Zitting Cisticola (Cisticola juncidis, 110 mm total length)
Canon 5D MII + EF 400 2.8 L IS + Canon 2x TC II, 800 mm, f/8, ISO 200, 1/500 sec, manual exposure in available light, bean bag.
Liquidstone wrote:
Surprisingly good IQ from the 120-300 OS + 2x, Paul. The brightness, optics, OS and framing flexibility makes this glass very tempting. Is your copy the newest version?
I'm very happy with the combo. My Sigma 120-300 is not the newest, sports version, but is the previous OS version. I don't think there is much wrong with the optics in the version I have, but faster AF and an AF limiter would be very welcome so the sports version maybe a really super bit of kit.
Lan11 wrote:
I'm a little disappointed. I was expecting a great tit, better yet - a pair.
Adding a doubler would make them even bigger and more impressive : -)
Not being a birder, I'd swear it is a chickadee.
Sorry to create unfulfilled expectations!
Petkal wrote:
I think you are getting excellent results from your lens + TC......the combo looks like a keeper.
Thanks for the comment Petkal, I certainly intend to keep the lens and TC for a good while yet!
Here's one of my favourite 2x tele-extended combos in action again: 300 f/2.8 IS MkII + 2xTC MkIII, on 1DX.
Although the combo is surprisingly nimble for 2xTC, I find it less than ideal for shooting small and erratically flying Common terns. I guess, if I was an expert, then all that would be a piece of cake for me.
PetKal wrote:
Here's one of my favourite 2x tele-extended combos in action again: 300 f/2.8 IS MkII + 2xTC MkIII, on 1DX.
Although the combo is surprisingly nimble for 2xTC, I find it less than ideal for shooting small and erratically flying Common terns. I guess, if I was an expert, then all that would be a piece of cake for me.
Peter, does your 300 have the updated firmware?
Off to a shoot, I'll check for an answer later.
I think that original quote was from a Nikon user, I don't think their 2x is as good as canons. I have no issues with the 2x on the new 600. I've even had good results stacking the 1.4x and 2x in the right conditions.
in terms of birding, i've had more success with the 2x III extender on the 2.8 telephotos than I've had with the 2x III on my 500f4 for whatever reason, most likely because of the available light during the times i normally shoot if i had to guess.. as well as the aforementioned slowdown in focus acquisition speed
Photon wrote:
That goes double for me!
Or, instead of "+1" how about "2X"!
Thanks for the kind words, Jess!
kaycephoto wrote:
in terms of birding, i've had more success with the 2x III extender on the 2.8 telephotos than I've had with the 2x III on my 500f4 for whatever reason, most likely because of the available light during the times i normally shoot if i had to guess.. as well as the aforementioned slowdown in focus acquisition speed
Well done, Kayce.... like in Peter's samples, the bokeh on the first is nice.
Both tern images very nice, the second is over the top because of the terrestrial background. You're the master of hand held BIF shooting Peter! Just curious, did you ever have days when you're at a loss on which big white to use?
Liquidstone wrote:
Both tern images very nice, the second is over the top because of the terrestrial background. You're the master of hand held BIF shooting Peter! Just curious, did you ever have days when you're at a loss on which big white to use?
Thank you, Romy. The overlapping between those lenses is huge, yet each one has some distinctive traits which can be used for selection. For example, in low light or challenging BIF targets, I will normally choose f/2.8 or even f/2 lenses. If anticipated BIF activity is intense, I might opt for 400 DO or 400 f/5.6 lens for ease of handholding.
Here's a massive BIF target where 300 f/2.8 IS MkII + 2xTC MkIII performs with ease.
PetKal wrote:
Thank you, Romy. The overlapping between those lenses is huge, yet each one has some distinctive traits which can be used for selection. For example, in low light or challenging BIF targets, I will normally choose f/2.8 or even f/2 lenses. If anticipated BIF activity is intense, I might opt for 400 DO or 400 f/5.6 lens for ease of handholding.
Here's a massive BIF target where 300 f/2.8 IS MkII + 2xTC MkIII performs with ease.
The captured detail on this one is staggering..... I don't think a TC-less 600 5.6 can do much better as far as sharpness is concerned.
Romy, the MkII lenses do work very well with MkIII TCs, both IQ and AF, without exception.
As a result I have become a true convert and a believer into a major usefulness of MkIIII TCs.
Let me conclude the 300 f/2.8 IS MkII + 2xTC MkIII series with another tern shot.
Art Morris, who is a pretty famous wildlife/bird photographer, swears by the 2x TCs on his super teles. If I had a fast, big tele I would own and use a 2x on it.
A closer look at the 2 mm wide bug - 40D + 100 2.8 macro + Sigma 2x TC + 37 mm ET, 0.60 sec, f/9, ISO 160, MF via Live View, manual exposure in available light (no flash), geared head/tripod:
These tiny 'pet' Hummers are a decent test for this sort of thing. Here are a few recent shots using the 1DX + 500mm II + 2X III. Cropped from near MFD size.
