600 f4 with and without teleconverters

[Unframed Dave]

Without:

• ILCE-1
• FE 600mm F4 GM OSS
• 600.0 mm
• ƒ/4
• 1/5000 sec
• ISO 640

With 1.4X

• ILCE-1
• FE 600mm F4 GM OSS + 1.4X Teleconverter
• 840.0 mm
• ƒ/5.6
• 1/2500 sec
• ISO 640

With 2X

• ILCE-1
• FE 600mm F4 GM OSS + 2X Teleconverter
• 1,200.0 mm
• ƒ/8
• 1/1600 sec
• ISO 640

All handheld, ISO constant.

 

[iain clyne]

To me the 1.4 is fine but the 2x is a bit too soft for my liking.

 

[Unframed Dave]

To me the 1.4 is fine but the 2x is a bit too soft for my liking.

I agree and the close focus is horrendous.

 

[Richard A]

Where were you focusing for these shots? The depth of field is certainly very minimal but that is to be expected. It's hard to tell a big difference with these small compressed images. Do you really need 1200mm? If you do, there is some really great sharpening software out there these days which you may find useful. It's the same with noise. The denoising software is so good these days that using higher ISOs and then getting rid of any noise is pretty trivial.

 

[Unframed Dave]

This was an exercise born out of curiosity. A lot of folks are interested in the image quality that these teleconverters can achieve. Including myself.

Focus point was the top right portion of the branch.

Most bird photographers would give a kidney for a usable and affordable 1200 mm lens. Unfortunately, such an animal doesn't exist and experience tells us that such a thing would be practically unusable. Simply put, the more magnification you apply, the more the factors that affect image quality become magnified. Movement and atmospherics being the big ones. Every novice assumes that a 600mm lens allows you to take quality shots of birds way off in the distance, the reality is nothing like. Actual workable distances are quite a revelation.

Close focus also comes into play, I could not achieve focus on yesterday's kingfisher with the 2X attached. I had to swiftly remove it, not ideal in dusty conditions in the field whilst managing a cumbersome, heavy lens. Certainly not something I would want to do regularly. These lenses with built in TCs are a work of genius.

In short, I found the 1.4X somewhat usable given the good light conditions. For me at this focal length, the 2X is of no use. I will repeat the exercise with the 400, 300 and 200-600. These are probably more useful, combinations when considering travel limitations. The latter two also being much more affordable.

I have never used denoise or sharpening software, so am unable to comment, from what I've seen, you are absolutely correct though.