Confused - Extender or Longer lens.

snoop69

snoop69

Suspended / Banned
Messages
2,451
Name
Paul
Edit My Images
Yes
My parents are looking at funding some new or used equipment as a late
xmas pressie & ive mentioned that i would be interested in a longer lens.

However,ive seen for sale on Ebay some 2 x extenders at a reasonable
price.

Other than cost,what benefitts would i get from choosing an extender over
a longer lens?

Im currently using a 18-55 & 55-200 with my 450d.

Any advice would be appreciated :thumbs:
 
Any teleconverter is going to be pretty much unuseable with those lenses.
If you fit a 2x then you lose the same amount in aperture, so f/5.6 becomes f/11 and your camera will not be able to autofocus and that'd be your smallest available aperture.
Converters are really for lenses with constant apertures of f/2.8 and wider.
 
Teleconverters are best used on long fast primes. Your lenses are not suitable. I'd just get a tele lens!
 
awp said:
Your lenses are not suitable.
Click to expand...
More than that. Canon Extenders will not phyically fit on your lenses. Third party ones might, but:
(a) do your research first to check whether they do fit;
(b) be prepared for a significant loss of image quality;
(c) remember that you won't be able to autofocus using those lenses with an extender.
 
Thanks for the info & advice - just what i was looking for :thumbs:

Now off to find a suitable lens.

Any advice please?

I like watching Sunday football & would like to have a crack at a little
motorsport.

I also like to shoot the moon when she's out.

Thanks again.
 
The convertor and extender are the same device.

The Canon 55-250 IS is the next ste up, alhtough I'm not sure that would give you much extra reach. Next would be the Sigma 70-300 APO, probably followed by the Canon 70-300 IS.
Or if you have some more cash there are a few that go out to 400mm (Depends on budget)
 
snoop69 said:
Thanks for the info & advice - just what i was looking for :thumbs:

Now off to find a suitable lens.

Any advice please?

I like watching Sunday football & would like to have a crack at a little
motorsport.

I also like to shoot the moon when she's out.

Thanks again.
Click to expand...

Your 55-250 has IS-----I would start with that first off.Shooting sports of any kind requires good technique which needs learning.When you have come to the limits of the 55-250 and discovered any shortcomings you will have a much better idea of which lens is going to suit you.Long fast glass is expensive--so it pays to get it right first time.A good idea can be to hire lenses first.The good news is that they do keep their value.
Pete.
 
TheWombat said:
Your 55-250 has IS-----I would start with that first off.Shooting sports of any kind requires good technique which needs learning.When you have come to the limits of the 55-250 and discovered any shortcomings you will have a much better idea of which lens is going to suit you.Long fast glass is expensive--so it pays to get it right first time.A good idea can be to hire lenses first.The good news is that they do keep their value.
Pete.
Click to expand...

Thanks for the advice Pete but i only have a 55-200 not 250.

Would a 250 be a good investment over the 200 or should i get the technique,
composition correct first with the 200 & then upgrade or would the 200 struggle?
 
Sorry Snoop----I assumed you had the 55-250 kit lens which is a great value lens.Either way I would play with what you have.You will probably surprise yourself.You will read and hear much about "Good Glass"--A lot of it is true--but it comes at a price premium--and is absolutely useless unless you know how to use it.Do your learning on less expensive stuff----then you will have a much better idea of your priorities.Unless you are made of money--lenses are a slow and steady acquisition--frequently kept secret from "She who must be obeyed ". Above all enjoy your camera.
Cheers,
Pete.
 
Save up and get a 100-400L that will cover your sports and moon no problem
 
ppp said:
Save up and get a 100-400L that will cover your sports and moon no problem
Click to expand...

I agree, it's a waste of money going to a 250mm, the difference in length isn't big enough so you'll feel like you've wasted the money.

Consider the Sigma 100-300mm F/4, you can put a 1.4X TC on this with only the loss of one stop which takes it to a 420mm f/5.6 but retains AF
 
wack61 said:
I agree, it's a waste of money going to a 250mm, the difference in length isn't big enough so you'll feel like you've wasted the money.
Click to expand...

Rubbish.

wack61 said:
Consider the Sigma 100-300mm F/4, you can put a 1.4X TC on this with only the loss of one stop which takes it to a 420mm f/5.6 but retains AF
Click to expand...

That advice is wack, too.

The canon 55-250 IS gives an equivalent of 88-480 on a 450D 1.6 crop sensor and is, by far, without question, the most suitable lens for the OP.

At £150 - £200 the cost won't stampede the parents.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top