Tamron 2x tc?

Nikolai

Was looking for a bit more reach for my Canon 40D/50D.
This tammy x2 is almost 3 times cheaper than original x2 canon counterpart ($94 vs $290). But naturally I'm concerned about the quality.
Anybody used both and can compare the results quality? :scratch

Manfr3d

I couldn't find any comarative reviews of the tamron 2x vs the rest, but
here is an interesting comparison of the kenko 2x, canon 2x and kenko 1.5x:

http://www.traumflieger.de/objektivtest/telekonverter/telekonverter_check.php

The Kenko is even cheaper than the Tamron afaik but performs like the canon.

Nikolai

Manfr3d wrote:

I couldn't find any comarative reviews of the tamron 2x vs the rest, but
here is an interesting comparison of the kenko 2x, canon 2x and kenko 1.5x:

http://www.traumflieger.de/objektivtest/telekonverter/telekonverter_check.php

The Kenko is even cheaper than the Tamron afaik but performs like the canon.

Thanks!
I can't read German, but pictures clearly show they all suck :-(

ziggy53

Nik,

No examples but my own research indicates that the loss of efficiency plus the loss of image quality just isn't worth it for my expectations, with a very few exceptions involving lenses I don't have. I would only recommend a 2x teleconverter for (Canon):

EF 300mm, f/4L IS USM
EF 300mm, f/2.8L IS USM
EF 400mm, f/2.8L IS USM
EF 500mm, f/4L IS USM
EF 600mm, f/4L IS USM

The EF 70-200mm "L" series lenses are mechanically compatible but I think the image quality loss is excessive.

A very good resource with examples is at:

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/reviews/Canon-Extender-EF-2x-II-Teleconverter-Review.aspx

As far as the comparison between Canon and Tamron teleconverters, I do think that the Canon vesion is better but not by a proportion equal to the cost. Still, if you must use a 2X converter it might be worth the extra cost just because the quality loss at 2X is considerable and the Canon version exhibits the least quality loss and is still considerably less than the equivalent native lens. I would only consider the Tamron SP Pro version which sells for around $200USD new.

Some rental houses carry the Canon 2X extender so you might want to rent one to determine for yourself whether the quality is enough for your application.

Nikolai

ziggy53 wrote:

Nik,
...

Thanks, Ziggy, much appreciated, as always!

aktse

ziggy53 wrote:

Some rental houses carry the Canon 2X extender so you might want to rent one to determine for yourself whether the quality is enough for your application.

BorrowLenses has both the canon 1.4 and the tammy 1.4 and the canon 2x (but not the tammy 2.x).

Maybe rent all three for a test run? You can do a comparison on the two 1.4x and apply that to the 2x

Nikolai

aktse wrote:

BorrowLenses has both the canon 1.4 and the tammy 1.4 and the canon 2x (but not the tammy 2.x).

Maybe rent all three for a test run? You can do a comparison on the two 1.4x and apply that to the 2x

Good idea, April!
Although in this field you really can't extrapolate your one lens data on another. Even copies differ, let along models...

dangin

for nikon, i have the tamron sp 2x tc; which is their supposed "Pro" model. i would assume that the optics in the tc are probably pretty close between the canon and nikon. as far as that goes, i've used it with a pretty good degree of success. overall, i haven't noticed any really substantial issues w/ IQ; there is some softness that is resultant of using the tc which should be expected with any tc. do note that w/ a 2x tc, you're looking at a 2 stop hit in light as well. i used it on my 70-200 at 200mm on a d200 to get a crazy long lens effect.

Nikolai

dangin wrote:

for nikon, i have the tamron sp 2x tc; which is their supposed "Pro" model. i would assume that the optics in the tc are probably pretty close between the canon and nikon. as far as that goes, i've used it with a pretty good degree of success. overall, i haven't noticed any really substantial issues w/ IQ; there is some softness that is resultant of using the tc which should be expected with any tc. do note that w/ a 2x tc, you're looking at a 2 stop hit in light as well. i used it on my 70-200 at 200mm on a d200 to get a crazy long lens effect.

