Telephoto vs Teleconverters

PhotoAnt · 9th August 2004

Hi, would like to find out the pros and cons of using teleconverters vs super-telephotos/telephotos. Other than the degrading of aperture, are there any other optical losses.

Otherwise it seems to make sense to carry a 200mm + 2x converter than to buy and carry a 400mm f5.6 super-tele.

Would appreciate your inputs.

nightpiper · 9th August 2004

beside aperture loss, there is resolution loss, detail loss, sharpness loss & colour degration. if you use very low end cheap brand teleconvertors, you will see a lot of CA & colour very yucky. many people will just stick to 1.4x as they find the degration of 2x too hard too swallow.

also common sense tells you that if 2x teleconvertors are as good as prime telephoto lenses, manufacturer will not make big telephoto & convertors will be very popular.

hope that clears some air.

btw, heard there r 3x convertors as well in case you r keen.

9th August 2004	#1
PhotoAnt New Member Join Date: Jul 2004 Posts: 48	Telephoto vs Teleconverters Hi, would like to find out the pros and cons of using teleconverters vs super-telephotos/telephotos. Other than the degrading of aperture, are there any other optical losses. Otherwise it seems to make sense to carry a 200mm + 2x converter than to buy and carry a 400mm f5.6 super-tele. Would appreciate your inputs.

9th August 2004	#2
nightpiper Member Join Date: Oct 2003 Posts: 1,798	beside aperture loss, there is resolution loss, detail loss, sharpness loss & colour degration. if you use very low end cheap brand teleconvertors, you will see a lot of CA & colour very yucky. many people will just stick to 1.4x as they find the degration of 2x too hard too swallow. also common sense tells you that if 2x teleconvertors are as good as prime telephoto lenses, manufacturer will not make big telephoto & convertors will be very popular. hope that clears some air. btw, heard there r 3x convertors as well in case you r keen.