Should you buy a Teleconverter?

Do you already own a teleconverter...if so which one and how often do you use it?

I got joined by the wallet to Canon in 2004 when I went ‘all in” with a 8MP 20D with EF-S 10-22mm, 24-70 mm 2.8 L and 70-200mm 2.8L and a pair of 580ex flashes I used for non-professional PJ shooting for my church and at work when photo were needed. I last upgraded to a 15MP 50D in 2008 because it and my good glass more met may needs until last year when I decided to photograph bird and other small animals. My first step was to buy a 2X converter for the 70-200mm not expecting the IQ to be stellar but on par with a 200mm capture cropped and resized with some Photoshop mojo until Canon released the R6mkII which checked off all boxes for me. I initially used the R6mkII with my EF lenses to see how the added megapixels would affect results, using the Canon EF-RF adapter for stills and Meike VND adapter for Clog3 video. I then decided to buy the RF100-500mm, RF 800mm f/11 and most recently added a second R6mkII body. If planning to shoot only stills I carry the two R6mkll with the 100-500mm and 800mm. If planning on shooting stills and video I’ll use the 100-500mm on one body and used the Meike VND adapter and either the EF 24mm-70mm or EF 70-200mm. I don’t use the 2x converter with the 70-200mm unless I’m shooting video from a tripod. The EF-S 10-22mm mostly lives on the 50D for wide establishing shots but I have used it on the R6mkII with Meike VND for cropped 1080p videos. I started doing PJ work in 1971 with a pair of Nikon Fs with 35mm and 85mm lens suspended a strap attached just the right side and set-up both my R6mkII bodies with Small Rig cages which have QD swivel socket on the bottom. I added Kirk feet with QD sockets to the 100-500mm and 800mm and bought two cross shoulder straps X with Kirk QD swivels. This set-up gives me the option to suspect the camera and lens from the bottom of the cage or with the RF lenses the QD connector on the foot. I find it actually more comfortable carrying two cameras on each hip than one because the weight is distributed evenly.

Your RF versus EF experience matches mine. I have the 100-500 and the 1.4 and only use that combo in full strong light on the R7. Otherwise it is on the R6 which has better ISO performance. It is also important to keep in mind that the combo can be perfectly sharp and in focus but the atmosphere between the shooter and target can dramatically soften an image. I think those who have never shot a long lens sometimes have unreasonable expectations.

Baie dankie Charl, puik aanbieding!!

Thanks Charl, good comparison information, stunning sample shots as ever !

Great video. I do like my 1.4x on the 100-500L/R7 combo although the focal length limitations can be frustrating. Obviously best in good light, but with a good noise reduction tools that extends the use even into lower light settings.

Another excellent video. I always think that if you have primes, you might just as well have the extenders for when you need more reach, but they are a lot less useful on zooms generally. My experience of extenders is confined to EF only, and I've never bothered to get an extender for the 100-500. I've been thinking about switching from my EF primes, and this video has made me consider switching to an RF400 rather than the RF600. It looks to be a more flexible option especially when used for larger animals and will be easier to travel with and to handle in the field. Food for (more) thought I think...

Spot on Charl. I married my R5 to the 100-500 while in Chobe 2 weeks ago. But most of the time, I had the 2x or 1.4x attached. Excellent combo. The R3 had my ef 500 with 1.4x attached for the majority of the trip. Stopped down and fast shutter was the key to success in both cases. Right now, we're planning on CDK this time next year, and I'm contemplating the Rf400 vs the Rf600. I am starting to lean toward the RF400 with the 2.8 for lower light and better backgrounds now that I know I can get the reach with the extenders. Again, thanks for the video. You and Walter are driving the 400 2.8 and that's a good enough recommendation for me. :)

I've owned the RF 1.4 teleconverter for two years now. I use it with the rf 800mm f11 in comination with either my R6 or R5 and find it works brilliantly. Pictures are still sharp and I do a lot of handheld photography.

Thank you very much for your suggestion!!!! I have purchased 2.0 converter- I will test them beforehand. Thank you for the tips!!! Hope everyone is doing well. Big hugs.

I really love watching your and pangolin gang videos. They are so precise and wonderful. Thanks for the informative video. My dream is to take one of your tours 😍

Hi Charles, excellent video many thanks. I have had the RF 1.4 extender for about two years and connected to my either R5 or R6 with the RF100-500m and I'm very happy with the results however, have been hesitating investing in the 2x variant until I have seen this video and your opinion . I'm looking forward to be with Pangolin in November for the Chobe,Delta & Kalahari trip and again in January for the Serengeti, Ndutu and Ngorongoro trip. Best Wishes, Bruce Gardner (South African but living in the UK)

A great video, particularly your tips at the end. I recently bought the EF 2x for my 70-200 on the R5. The RF lens are just too pricey at the present. I got the extender for shooting the whale migration off the south coast of Western Australia, and so far I’m pretty happy with the results, but your tips will definitely improve the results further. Again many thanks for the tips. 👍😁

Thank you

Well I will say yes.. depending on the F Stop on the lense One Has and low light capabilities in the camera body with high ISO.. I love mine Gives me good result

Hello, I enjoyed your presentation. Actually I’ve found every Pangolin video useful and entertaining. Some challenge me to think from another POV. To the point, I’ve used the 1.4 and 2.0 for years with my 5D and 5D III. However, I’ve also found using the same lens with my 7Ds quite satisfying.

I use the 1.4 teleconverter for my RF 100-500, and I love it

Great summary. I have the x1.4 on an R5 with the RF100-500 and mainly shoot birds. I never liked the x2 on the DLSRs and only used the x1.4 after a dalliance with a x2. I preferred the larger 50MP sensor of the 5Ds to allow enlargement of the image instead. Interesting you are using the R3; the higher MPs of the R5 would be better for birds and with using that the x2 may not be that necessary (I'm looking forward to the R5 Mk2 !!). To get good pics with a x2 on the R3 speaks a lot for the quality of the R system and I will reconsider getting a x2. On a separate note, I also use the cheapie RF800 and this is just an unbelievably good lens. OK, its only F11, but the R5 quality allows you to crank up the ISO with relative impunity and the light availability here in Oz (and I suspect with you) makes it quite viable. Its also very compact and light and I tend to have it on my hip ready to go whilst using the RF100-500.

Charl, Thank you for a very informative video. Request you to please inform whether the minimum focussing distance increases when using a 1.4 TC

Thank you for this very informative and very timely video. Pangolin has a wonderful history of covering topics that are of great importance to all of us in the wildlife photography community. I strongly agree that the Canon RF and Nikon Z mount lenses, that are compatible with their respective teleconverters, perform exceptionally well compared to my prior experiences on their DSLRs. It is unfortunate that in the design of the Canon RF 100-500 mm lens, the teleconverter can only be attached when the lens is zoomed to 300 mm or more. This has been a significant limitation for me, because I am often concerned about the risk of inadvertently damaging the lens in the field when I’m carrying it in the partially extended position. The combination works very well when I’m shooting from a hide or from my vehicle where the risk of inadvertently damaging the lens is significantly reduced.