The APO 2X Extender

[farnz]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I like the idea but the APO version is expensive. More than some really good older R lenses.

 

Are the really that much better than the earlier standard extenders?

Yes, no comparison. I owned a non-APO for a short while but ditched it when I borrowed an APO and saw the difference. I wouldn't consider using a non-APO now; the APO extenders are not cheap but then high quality rarely is.

 

Pete.

[robert_parker]

Yes, no comparison. I owned a non-APO for a short while but ditched it when I borrowed an APO and saw the difference. I wouldn't consider using a non-APO now; the APO extenders are not cheap but then high quality rarely is.

 

Pete.

 

Couldn't agree more - the 1,4 APO and the 2 x APO are both excellent, especially when used this the 180 2,8 APO, 280 f4 and similar lenses.

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[jaapv]

However, in this day and age the use of an extender must be questioned. On slide film it is obvious, it will narrow the framing. On film for print and low resolution sensors it is useful if the quality of the extender ( which is related to the quality of the lens) can exceed the quality of a cropped image. The Apo-extenders can certainly do that.

But an extender vs a crop on a 24 MP sensor.? An optical addition better than a 12 MP crop? Highly doubtful, even with the absolute top in extenders, as the Apos are.

And when we consider that a 2x extender will increase camera shake fourfold (and a 1.4x one doubles it) through loss of shutterspeed, I think the contest is irrevocably won by the crop.

[naturephoto1]

So it does,it serves a number of prominent long lenses.

 

If you are asking about the 1.4X Apo extender, it was initially designed for the 280mm f2.8 lens. As Robert Parker has indicated it also works with some of the 180 2,8 APO, 280 f4 and similar lenses. It works with the 400mm f2.8 Apo Telyt lens, the entire modular system, the 400mm f6.8 and 560mm f6.8 telyt lens. I believe that it will work with the 400mm f5.6 and 560mm f5.6 telyt lenses, 28-90 mm f/2.8-4.5 zoom, and the 105-280 mm f/4.2 zoom.

 

Rich

[naturephoto1]

However, in this day and age the use of an extender must be questioned. On slide film it is obvious, it will narrow the framing. On film for print and low resolution sensors it is useful if the quality of the extender ( which is related to the quality of the lens) can exceed the quality of a cropped image. The Apo-extenders can certainly do that.

But an extender vs a crop on a 24 MP sensor.? An optical addition better than a 12 MP crop? Highly doubtful, even with the absolute top in extenders, as the Apos are.

And when we consider that a 2x extender will increase camera shake fourfold (and a 1.4x one doubles it) through loss of shutterspeed, I think the contest is irrevocably won by the crop.

 

Even in digital, the apo extenders are quite good.

 

Here are some examples taken with my Fuji X-E1 with my tripod mounted 280mm f4 Apo Telyt lens:

 

Taken with the 2X Apo extender and probably about 1/2 mile away.

 

Taken with the 2X Apo extender and probably about 1/2 mile away.

 

Taken with the 1.4X Apo extender and probably about 1/2 mile away.

 

I think that I could print all of these images to at least 24" and quite possibly 30" in length.

 

Images with the 2X extender were at f16 and f11 for the 1.4X extender with exposures of 1/10 or 1/20, or 1/13.

 

By the way, I think that the Apo extenders lose only about 10% performance or so with the 1.4X extender and about 20% performance with the 2X extender.

Edited September 4, 2013 by naturephoto1

[jaapv]

I'm not contesting that an image with an Apo-extender can be quite good, but I think a cropped image from the M will be better.12 MP is ample for whatever print size you consider.I've printed M8 images up to 1m wide with good success.

[k-hawinkler]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Unnecessary cropping seems a waste of pixel resource to me.

If one is only interested in the innermost parts of a frame why not choose a camera that has most of its pixels concentrated there?

To me that suggests using a camera with a crop factor before adding one or more extenders.

Luckily sensors in cameras with crop factors of 1.5x or even 2x are quite competitive with those in FF cameras.

Exceptions are primarily fast events in dimly lit scenes.

Here the top of the line Canikons seem to be second to none.

[naturephoto1]

Unnecessary cropping seems a waste of pixel resource to me.

If one is only interested in the innermost parts of a frame why not choose a camera that has most of its pixels concentrated there?

To me that suggests using a camera with a crop factor before adding one or more extenders.

Luckily sensors in cameras with crop factors of 1.5x or even 2x are quite competitive with those in FF cameras.

Exceptions are primarily fast events in dimly lit scenes.

Here the top of the line Canikons seem to be second to none.

 

Sometimes even the cropped sensor cameras are insufficient thus as above I used the Fujifilm X-E1 with both the 2X Apo Extenders and the 1.4X apo extenders. Moving was not an option as I was shooting from one hilltop to another.

