Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1998/09/29
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]On Tue, 29 Sep 1998, Gib Robinson wrote: <SNIP> > I have a 2 1/2 year-old daughter. She's not the problem but she >loves birds and images of birds. That's a problem because I don't own a= >lens longer than 180mm (f/4). <SNIP> >I want to extend the range of my lenses. I'm considering two options: bu= y a >400mm or 2X tele-extender. Which would you recommend? The 400 TELYT 6.8 = is >likely to be a little more expensive than the 2X and I assume it would b= e >somewhat more stable with a shoulder stock and grip. Photographically I >assume the 400 might be somewhat better than the 2X, but I don't know. >Apparently the 2X (non-Apochromatic) was designed as a good match for th= e >f/4 180. What do you think? Which would you recommend. Gib, I use the 400 f/6.8 for birds and I recommend it highly. The shoulder stock allows me to use shutter speeds as slow as 1/60 sec where with my 2= 80 without the stock I have to be extremely careful at 1/125 sec to get good= sharpness. I haven't used the 180 or the 2X so can't comment on the optical properties but because of the smaller aperture you would definite= ly have more trouble focussing accurately and you'd be stuck using a tripod.= = The one advantage you'd have with the 180+2X would be a closer minimum focus distance. I use either the 60mm extension tube designed for the f/6.8 lenses or the 14256 extension tube to get closer than 11 feet with the 400. Doug Herr Sacramento