RJ_or_Bust From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Posted (12 years 3 months 1 week 5 hours ago) and read 758 times:
I'm interested in buying a 2x teleconverter for my Canon Rebel 2000 to use with my 28-80mm & 75-300mm lenses. Here is where the question comes up...I don't want to spend much/any money for the converter and I have found manual focus teleconverters for under $20 dollars. I have no problem being confined to using MF with the converter as long as it saves me 100-200 dollars.
So, my question is this, will a cheap MF teleconverter work with a Rebel 2000? I have noticed that many of them say, "Compatible with Canon FD mount cameras." Does the Rebel 2000 have such a mount?
My second question is more specific. I'm looking at an Albinar-ADG Auto 2x Tele-Converter C/FD thats selling for $6 + shipping and would like to know if this would fit the Rebel 2000? Does anyone have one and if so would you recommend it. And does the auto mean it works with autofocus?
Thomasphoto60 From United States of America, joined Jan 2000, 3723 posts, RR: 25 Reply 1, posted (12 years 3 months 1 week 4 hours ago) and read 720 times:
Well it depends on if you want so-so, images or sharp, defined images. A $16-$20 teleconverter will deliver.....well there is really no nice way to put this..crap!
How fast is your lens ? if the max fstop is a f5.6 or higher, then in my opinion you are waisting your time with a teleconverter, no matter what the cost. These converters work best with large fast lenses, i.e. a 300mm f2.8 or f4, 400mm f2.8 ect...
To answer your question "Will a cheap MF teleconverter work with a Rebel 2000 ?" short answer...Yes, long answer, you will probably not be happy with the results. If you really want a teleconverter that badly, then get a hold of $200 or so dollars and buy Canon's AF 2x Converter. But even with this high quality converter, (as I said earlier) these work best with FAST lenses ! Sticking this(or any converter) on a 75-300 f5.6 (as far as I know all 3 of Canon's 75-300s are 5.6's) will at max zoom give you a 600mm f11....you better start thinking about shooting on very sunny days, with an iso film rating of no less than 200 (more like 400). I am sure there will be a few that will disagree with me, but I am speaking from experince. I suggest perhaps a Canon 300mmEF f4 telephoto($700-$1000 used) albeit a bit slow, you can use a teleconverter on this lens giving you a 600mm at f8, which is not too bad.
As my father use to say "You get what you paid for "
Mikephotos From United States of America, joined Oct 2000, 2923 posts, RR: 56 Reply 2, posted (12 years 3 months 1 week 4 hours ago) and read 719 times:
Just to add to Thomas' excellent reply, you'd probably be better off enlarging the image 2x with you PC than with a $6 2x teleconverter. The lens/glass is a very important part of quality photography, save your money and go for the "good stuff". If you can't afford the Canon line of converters, I hear the Kenko Pro 300's (not the normal line) work very well and the quality is up there with the Canon & Nikon TC's.
RJ_or_Bust From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 3, posted (12 years 3 months 1 week 4 hours ago) and read 712 times:
You are correct...Both lenses have a max fstop of 5.6 at full zoom. Although, the main reason I want the teleconverter is so I can get further away on bright days. For the not so nice days I plain on staying quite close but I would like the option to use different vantage points which would be possible with the teleconverter. A 600mm f11 doesn't sound very impressive to me like you say, but there is no way I can spend the kind of money a 300mmEF f4 costs. Hopefully in a couple of years it won't be a big deal when I'm riding left seat in my rj (*fingers crossed*) but until then I'm spending an exuberant amount of money to get there.
I'm really not going for the aw-inspiring airliners.net cover photo so sharpness isn't an increadibly huge deal to me. Don't get me wrong, I would love to have it but I just want to have a little fun and get out of the house so I can handle sub-standard photos for now. If you still think it's a bad idea please say so but I will still be happy with the results if I can get a decent photo out of 400iso or even 800iso.
Thomasphoto60 From United States of America, joined Jan 2000, 3723 posts, RR: 25 Reply 4, posted (12 years 3 months 1 week 2 hours ago) and read 711 times:
I can certainly understand being on a budget. And being in flight school is not at all cheap ( who are you training with COEX, AM Eagle ?..). Keep in mind that my reply as well as Mike's are from the working photographers perspective, as this is how we make our livings. I am certainly not saying not to go that route, but having photos accepted on this site is getting increasingly difficult and shooting with a medicore lens and film combination may not yeild the results that you hope to achieve.
Regardless, as long as you are having fun at what you are doing, then go for it.
I hope to see some of your work here one day. All the best,
RJ_or_Bust From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 5, posted (12 years 3 months 1 week 1 hour ago) and read 709 times:
Hi Again Thomas,
Right now I'm in a flight school with Mesa Airlines. After 15-19 months of flying your guaranteed an interview and 98% of the applicants get hired on as first officers to fly the BE1900D, Dash-8, CRJ-200, or the ERJ-145 (can you tell which two I'm hoping for?).
I hope I didn't come off sounding too abrasive in my last reply. I will take your's and Mike's advise very seriously. I guess I was just thinking too positive for the cheap lens to be ample for what I'm doing. If you guys think it's a waste I won't bother with it. But (ah yes, that dreaded, word), if I were to just use it in bright sun light (perfect conditions) do you think it would still be a waste?
Thomasphoto60 From United States of America, joined Jan 2000, 3723 posts, RR: 25 Reply 6, posted (12 years 3 months 1 week 1 hour ago) and read 712 times:
Don't sweat it, I certainly did not take your comments as abrasive in any way shape or form.
$15-20 is certainly cheap enough to play around and experiment with. With bright sunny conditions you may get some decent shots. One thing I forgot to mention though, I would suggest on some form of sturdy support..and as I believe these lenses do not have tripod collars, use of a tripod may not be the best answer. A car hood or top, as well as shooting from inside your car with your window rolled halfway down are some good alternatives, but make sure you have a steady hand though. Also bare in mind that using an MF converter on your EOS camera, you will lose most (if not all) automation, and then be forced to shoot in manual mode. If you are not use to photographing in manual mode, this can be a challange, again another reason to buy (when you can) a dedicated converter, preferebly a Canon or one of the better known brand 3rd market makers such as Tokina or Tamron. You might be able to pick something on EBAY.