Thanks, Dan!

catspaw

dangin wrote:

for nikon, i have the tamron sp 2x tc; which is their supposed "Pro" model. i would assume that the optics in the tc are probably pretty close between the canon and nikon. as far as that goes, i've used it with a pretty good degree of success. overall, i haven't noticed any really substantial issues w/ IQ; there is some softness that is resultant of using the tc which should be expected with any tc. do note that w/ a 2x tc, you're looking at a 2 stop hit in light as well. i used it on my 70-200 at 200mm on a d200 to get a crazy long lens effect.

also useful to me to me as well, so than you! (yay Nikon!)

however, care to define 'crazy long lens effect'?

jeffreaux2

Hey Nik....

As you know I just recently purchased the 70-200 F2.8 IS. A coworker who shoots sports bought one at the same time. He also purchased the Canon 2X converter in hopes of extending the lens for more reach in his sports shots. He said(and I didn't get an opportunity to try it out) that the difference in IQ when using the converter was night and day compared to using the lens alone. He was so disatisfied with the IQ(super soft) that he returned the 2X and ordered a 1.4X. I haven't spoken to him about the 1.4X, but he had said that after he ordered he found out(like Ziggy said) that the 2X was really only reccomended for a handful of "L" primes....whereas the 1.4X was indeed "Canon approved" for the 70-200.

You might check with some of the wildlife shooters/birders on DPreview.com. I seem to remember reading where many of them prefer stacking two 1.4X converters rather than using a single 2X.

Hope this helps, and if you do find a 2X converter that maintains IQ, regardless of who the manufacturer is....I'd be interested in knowing about it, as I am flirting with the idea of getting an extender myself.

Nikolai

jeffreaux2 wrote:

Hey Nik....

As you know I just recently purchased the 70-200 F2.8 IS. A coworker who shoots sports bought one at the same time. He also purchased the Canon 2X converter in hopes of extending the lens for more reach in his sports shots. He said(and I didn't get an opportunity to try it out) that the difference in IQ when using the converter was night and day compared to using the lens alone. He was so disatisfied with the IQ(super soft) that he returned the 2X and ordered a 1.4X. I haven't spoken to him about the 1.4X, but he had said that after he ordered he found out(like Ziggy said) that the 2X was really only reccomended for a handful of "L" primes....whereas the 1.4X was indeed "Canon approved" for the 70-200.

You might check with some of the wildlife shooters/birders on DPreview.com. I seem to remember reading where many of them prefer stacking two 1.4X converters rather than using a single 2X.

Hope this helps, and if you do find a 2X converter that maintains IQ, regardless of who the manufacturer is....I'd be interested in knowing about it, as I am flirting with the idea of getting an extender myself.

Thanks Jeff!
I guess I'll stay with my lone 1.4x :-)

Scott_Quier

Nik,

As a tangental input, I knew Michael Reichmann did some testing of the 2xTC some time ago. A little looking around found this page.

I just thought you might find it of use.

Nikolai

Scott_Quier wrote:

Nik,

As a tangental input, I knew Michael Reichmann did some testing of the 2xTC some time ago. A little looking around found this page.

I just thought you might find it of use.

Thanks, Scott!

Photoskipper

I got the Kenko 2X couple years ago (because it was really cheap - $50 only on special promotion) but found it very disappointed. Finally purchase the Canon 2X TC a year ago and feel the difference.

Kenko seems give a very loose image even on the L lenses and looks much dimmer on the viewfinder. The Canon gives more better brightness, clarity and sharpness.

So I keep the Canon on the Ls and leave the Kenko standby for the old non-L with the Rebel in the car boot for ad hoc shooting.

catspaw

I've noticed this has been a Canon-heavy thread --- I ordered the Nikon 2x just a few days ago, so anyone interested in how THAT performs, let me know and I can post up a mini review.

yay NIKON!'

*runs and hides*

David_S85

I borrowed a 70-200 2.8 L IS for the last couple of weeks, and along with it was the Canon 1.4x TC. I already had a Tammy 1.4x, so along with testing the lens I also got to check out the differences in the two TC's. I know you're looking for input about a 2.0, but it didn't take too many shots from the both of them to tell me which was the clear winner.

The CA from the Tammy was awful. I can only believe a 2.0 would be worse. The Canon TC, while still creating some CA and blurry corners of its own, was head and heels above a cheaper TC. Better yet, DPP 3.4's lens correction thingie can also correct for Canon TC's (which report their presence in the EXIF) on any of Canon's listed lenses in DPP's database, which is a win-win in my book. Not so with Tamrons & Kenko's.