesn't loose it at all... a brief description I found is on dpreview:
the review


----------



## fmw (Feb 19, 2007)

The 1.4X TC's are always noticeably better than the 2X optically, regardless of brand.  Every time.  No exceptions.


----------



## lostprophet (Feb 20, 2007)

I used to have the Sigma EX 70-200mm F2.8 and the Sigma 1.4x and didn't have any problems with image quality


----------



## Alex_B (Feb 20, 2007)

Kenko Teleplus PRO 1.4x ... the way to go with Canon cameras IMHO.

I would not waste my money with any 2.0x converter. the quality is not much better than blowing up a smaller image with photoshop by a factor of 2.


----------



## darich (Feb 21, 2007)

Alex_B said:


> Kenko Teleplus PRO 1.4x ... the way to go with Canon cameras IMHO.
> 
> I would not waste my money with any 2.0x converter. the quality is not much better than blowing up a smaller image with photoshop by a factor of 2.



Alex

do you have any experience with this TC?
Since i've gone full frame DSLR i might consider a TC if the optics were good since i have a high end camera (Canon 5D) and L quality lenses.
Why is it your opinion? do you have one?
thanks?


----------



## Alex_B (Feb 21, 2007)

darich said:


> do you have any experience with this TC?
> Since i've gone full frame DSLR i might consider a TC if the optics were good since i have a high end camera (Canon 5D) and L quality lenses.
> Why is it your opinion? do you have one?
> thanks?


 
I have that Kenko TC for my 300mm 4/L on my Canon 5D.

Unfortunately I have not used it "out there" for some real-world shooting. I only got it beginning of this year ispired by some tests I read where it was competing well against other TCs. All I did so far were indoor tests and those seemed rather convincing.

You have to be careful though as there are two different Kenkos 1.4x I think, the old ones are good, but the new one is supposed to be better.

From my tests (which I cannot post since that laptop-harddrive died 2 weeks ago  ) I remember that you can feel (see) you are using a TC with the aperture fully open, in particular in towards the corners, but also central sharpness. But stopped down only slightly, it became very good.
I also tested it in combination with a close-up lens and for static objects it appeard a useable macro combination with the 5D.

Maybe I get a chance for some new tests in March (I am pretty much booked out by other deadlines at the moment ... ), or even real-world photography. So if you are not in a hurry to buy it, just let me know and I can send you samples then.

Oh, and to mention: in that tests I read (German I am afraid), that Kenko TC was way better with L opics on a 5 D than any Canon TC.


----------



## darich (Feb 21, 2007)

Alex_B said:


> I have that Kenko TC for my 300mm 4/L on my Canon 5D.
> 
> Unfortunately I have not used it "out there" for some real-world shooting. I only got it beginning of this year ispired by some tests I read where it was competing well against other TCs. All I did so far were indoor tests and those seemed rather convincing.
> 
> ...



Thanks Alex

I'm in no hurry but have considered one for a little while now. Waiting another couple of months is no big deal. I'd really appreciate it if you could either post some sample shots or email them to me. Any chance of sending them full size with no processing?

If i get impatient before then i might just go buy one and post the results myself....but until i do that i'll keep an eye out for yours!

cheers
David


----------



## darich (Feb 21, 2007)

Apart from the obvious difference in cost what is the difference between this teleconverter and this one

The cheaper one is less than half the price of the more expensive one. Is it like buying a lens and buying an L lens?


----------



## Ockie (Feb 22, 2007)

Alex_B said:


> Kenko Teleplus PRO 1.4x ... the way to go with Canon cameras IMHO.



I can't dint the Kenko Teleplus converters on any spanish shop, the only one i can find that seems to be quite good is this one.



> I would not waste my money with any 2.0x converter. the quality is not much better than blowing up a smaller image with photoshop by a factor of 2.


Does anyone have any pictures to compare to?



This is a quote from that review site... 


> These digitally optimized tele-converters employ the latest lens coating technology to reduce both flare and ghosting. A combination of these dedicated tele-converters and specific DG lenses ensure the best possible performance. The new special design maintains the master lens high-level of performance while extending its focal length.


----------



## Alex_B (Feb 22, 2007)

darich said:


> Apart from the obvious difference in cost what is the difference between this teleconverter and this one
> 
> The cheaper one is less than half the price of the more expensive one. Is it like buying a lens and buying an L lens?


 
the first:  Kenko 1,5x Teleplus MC DG : follow up model of the SHQ

the second: [FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Kenko 1,4x Teleplus PRO 300 DG: following Kenko similar to the first one, but with "better optical quality" .. also multicoated, 30 g or so heavier.[/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][/FONT] 
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]in tests the second more expensive one shows considerably less vignetting on the 5D[/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][/FONT] 
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]But both are better than the Canon TC in terms of corner sharpness and vignetting.[/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][/FONT] 
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Here is a test, unfortunately German only, but it shows the combination of (among other combinations) your camera, with your lens, and various TCs[/FONT]
http://www.traumflieger.de/desktop/telekonverter/konvertertest2.php


----------



## Alex_B (Feb 22, 2007)

Ockie said:


> I can't dint the Kenko Teleplus converters on any spanish shop, the only one i can find that seems to be quite good is this one.
> 
> Does anyone have any pictures to compare to?
> 
> ...


 
again, German only, but the images speak for themselves:

http://www.traumflieger.de/objektivtest/telekonverter/telekonverter_check.php


----------



## fmw (Feb 24, 2007)

Maybe this will set you at ease. The original exposure was made with a Tamron 1.4X teleconverter behind a 300mm f4 ED Nikkor lens (equivalent to Canon's L.) The newspaper page was included in its entirety from left to right in the frame. So you can imagine how much of a blow up this image of the lower right corner of the frame is.


----------



## Ockie (Feb 24, 2007)

Thanks for posting...

I think I'm going to just save up some more money for another lens, I'll probably get more use out of a different lens (no telezoom) or from a decent flash.
I've been thinking about the teleconverter a bit more and I'm glad I asked here before buying anything...

I'm going to try to get a "job" on a golf course as photographer for the price giving ceremony's at tournaments, what would mean making photo's of the tournaments that are held there once or twice a month, with some months without any tournaments at all (currently they take the photo's with a small camera... looks quite ugly in their magazine, so I guess they might like my idea ...). 
My 200mm will do fine on the course itself, while the 18-55 won't be good enough for the price giving thing afterwards since its normally dark / not enough light.
Oh well, since its still just a hobby for me I won't worry too much about it, if I'm able to get the spot on the tournament thing and they are going to pay me I'll see what I'll buy


----------

