2X Teleconverter with FE 200–600 mm F5.6–6.3 G OSS and A1

[-ST-]

I just had to try, even though it was heavily overcast.
f/13 needs a lot of light.
Handheld - not easy to do.
100% crop

• ILCE-1
• FE 200-600mm F5.6-6.3 G OSS + 2X Teleconverter
• 1,200.0 mm
• ƒ/13
• 1/500 sec
• ISO 2500

150% crop

• ILCE-1
• FE 200-600mm F5.6-6.3 G OSS + 2X Teleconverter
• 1,200.0 mm
• ƒ/13
• 1/500 sec
• ISO 2500

For anyone following along:

• I got a GREAT deal on a 2X teleconverter yesterday. Too good to pass up.
• I got it mainly to carry with me when using the FE 70-200mm F2.8 GM OSS II (e.g. when I need the versatility of that lovely lens, but I might need a little more reach). I can't imagine carrying both the 70-200 AND the 200-600 while tromping around looking for photos.
• I didn't expect it to work very well with the FE 200–600 mm F5.6–6.3 G OSS, but I was curious.
• Wow. Add the 2X Teleconverter to the 200-600 - and it's heavy (about 3,300 grams or 7 pounds 4 ounces), making it challenging to hand-hold steady and keep a large subject in the viewfinder.

 

[Deleted Member 5003]

I just had to try, even though it was heavily overcast.
F13 needs a lot of light.
Handheld - not easy to do.
100% crop
View attachment 34760
150% crop
View attachment 34761

For anyone following along:

• I got a GREAT deal on a 2X teleconverter yesterday. Too good to pass up.
• I got it mainly to carry with me when using the FE 70-200mm F2.8 GM OSS II (e.g. when I need the versatility of that lovely lens, but I might need a little more reach). I can't imagine carrying both the 70-200 AND the 200-600 while tromping around looking for photos.
• I didn't expect it to work very well with the FE 200–600 mm F5.6–6.3 G OSS, but I was curious.
• Wow. Add the 2X Teleconverter to the 200-600 - and it's heavy (about 3,300 grams or 7 pounds 4 ounces), making it challenging to hand-hold steady and keep a large subject in the viewfinder.

Yes ST as was noted in the theme where this subject was extensively discussed the x2 TC on the 200-600 needs really good light and ideal shooting conditions and even then due to the overiding ight physics will always be of lower quality than without the x2 TC.

Also at 1/500 shutter speed I assume you had steady shot on......

Additionally and not to be critical but in offering further commentary the images you present are good composition but a little soft and grainy which could easily be recovered with Topaz denoise and sharpening........

 

[-ST-]

Thanks, Ray.

Yes ST as was noted in the theme where this subject was extensively discussed the x2 TC on the 200-600 needs really good light and ideal shooting conditions and even then due to the overiding ight physics will always be of lower quality than without the x2 TC.

I'll hunt around for those older discussions.
In my previous experiment with the 2x teleconverter and the 70-200, I decided there wasn't enough benefit to warrant keeping the teleconverter. Since getting the 200-600, I've come to appreciate the longer reach. With that in mind, I decided to get the 2x teleconverter to carry when I'm using the 70-200 in case favourable conditions arise to use it - compromises and all.

Also at 1/500 shutter speed I assume you had steady shot on......

Yes, steady shot was on. I'll keep experimenting with different combinations (shutter speed, aperture, ISO) and work on my physical skill of holding the camera still. This was my first day with this combination, and I've got a lot to learn.

Additionally and not to be critical but in offering further commentary the images you present are good composition but a little soft and grainy which could easily be recovered with Topaz denoise and sharpening........

Thanks for the commentary. It's always welcome, and I appreciate it. I'll have to look into Topaz Denoise AI, but I'll take a run at the denoise and sharpening tools I already have in Capture One first.
Cheers!

 

[Deleted Member 5003]

Thanks, Ray.

I'll hunt around for those older discussions.
In my previous experiment with the 2x teleconverter and the 70-200, I decided there wasn't enough benefit to warrant keeping the teleconverter. Since getting the 200-600, I've come to appreciate the longer reach. With that in mind, I decided to get the 2x teleconverter to carry when I'm using the 70-200 in case favourable conditions arise to use it - compromises and all.