 

Rich

[jaapv]

Unnecessary cropping seems a waste of pixel resource to me.

If one is only interested in the innermost parts of a frame why not choose a camera that has most of its pixels concentrated there?

To me that suggests using a camera with a crop factor before adding one or more extenders.

Luckily sensors in cameras with crop factors of 1.5x or even 2x are quite competitive with those in FF cameras.

Exceptions are primarily fast events in dimly lit scenes.

Here the top of the line Canikons seem to be second to none.

Other cameras have nothing to do with it.The pixel count is just a number. I am talking about the final image quality. Do I get a better image using an extender on an M or is the image quality better when I crop the image down using the lens without extender? That has nothing to do with using a NEX, a cellphone or whatever, it has to do with the question whether an extender is meaningful on the same high-pixel count sensor.

 

The other question, the one you are raising , is whether it is better to use an extender on a large sensor camera or to use the lens without extender on a cropped sensor camera. That depends on the image quality of the smaller sensor camera, but if that is (nearly) as good as the large sensor camera, it is likely the smaller sensor will win out over the extender.

 

So in both cases the use of an extender is doubtful.

 

If you mount the extender again on the smaller sensor camera, obviously the argument shifts to an even smaller camera.

 

So it appears that the answer to the point I raised is don't use an extender, crop. ( or use another camera( or another lens, for that matter)).

Edited September 5, 2013 by jaapv

[stuny]

One advantage of the extender vs. the crop is that the extender is more WYSIWYG for distant subjects, and easier to focus in those situations.

[jaapv]

And do use an extender to get even closer by cropping the extended image

[algrove]

Good discussion.

 

Choices (Leica only since this is LUF and I do not care about NEX/iphone or any other brand until they offer a small FF with interchangeable lenses and allow M & R lens use)

 

1.So go FF and crop.

2.Extend and try not to crop.

3.Extend and crop.

[jaapv]

Yes - and I suspect that on a high-pixelcount sensor option 1 is superior to option 2, unless you want to make some crazy-sized print. Now we need proof...

[algrove]

I am currently finding an easy size to print with the M is 20x30" and that is even sending it via internet in jpeg form. I like to hand deliver, but most do not want to bother with Tiff anymore around here which is my preferred file format.

[naturephoto1]

Though used with film, the following were shot with the 800mm f5.6 Modular Apo Telyt lens used with the 1.4X Apo Extender in 1998:

 

https://sphotos-b-iad.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-frc3/579894_399338456794772_1313985014_n.jpg

Great Blue Heron Image taken on Fujichrome Provia 100 or Astia 100 and at some distance.

 

https://sphotos-a-iad.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-frc1/420090_401692049892746_1471887390_n.jpg

Least Bittern (female?) Image taken on Fujichrome Provia 100 and relatively near distance.

 

Rich

[johnbuckley]

Thanks for all this information. Very, very helpful.

 

In answer to Jaap's question: we are going to Botswana, but not until next August.

 

And having read everyone's point of view, I actually think the suggestion to simply crop my images (if needed) makes sense. Again, I am new to being able to use long lenses with the M. This last summer, I was able to get very satisfactory images of moose and other game at a long distance, and where there was too much landscape and too little moose, cropped to good effect.

 

I may get the extender as well. I think that rather than spending money on a longer lens, I'll apply that money to the ferociously expensive invoice for the safari. Thank you, all -- and especially Jaap's and Stu, whose safari images I have enjoyed over the years.

[masjah]

One point to bear in mind when using the 2X Apo Extender is the effect it has on the focus "gearing" of the lens. When I use it with my 280/4, it makes the focus very critical, in that the slightest movement of the focus ring has a big effect on the focus. As it happens my own work is with largely static subjects, so I put my R9 on a tripod, stick on the right-angle viewfinder, and use its magnification facility to help me. No doubt younger and more skilled hands could do much better though.

[jaapv]

Thanks for all this information. Very, very helpful.

 

In answer to Jaap's question: we are going to Botswana, but not until next August.

 

And having read everyone's point of view, I actually think the suggestion to simply crop my images (if needed) makes sense. Again, I am new to being able to use long lenses with the M. This last summer, I was able to get very satisfactory images of moose and other game at a long distance, and where there was too much landscape and too little moose, cropped to good effect.

 

I may get the extender as well. I think that rather than spending money on a longer lens, I'll apply that money to the ferociously expensive invoice for the safari. Thank you, all -- and especially Jaap's and Stu, whose safari images I have enjoyed over the years.

Botswana in August? Take a sweater.

[algrove]

Botswana in August? Take a sweater.

 

Should be fun John.

Edited September 6, 2013 by algrove

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[johnbuckley]

Botswana in August? Take a sweater.

 

 

Yes, and we will.