Professional Web Applications Themes

Sigma 70-300mm f/4-5.6 DL Macro Super II with teleconverter - Photography

I am getting a Sigma 70-300mm f/4-5.6 DL Macro Super II. Wondering if anyone's using a teleconverter on it with satisfactory results? Now, I know that this is not as good as the APO but from what I read it seems to do a decent job for the price. But not sure it will yield good results with a teleconverter. If you are satisfied with this lens + a telecon then please let me know what teleconverter are you using alongwith a few sample shots. Thanks, Siddhartha...

  1. #1

    Default Sigma 70-300mm f/4-5.6 DL Macro Super II with teleconverter

    I am getting a Sigma 70-300mm f/4-5.6 DL Macro Super II. Wondering if
    anyone's using a teleconverter on it with satisfactory results?

    Now, I know that this is not as good as the APO but from what I read it
    seems to do a decent job for the price. But not sure it will yield good
    results with a teleconverter.

    If you are satisfied with this lens + a telecon then please let me know
    what teleconverter are you using alongwith a few sample shots.
    Thanks,

    Siddhartha

    Siddhartha Guest

  2. #2

    Default Re: Sigma 70-300mm f/4-5.6 DL Macro Super II with teleconverter


    "Siddhartha Jain" <co.uk> wrote in message
    news:googlegroups.com... 

    I have the cheaper Sigma 70-300 4-5.6 and my only comments are after talking
    to the Ritz store manager: Don't use a 2x, as already discussed in earlier
    threads this past weekend. Autofocus does not work beyond the the 200mm
    range. Manual focus will not produce sharp results, and will be very
    "grainy". I returned it am now looking for a Canon 1.4x with a money back
    satisfaction guarantee.


    Toomanyputters Guest

  3. #3

    Default Re: Sigma 70-300mm f/4-5.6 DL Macro Super II with teleconverter

    Toomanyputters wrote: 
    talking 
    earlier 
    200mm 
     
    back 
    And how is the lens without a teleconverter?

    - Siddhartha

    Siddhartha Guest

  4. #4

    Default Re: Sigma 70-300mm f/4-5.6 DL Macro Super II with teleconverter


    "Siddhartha Jain" <co.uk> wrote in message
    news:googlegroups.com... 
    > talking 
    > earlier 
    > 200mm 

    > back 
    > And how is the lens without a teleconverter?
    >
    > - Siddhartha[/ref]

    I think it is very good. I shoot a lot of birds in motion and I find
    nothing wrong with it. 


    Toomanyputters Guest

  5. #5

    Default Re: Sigma 70-300mm f/4-5.6 DL Macro Super II with teleconverter

    Toomanyputters wrote: 
     
    Got any images online? Thanks for the feedback.

    - Siddhartha

    Siddhartha Guest

  6. #6

    Default Re: Sigma 70-300mm f/4-5.6 DL Macro Super II with teleconverter

    In message <I%vLd.63928$southeast.rr.com>,
    "Toomanyputters" <com> wrote:
     

    Teleconverters can't make images "grainy". Maybe what you mean is that
    grain (film) or noise (digital) is the only high-frequency component in
    the image when the optics are too soft. They are *always* there, sharp
    focus or not.
    --

    <>>< ><<> ><<> <>>< ><<> <>>< <>>< ><<>
    John P Sheehy <komm> 
    JPS@no.komm Guest

  7. #7

    Default Re: Sigma 70-300mm f/4-5.6 DL Macro Super II with teleconverter

    On Mon, 31 Jan 2005 19:52:08 GMT, in rec.photo.digital.slr-systems
    "Toomanyputters" <com> wrote:
     

    Very incorrect generalization. I use a Nikon TC-20EII with a Nikon 70-200mm
    f/2.8 VR lens on my D70 with very good results. Examples cane be seen at
    http://edwardgruf.com/Digital_Photography/D70/misc/index.html
    top right two and bottom three all taken with this combo handheld.
    ----------
    Ed Ruf Lifetime AMA# 344007 (Ruf.com)
    See images taken with my CP-990/5700 & D70 at
    http://edwardgruf.com/Digital_Photography/General/index.html
    Ed Guest

  8. #8

    Default Re: Sigma 70-300mm f/4-5.6 DL Macro Super II with teleconverter


    <komm> wrote in message
    news:com... 
    >
    > Teleconverters can't make images "grainy". Maybe what you mean is that
    > grain (film) or noise (digital) is the only high-frequency component in
    > the image when the optics are too soft. They are *always* there, sharp
    > focus or not.
    > --[/ref]
    Yea, that's what I meant. But I stand by what I said about AF not working
    correctly beyond 200mm on the Sigma. Maybe I should not have commented at
    all, since I used a cheaper 2x on a cheaper Sigma. But having read the
    earlier comments using a 2x converter, I was experienceing most of those
    problems. Now I see follow ups with those of you having great success with
    these converters.


    Toomanyputters Guest

Similar Threads

  1. Sigma 28-80/macro not working with EOS 10D
    By DagH in forum Photography
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: July 18th, 12:22 PM
  2. Replies: 20
    Last Post: July 16th, 04:05 AM
  3. Sigma 50mm Macro problems
    By Graham in forum Photography
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: July 10th, 12:54 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139