Yes, steady shot was on. I'll keep experimenting with different combinations (shutter speed, aperture, ISO) and work on my physical skill of holding the camera still. This was my first day with this combination, and I've got a lot to learn.


Thanks for the commentary. It's always welcome, and I appreciate it. I'll have to look into Topaz Denoise AI, but I'll take a run at the denoise and sharpening tools I already have in Capture One first.
Cheers!

I personally haven't used Capture One but yes this may well be adequate.....

 

[jeffj3]

ST- wait until you shoot with an a7rv, the viewfinder is so much bigger than the iv's.

 

[-ST-]

ST- wait until you shoot with an a7rv, the viewfinder is so much bigger than the iv's.

Hey, Jeff.
I have an A1 as well as an A7 IV.
I think the viewfinder on the A1 is the same size as the A7 RV.

The new Alpha A7R V has a 9.44M-dot OLED Quad-XGA electronic viewfinder with 0.90x magnification and a refresh rate of up to 120fps.

The Sony A1 goes one step further, sporting the same 9.44M-dot OLED Quad-XGA EVF with 0.90x magnification but doubling the refresh rate up to 240fps which ensures no black-out. Source -

Sony A7R V vs A1 - Head-to-head Comparison | Photography Blog

A detailed head-to-head comparison of the Sony A7R V vs A1 cameras.

www.photographyblog.com

 

[-ST-]

It was a nice bright day, and I got these results. All shots are hand held.

Eagle at 25 meters.
No teleconverter - 150% crop

• ILCE-1
• Sony FE 200–600mm F5.6–6.3 G OSS (SEL200600G)
• 600.0 mm
• ƒ/8
• 1/500 sec
• ISO 125

2x teleconverter - 75% crop

• ILCE-1
• FE 200-600mm F5.6-6.3 G OSS + 2X Teleconverter
• 1,200.0 mm
• ƒ/13
• 1/500 sec
• ISO 400

At this distance, there was no advantage to using the 2x teleconverter, but I didn't lose much either.

 

[-ST-]

These were all shot with the 2x teleconverter.



63% crop, heron

• ILCE-1
• FE 200-600mm F5.6-6.3 G OSS + 2X Teleconverter
• 1,200.0 mm
• ƒ/13
• 1/2000 sec
• ISO 3200

52% crop, juvenile bald eagle

• ILCE-1
• FE 200-600mm F5.6-6.3 G OSS + 2X Teleconverter
• 1,200.0 mm
• ƒ/13
• 1/500 sec
• ISO 1000

56% crop, bald eagle

• ILCE-1
• FE 200-600mm F5.6-6.3 G OSS + 2X Teleconverter
• 1,200.0 mm
• ƒ/13
• 1/2000 sec
• ISO 3200

48% crop

• ILCE-1
• FE 200-600mm F5.6-6.3 G OSS + 2X Teleconverter
• 1,200.0 mm
• ƒ/13
• 1/2000 sec
• ISO 3200

Since all of these are at 100% crops or less, I could have taken these without the teleconverter and cropped them in post to get similar or better results.

So far, the only reason to use the 2x teleconverter is to get skittish birds or candid shots.

• ILCE-1
• FE 200-600mm F5.6-6.3 G OSS + 2X Teleconverter
• 1,200.0 mm
• ƒ/13
• 1/500 sec
• ISO 640

• ILCE-1
• FE 200-600mm F5.6-6.3 G OSS + 2X Teleconverter
• 418.0 mm
• ƒ/11
• 1/500 sec
• ISO 1600

• ILCE-1
• FE 200-600mm F5.6-6.3 G OSS + 2X Teleconverter
• 1,200.0 mm
• ƒ/13
• 1/500 sec
• ISO 320

 

[jeffj3]

Hey, Jeff.
I have an A1 as well as an A7 IV.
I think the viewfinder on the A1 is the same size as the A7 RV.

