Results 1 to 16 of 16

Thread: Stacking teles... which one first?

  1. #1
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    12,938

    Default Stacking teles... which one first?

    If I were to stack a 1.4x and 2x tele, which one should be attached to the camera body to minmise degradation in image quality?

  2. #2
    Senior Member Virgo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    West of Singapore
    Posts
    4,816

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by mpenza
    If I were to stack a 1.4x and 2x tele, which one should be attached to the camera body to minmise degradation in image quality?
    I think the 1.4x is a better choice. Anyone care to further comment on this?
    Kind Regards
    My Picture Website

  3. #3
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    Tampines
    Posts
    3,287

    Default

    I think what he meant was to use both. I think it is better to try both ways i.e. 1.4 then 2.0 and also 2.0 then 1.4 and do a couple of test shots and compare.

  4. #4

    Default

    Not sure, but I would say it depends on which TC is in better condition (or cleaner). Put the cleaner TC further from the body so that the dirt is not magnified.

  5. #5
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Singapore, Bedok
    Posts
    1,785

    Default

    i believe the 1.4x should be closer to the lens. You will be magnifying a lens+1.4x with a 2x, which seems better than magnifying a lens+2x image with a 1.4x. But i'm just guessing here. In fact, my guess is that your tripod won't be steady enough.

  6. #6
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    12,938

    Default

    thanks guys for your suggestions. will try out some day. I did test the "stack" previously with a 1.4x closer to the body (EF 100 macro usm used)... but I tried too many combinations (1.4x, 2x, 1.4x with B300, 2x with B300, stacked, stacked with B300) that I lost track which is which AF was ok with 1.4x + B300 and 2x + B300 but was significantly slower with stacked and stacked + B300.

    if I use a nonextending lens (e.g. 100mm macro usm), my 1.2kg "digital" tripod (slik sprint pro gm + manfrotto magnesium panhead) still can tahan
    Last edited by mpenza; 8th April 2004 at 10:55 AM.

  7. #7
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Catchment Area
    Posts
    2,441

    Default Too many pieces of glass

    Macro lens say 10 elements
    1.4x with 5 elements
    2.0x with 7 elements
    Total is a whopping 22 elements, 44 air/glass surface to reflect light. Light lost due to reflection is already 30 to 40%. Add all sorts of aberrations and the reduction in 3 stops, the poor light ray is not longer razor sharp, but look more like sotong.

    Good luck to you and the poor light ray that needs to meander thru' so many elements. Add that cropping factor of 1.5 if you're using dSLR.

    I thought the rule of the thumb is to add ONE teleconverter to a PRIME lens or else it's an utter waste of time and effort.

  8. #8
    Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    Northeast
    Posts
    1,226

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by smallaperture
    Macro lens say 10 elements
    1.4x with 5 elements
    2.0x with 7 elements
    Total is a whopping 22 elements, 44 air/glass surface to reflect light. Light lost due to reflection is already 30 to 40%. Add all sorts of aberrations and the reduction in 3 stops, the poor light ray is not longer razor sharp, but look more like sotong.

    Good luck to you and the poor light ray that needs to meander thru' so many elements. Add that cropping factor of 1.5 if you're using dSLR.

    I thought the rule of the thumb is to add ONE teleconverter to a PRIME lens or else it's an utter waste of time and effort.
    hehe, rules are meant to be broken

    By the way mpenza, what sort of magification did you end up getting? I'm also thinking of experimenting with extension tubes and telecovertors to get greater than lifesize using Nikon equipment...

  9. #9
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Catchment Area
    Posts
    2,441

    Default Break rules = penalty

    In photo, break rules = penalty of lower resolution, darker image in the viewfinder, AF hunting.... and unsatisfactory results and frustration. Maybe, a simple cropping might be better. Maybe, try it out and let us all know the results for everybody to learn from the experience and maybe, establish some new rule, new advice to some newbies.

    For me, I will stick to the few rules of the thumb. I apply some creativity to composition, lighting, angles etc.

  10. #10
    Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    East of Singapore
    Posts
    1,678

    Default

    it depends which brand of TCs are you using. Sigma only allow the 2X to be stacked to the lens first and the followed by the 1.4X to the body. Not the other way round
    http://www.avianwatchasia.org for some real bird photos
    My website : http://www.gorgeousfeathers.com

  11. #11
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Clementi
    Posts
    6,580

    Default

    Just a question.... can teleconvertors be stacked only on primes? What about telezooms?

  12. #12
    Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    Northeast
    Posts
    1,226

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by smallaperture
    In photo, break rules = penalty of lower resolution, darker image in the viewfinder, AF hunting.... and unsatisfactory results and frustration. Maybe, a simple cropping might be better. Maybe, try it out and let us all know the results for everybody to learn from the experience and maybe, establish some new rule, new advice to some newbies.

    For me, I will stick to the few rules of the thumb. I apply some creativity to composition, lighting, angles etc.
    In macrophotography, you wouldn't be using AF anyway and would be stopping down alot to gain DOF, so AF and small apertures aren't really a problem. John Shaw uses quite abit of creative usage of teleconvertors, extension tube and diopter lenses (sometimes all at once!), and has gotten good publishable images, so I believe it can be done, though I agree sometimes that cropping can be better.

  13. #13
    Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    Northeast
    Posts
    1,226

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by TME
    Just a question.... can teleconvertors be stacked only on primes? What about telezooms?
    You can try, but there's no guarantee of it working and that you are able to get acceptable images. I believe that for zooms, one should only try teleconvertors on the pro constant f2.8 zooms. A 1.4X results in f4, a 2X gives f5.6. A teleconvertor magnifies the image, as well as any flaws, chromatic aberrations etc, so one should only start with the best possible lens (usually a prime), to cut down on the flaws which will appear later.

  14. #14
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Singapore, Bedok
    Posts
    1,785

    Default

    If you're stacking on a zoom, watch out for moving rear element in the lens. They may fit when zoomed out, but hit the convertor zoomed back in.

  15. #15
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    12,938

    Default

    yup, good to test first by trying zooming and manual focussing through the entire range.

  16. #16
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Clementi
    Posts
    6,580

    Default

    I see, thanks! I'm looking at a 1.4x or 2x with a Minolta 100-400mm lens f/3.5 - 6.7

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •