I have always wondered if it was worth to have a teleconverter in my photography bag. After discussing it with other photographers and reading online one thing became clear over time, you had to sacrifice image quality to obviously get the extra reach. In macro photography this is different however because apart from the zooming as with tele lenses you get a higher magnification which some might find interesting.
After borrowing a 1.4x teleconverter, which is said to degrade the image quality less since its not zooming/magnifying as much as the 2x converter, I took some shots. The images I took where of a micro moth. After opening the files on my pc I compared them to another set of images that i had taken earlier.
What I found is that although you get a half more magnification, the subject is softer and you can see a bit of fringing in certain areas. Even after trying to introduce some sharpening, the image, though improved, still felt unnatural. Not to mention thin bluish/purple lines that surround parts of the image.
Concluding, in my opinion I think I will stick and shoot without any teleconverters. Its true that the subject gets more magnified but for me it doesn't make justice to the deterioration of image quality that happens when using the teleconverter.
P.S. Any opinions appreciated.