Ah gotcha, doing events I don't really let the VF bother me but when I was comparing side by side (a day before I bought the RV) it made me pause

 

[-ST-]

Kid's toy truck at 100 meters. This is an extreme test - and I wouldn't consider either of these a keeper.
2x teleconverter, 100% crop

• ILCE-1
• FE 200-600mm F5.6-6.3 G OSS + 2X Teleconverter
• 1,200.0 mm
• ƒ/13
• 1/1000 sec
• ISO 1600

without teleconverter, 200% crop (shot the next day - more even light)

• ILCE-1
• Sony FE 200–600mm F5.6–6.3 G OSS (SEL200600G)
• 600.0 mm
• ƒ/6.3
• 1/500 sec
• ISO 800

Here's how much I had to crop the image without the teleconverter (immediately above).

Fortunately, there's plenty of room to crop in the 50-megapixel image you get with the A1.

 

[Deleted Member 5003]

Hi ST have you got your images and referencing mixed up...?

The brighter first image has underwritten shooting stats at 600mm and no TC but you have a heading referencing x2 TC at 100m
whilst the second has stats at 1200mm + x2 TC but you head it without TC and 200% crop...?

 

[Deleted Member 5003]

That's better...your referencing now makes sense.

 

[-ST-]

Hi ST have you got your images and referencing mixed up...?

The brighter first image has underwritten shooting stats at 600mm and no TC but you have a heading referencing x2 TC at 100m
whilst the second has stats at 1200mm + x2 TC but you head it without TC and 200% crop...?

You caught me while I was editing because I got them mixed up.
Then I was going to delete that post anyway because I went back today to do the no TC shot - and the lighting was different, so it's not a fair comparison.

 

[-ST-]

It was a bright morning and two months since my original post on this subject, so I did some more comparisons between the FE 200–600 mm F5.6–6.3 G OSS without and with the 2X teleconverter. It looks like the forum software scales anything above 1980x1280 down to that resolution. If the images are smaller, they are not scaled up here.

I process image outputs to jpeg at 3840x2560 because I view them on a 4K monitor.

Since I'm shooting with the A1, there's lots of room for deep cropping.

After another day of comparisons, I'm convinced that I can crop the 51-megapixel images I get with the FE 200–600 mm F5.6–6.3 G OSS, and get results that are very close to, and occasionally better than when I use the 2X teleconverter.

Advantages

• A bigger image in the viewfinder without having to switch to APSC mode
• For live subjects, you might get a shot before your presence scares them off
• For extremely deep crops, you can get a bigger output image (examples below)

Drawbacks

• You need a lot of light to shoot at F13
  • Especially since I had to shoot at higher shutter speeds to offset camera shake with the longer, heavier lens
• Although the 2X teleconverter only adds 207 grams (approx 3 ounces), it adds some heft to the lens and moves the center of gravity of the lens out 47 mm (approx 1.5 inches) further away from the body.
• Autofocus can be slower
• It can be harder to find a moving subject in the viewfinder

Interesting

• I enjoyed the sense of having a longer reach
• I didn't mind the extra weight on or off the camera
• I did a similar exercise with the FE 70-200mm F2.8 GM OSS II yesterday, and the results were similar (perhaps marginally better for image quality and focus speed)
• Based on the above, I'll probably carry the 2X teleconverter if I'm using either the 70-200 or 200-600
  • With the FE 70-200mm F2.8 GM OSS II, the maximum aperture with the 2X teleconverter is F5.6, and I'm used to working with that constraint with the 200-600 anyway.
• Now that I can park the lens in the Cotton Carrier and have two hands free, I've gotten pretty adept at adding or removing the 2X teleconverter. For more about that, see: https://www.alphashooters.com/commu...y-harness-for-2-cameras-one-week-review.6362/

Here are some photos.

