SLR Camera question

meltdown75

Lifer
Nov 17, 2004
37,548
7
81
I have a question for the photography folks here.

I have an old Yashica 35mm SLR that I still use from time to time and I really enjoy taking pics with it. I picked up a 70-210mm zoom lens for it and I love it. Now I am looking into the 300mm range because I want to be able to zoom in even more.

I have never used a teleconverter before. Does it essentially double your lens power? ie. would I be better off picking up a 2X teleconverter for the 70-210mm lens that I already have? What are the pros and cons? Thanks if you can help.
 

DBL

Platinum Member
Mar 23, 2001
2,637
0
0
slower and lower quality. Unless, you are starting with pristine glass, it's generally not worth it. A 1.4x might be a more reasonable choice.
 

meltdown75

Lifer
Nov 17, 2004
37,548
7
81
Originally posted by: DBL
slower and lower quality. Unless, you are starting with pristine glass, it's generally not worth it. A 1.4x might be a more reasonable choice.
Thanks I will check out some different converters. I didn't know they came with varying multiplyers.

My camera is an old Yashica FX-103 program. I love it!
 

montanafan

Diamond Member
Nov 7, 1999
3,551
2
71
If you just want some closer shots of the birds and you're shooting in daylight, a teleconverter would be a good alternative to a more expensive 300mm lens. But if you're wanting a really nice close-up of the bird with a shallow depth of field, the loss in F-stops with the teleconverter will make that more difficult.
 

AndrewR

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
11,157
0
0
Originally posted by: DBL
slower and lower quality. Unless, you are starting with pristine glass, it's generally not worth it. A 1.4x might be a more reasonable choice.

I thought about getting a teleconverter, but the loss of image quality didn't appeal to me, not to mention the loss of the aperture.
 

Antisocial Virge

Diamond Member
Dec 13, 1999
6,578
0
0
Originally posted by: AndrewR
Originally posted by: DBL
slower and lower quality. Unless, you are starting with pristine glass, it's generally not worth it. A 1.4x might be a more reasonable choice.

I thought about getting a teleconverter, but the loss of image quality didn't appeal to me, not to mention the loss of the aperture.

I thought about one until I tried one, ugg, not good.