Jump to content

SIGMA TELE CONVERTER TC-1411 / TC-2011


Iainho70
 Share

Recommended Posts

  • 3 weeks later...
vor 8 Stunden schrieb jaapv:

It will certainly transfer weight from your camera bag to your wallet.... :lol:

True.

The Sigma 100-400 and 1.4 TC are ordered.

Delivery will take two weeks. 

In the meantime, I’m looking forward to more sample photos from you guys!

Edited by anickpick
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...
  • 2 months later...
  • 4 months later...

I'm coming at this from the opposite direction as Paolou Pigini -- I possess the 105 2.8 macro, and am now intrigued at the possibility of this 2x converter; it would save me the cost and weight of a dedicated long lens. I'm posting here partly because I want to keep track of this conversation, and see what experience people have. On the one hand, reducing my 2.8 to 5.6 is not optimal; on the other, my new SL2-S is very capable at higher ISOs, and in any case I typically use tele lenses in daylight. I have just discovered that the converter is available at Lensrentals, so it is now on its way to me -- arrives Thursday 11th. I'll come back and post my impressions and some photographs when I've had a chance to test it.

Edited by JulianHalliday
Link to post
Share on other sites

On 8/8/2020 at 5:51 PM, tritentrue said:

Now that you mention it, I see that the MC-11 also has this printed on it and it works well with Canon lenses . . .

And I've just tried the TC-1411 with the Lumix S Pro 70-200mm f/4 and it works well, so maybe there's hope . . . 

This is getting interesting. Any experience with the Lumix S PRO 70-200mm f/2.8 O.I.S and the DMW-STC14 Lumix S 1.4x Teleconverter on an SL2-Whatever?

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

On 3/9/2021 at 7:55 PM, JulianHalliday said:

I'm coming at this from the opposite direction as Paolou Pigini -- I possess the 105 2.8 macro, and am now intrigued at the possibility of this 2x converter; it would save me the cost and weight of a dedicated long lens. I'm posting here partly because I want to keep track of this conversation, and see what experience people have. On the one hand, reducing my 2.8 to 5.6 is not optimal; on the other, my new SL2-S is very capable at higher ISOs, and in any case I typically use tele lenses in daylight. I have just discovered that the converter is available at Lensrentals, so it is now on its way to me -- arrives Thursday 11th. I'll come back and post my impressions and some photographs when I've had a chance to test it.

I've been using this combo for a few months now. What would you use it for? 

If I can help... 

 

Paolo

Link to post
Share on other sites

Paolou, I've just received my rental teleconverter. I've taken a few shots and am going to organize them and post them here. My use for this combo -- or a 200mm lens generally -- will be for wildlife and occasional sports. My immediate impression of the photos I've taken is that the results are very soft compared to the unaugmented 105 lens. I know that focus was correct, and the shutter speeds appropriate -- it just seems much less crisp than I'd hoped. I will continue to experiment when I have a chance. But has your experience been good, in general? It's a good length and, as noted in this thread, the weight and cost saving would be considerable compared to a dedicated long lens. But if the image quality is as compromised as my initial tests indicate, then the compromise won't be worth it to me. I'm withholding judgment pending further shooting.

Link to post
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, JulianHalliday said:

Paolou, I've just received my rental teleconverter. I've taken a few shots and am going to organize them and post them here. My use for this combo -- or a 200mm lens generally -- will be for wildlife and occasional sports. My immediate impression of the photos I've taken is that the results are very soft compared to the unaugmented 105 lens. I know that focus was correct, and the shutter speeds appropriate -- it just seems much less crisp than I'd hoped. I will continue to experiment when I have a chance. But has your experience been good, in general? It's a good length and, as noted in this thread, the weight and cost saving would be considerable compared to a dedicated long lens. But if the image quality is as compromised as my initial tests indicate, then the compromise won't be worth it to me. I'm withholding judgment pending further shooting.

My experience is that even the best 2x tele converters will give you soft results. Over the years for my wildlife work I've used some of the best TC's,  2x Leica R APO, 2x Zeiss Mutarll & the latest 2x Canon lll. They all yield softish results, some more so than others.

99.9% of the time I stay with a 1.4x converter & there's virtually no perceptible IQ loss. I have the Sigma 1.4x which I use with the 100-400mm L & the Canon lll 1.4x which use on the SL2 with the Canon 400mm f4 DO USMll & MC-21 adapter. 

Another factor to consider is that there appears to be shutter slap with these cameras,  which affects IQ & sharpness. It's always best to use the electronic shutter when using long lenses. 

Have a look at my posts #116 & #117 here: 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, JulianHalliday said:

Paolou, I've just received my rental teleconverter. I've taken a few shots and am going to organize them and post them here. My use for this combo -- or a 200mm lens generally -- will be for wildlife and occasional sports. My immediate impression of the photos I've taken is that the results are very soft compared to the unaugmented 105 lens. I know that focus was correct, and the shutter speeds appropriate -- it just seems much less crisp than I'd hoped. I will continue to experiment when I have a chance. But has your experience been good, in general? It's a good length and, as noted in this thread, the weight and cost saving would be considerable compared to a dedicated long lens. But if the image quality is as compromised as my initial tests indicate, then the compromise won't be worth it to me. I'm withholding judgment pending further shooting.

Personally I am satisfied with the image quality, seems to me as good as it can be with a TC2x, and also AF doesn't slow down that much. In the future I'll consider using it also with a supertele prime such as an hypothetical Sigma 300 2.8. 

Main issues with the combo 105+2x are the slowness of autofocus of the macro lens itself and the reduced versatility. 

If you don't need to reach the 2:1 reproduction ratio with the macro you may consider instead the new Panasonic 70-300, at least it's what I would do. 

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Michali, Paolou, many thanks for your helpful comments. I will certainly give the 1.4x a try -- 150mm should be ample for most things I'd want to do. I shot some more yesterday, with and without tripod, and at first blush the results were more satisfactory. The thing seems to work best around f11 (indicated by camera, not on the 105). I think I'll define a profile that uses electronic shutter only and a 1/200 minimum shutter speed, see how that goes. And I'll look into that Panasonic lens -- I have noticed it, but never looked at it seriously.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...