Without 2X teleconverter (just so you can see the whole object) (3840x2560)

• ILCE-1
• Sony FE 200–600mm F5.6–6.3 G OSS (SEL200600G)
• 600.0 mm
• ƒ/6.3
• 1/500 sec
• ISO 100

Without 2X teleconverter (1970x1315)

• ILCE-1
• Sony FE 200–600mm F5.6–6.3 G OSS (SEL200600G)
• 600.0 mm
• ƒ/6.3
• 1/500 sec
• ISO 100

With 2X teleconverter (2910x1940)

• ILCE-1
• FE 200-600mm F5.6-6.3 G OSS + 2X Teleconverter
• 1,200.0 mm
• ƒ/13
• 1/500 sec
• ISO 800

Without 2X teleconverter (680x452)

• ILCE-1
• Sony FE 200–600mm F5.6–6.3 G OSS (SEL200600G)
• 600.0 mm
• ƒ/6.3
• 1/500 sec
• ISO 100

With 2X teleconverter (952x635)

• ILCE-1
• FE 200-600mm F5.6-6.3 G OSS + 2X Teleconverter
• 1,200.0 mm
• ƒ/13
• 1/500 sec
• ISO 800

Without 2X teleconverter (3840x2560) 68% crop at approximately 280 metres.

• ILCE-1
• FE 200-600mm F5.6-6.3 G OSS + 2X Teleconverter
• 600.0 mm
• ƒ/13
• 1/500 sec
• ISO 500

With 2X teleconverter (3840x2560) 28% crop

• ILCE-1
• FE 200-600mm F5.6-6.3 G OSS + 2X Teleconverter
• 1,200.0 mm
• ƒ/13
• 1/500 sec
• ISO 800

Without 2X teleconverter (2510x1975) 400% crop

• ILCE-1
• FE 200-600mm F5.6-6.3 G OSS + 2X Teleconverter
• 600.0 mm
• ƒ/13
• 1/500 sec
• ISO 500

With 2X teleconverter (3840x2560) 200% crop

• ILCE-1
• FE 200-600mm F5.6-6.3 G OSS + 2X Teleconverter
• 1,200.0 mm
• ƒ/13
• 1/500 sec
• ISO 800

 

[-ST-]

And finally, just for fun - this is a 44% crop with decent light and the 2X Teleconverter.

• ILCE-1
• FE 200-600mm F5.6-6.3 G OSS + 2X Teleconverter
• 1,200.0 mm
• ƒ/13
• 1/2000 sec
• ISO 1000

 

[-ST-]

Google Maps will show you the distance between points on a map. I just found this out, and I with that, I had an excuse to explore the absurd (things you probably wouldn't do).

I took two shots at 600 mm and 1200 mm (using the 2x teleconverter) at approximately 730 meters (2400 feet).

• Manual, f/13, 1/1000 sec
• Hand-held
• In the cropped images below, I used the Sharpening and Noise Reduction tools in Capture One 23

What do you think - comparing the FE 200–600 mm F5.6–6.3 G OSS with and without the 2x teleconverter?

Here are the images.
No crop - 600 mm

• ILCE-1
• Sony FE 200–600mm F5.6–6.3 G OSS (SEL200600G)
• 600.0 mm
• ƒ/13
• 1/1000 sec
• ISO 6400

No crop, 1200 mm with 2x teleconverter

• ILCE-1
• FE 200-600mm F5.6-6.3 G OSS + 2X Teleconverter
• 1,200.0 mm
• ƒ/13
• 1/1000 sec
• ISO 5000

And the same shots, 600 mm at 250% crop

• ILCE-1
• Sony FE 200–600mm F5.6–6.3 G OSS (SEL200600G)
• 600.0 mm
• ƒ/13
• 1/1000 sec
• ISO 6400

1200 mm with the 2x teleconverter at 125% crop

• ILCE-1
• FE 200-600mm F5.6-6.3 G OSS + 2X Teleconverter
• 1,200.0 mm
• ƒ/13
• 1/1000 sec
• ISO 5000

And the same shots: 600 mm at 500% crop

• ILCE-1
• Sony FE 200–600mm F5.6–6.3 G OSS (SEL200600G)
• 600.0 mm
• ƒ/13
• 1/1000 sec
• ISO 6400

and 1200 mm with the 2x teleconverter at 250% crop

• ILCE-1
• FE 200-600mm F5.6-6.3 G OSS + 2X Teleconverter
• 1,200.0 mm
• ƒ/13
• 1/1000 sec
• ISO 5000

And finally, 600 mm at 1000% crop

• ILCE-1
• Sony FE 200–600mm F5.6–6.3 G OSS (SEL200600G)
• 600.0 mm
• ƒ/13
• 1/1000 sec
• ISO 6400

1200 mm with the 2x teleconverter at 500% crop

• ILCE-1
• FE 200-600mm F5.6-6.3 G OSS + 2X Teleconverter
• 1,200.0 mm
• ƒ/13
• 1/1000 sec
• ISO 5000

 

[-ST-]

Here's another report on the FE 200–600 mm F5.6–6.3 G OSS with the 2X teleconverter.

