Extenders 2x TC question with RF 100-500mm

[lostnomore]

I realize that the RF 2x teleconverter can be only used on this lens from 300-500mm. What is the max. (widest) aperture at 300mm and also at 500mm when this TC is attached?

 

[SYSO]

One thing I learned in my decades in photography is never stack a 2x TC on a zoom lens. 1.4x TC, on the other hand, works really well with the 100-500. In fact, there's no discernable differences in IQ with or without the TC. If greater reach is needed but without a TC, the RF 800 f/11 is a much better option than the 2x TC for just USD$300-$400 more than the cost of 2x TC. While I have all three -- 100-500, 1.4x and RF 800 -- I've been heavily favoring the RF 800 for bird photography lately. Its IQ is as good as the 100-500.

 

[Only RF]

Ahhh. I was waiting for the OP to respond with the 800 f11 in mind. For the price for one and especially two TC's that is a good option. I was this close to getting one but decided to go with the R7 instead. When I travel (which is when I shoot the most) I do a lot of walking so I don't like to carry too much gear. I have a little pouch I strap to my belt for my TC and the camera plus that lens are on my PK shoulder strap.

I think about the 800 f11 quite often.

 

[Only RF]

Are we allowed to post links from other forum sites?

 

[ChRiSiS]

Frankly, I have the 2X TC and use it with the 100-500. Contrary to what I read on here, the IQ is quite good with the 2X TC. Just like with the smaller apertures on RF lenses that everyone said would ruin the IQ and whole experience, but which turned out not to be an issue, I suspect that mirrorless is different in that regard.

Now, any TC is likely to cause some degradation, and a 2x is likely to cause more than a 1.4, but in my real world examples it is simply not apparent!

Chris

 

[Only RF]

Good to get real world advice.

 

[freddijay]

I use the R5 with the RF 2X on an RF 100-500 quite frequently and that combination can provide some quite acceptable images if you are careful about it. Of course, less magnification with the RF 1.4X is a bit better if you aren't in need of the extra reach. It all comes down to balance, IMHO. If you need the shot and the subject is too far away, the RF 2X is a definite option. If you can shoot with a prime lens and no extenders, that's great. Different tools for different situations is the rule. These full-frame images were shot in our backyard with the R5, RF 2X, RF 100-500. For my purposes, they are very usable. If I want to get out the EF 500 f/4 II and mount it on a tripod, I might do better, especially with the EF 2X III extender which is quite sharp with the EF lens.

 

[Only RF]

BIF must be challenging. I manage with my 1.4 pretty well. If I had gotten a 2X it would have been for static subjects.

Just in case

Canon RF800mm F11STM

www.fredmiranda.com

 

[AKVet]

BIF must be challenging. I manage with my 1.4 pretty well. If I had gotten a 2X it would have been for static subjects.

Just in case

Canon RF800mm F11STM

www.fredmiranda.com

Wow, those photos from that 800mm were incredible!

 

[Only RF]

Wow, those photos from that 800mm were incredible!T

They are. I'm still thinking about getting one.

 

[AKVet]

They are. I'm still thinking about getting one.

Yeah, me too! It is tempting! Oh well, it's only money!