I had lots of light this morning, so I took some shots of a Great Blue Heron in a tree, both with and without the 2X teleconverter.

Here's an uncropped shot without the 2X teleconverter.

• ILCE-1
• Sony FE 200–600mm F5.6–6.3 G OSS (SEL200600G)
• 600.0 mm
• ƒ/6.3
• 1/500 sec
• ISO 800

Cropping in 175%

• ILCE-1
• Sony FE 200–600mm F5.6–6.3 G OSS (SEL200600G)
• 600.0 mm
• ƒ/6.3
• 1/500 sec
• ISO 800

Shot from the same position with the 2X teleconverter

• ILCE-1
• FE 200-600mm F5.6-6.3 G OSS + 2X Teleconverter
• 1,200.0 mm
• ƒ/13
• 1/500 sec
• ISO 3200

Without the 2X teleconverter

• ILCE-1
• Sony FE 200–600mm F5.6–6.3 G OSS (SEL200600G)
• 600.0 mm
• ƒ/6.3
• 1/500 sec
• ISO 400

With the 2X teleconverter - cropped to the same field of view

• ILCE-1
• FE 200-600mm F5.6-6.3 G OSS + 2X Teleconverter
• 1,200.0 mm
• ƒ/13
• 1/500 sec
• ISO 1600

At this distance, with a relatively large bird and the extreme crops you can get with a 51 Megapixel image, the 2X teleconverter doesn't convey a lot of value. However, it doesn't appear to cost anything in terms of image quality.

If you were to crop in REALLY tight (e.g., zoom in on the eye), here's what happens.
On the left - no teleconverter, 1600%
On the right - with 2X teleconverter, 800%

These two in-flight images were taken with the 2X teleconverter. I could have gotten these shots without the teleconverter and cropped later, but there was no downside to using it.

• ILCE-1
• FE 200-600mm F5.6-6.3 G OSS + 2X Teleconverter
• 904.0 mm
• ƒ/13
• 1/2000 sec
• ISO 6400

• ILCE-1
• FE 200-600mm F5.6-6.3 G OSS + 2X Teleconverter
• 912.0 mm
• ƒ/13
• 1/2000 sec
• ISO 6400

 

[Deleted Member 5003]

Yes ST with good light and well supported camera/lens, static subjects should not yield a huge quality differential whilst flying subjects almost certainly will with the focus speed very much diminished......

 

[Gaz]

I just had to try, even though it was heavily overcast.
F13 needs a lot of light.
Handheld - not easy to do.
100% crop
View attachment 34760
150% crop
View attachment 34761

For anyone following along:

• I got a GREAT deal on a 2X teleconverter yesterday. Too good to pass up.
• I got it mainly to carry with me when using the FE 70-200mm F2.8 GM OSS II (e.g. when I need the versatility of that lovely lens, but I might need a little more reach). I can't imagine carrying both the 70-200 AND the 200-600 while tromping around looking for photos.
• I didn't expect it to work very well with the FE 200–600 mm F5.6–6.3 G OSS, but I was curious.
• Wow. Add the 2X Teleconverter to the 200-600 - and it's heavy (about 3,300 grams or 7 pounds 4 ounces), making it challenging to hand-hold steady and keep a large subject in the viewfinder.

There’s a good looking moon at the moment so I was thinking about using my 1.4 teleconverter on the 200-600 this month. I usually shoot the moon at F11 so it will be interesting to see how it’s impacted.

 

[Hank]

There’s a good looking moon at the moment so I was thinking about using my 1.4 teleconverter on the 200-600 this month. I usually shoot the moon at F11 so it will be interesting to see how it’s impacted.

I think the cloud cover will be raining on that parade Gaz. (For the next few days anyway)