> > I was just going with the new "L" glass convert's > > flow. I use both Canon EF converters extensively > > (I own them both), and have also tried a Kenko > > 1.4x side by side with a Canon EF 1.4x. The > > Kenko yielded images that were clearly not as good > > (apparent sharpness and contrast), when compared to > > the EF 1.4x on film so I bought the Canon converters. > > Canon's EF 1.4x converters are selling very > > cheaply (about $290), now with the release of > > the EF 1.4 II and EF 2x II converters, what does a Tamron > > 1.4x go for $200? > > I doubt there is a huge difference in price these days. > > Used, complete, mint condition EF 1.4x converters can > > be had for about the same amount, why buy anything else? > ------------------------------------------------------------------ > ---------- > ----- > Chip, Chip, Chip, > > We are all saying Tamron and now you are saying Kenko. > Unless you have used the Tamron you cannot understand that > their new SP PRO TC is really first rate. New its still less > than a used Canon EF 1.4x Version 1. I for one do not need > to "feel better" by paying more for a Canon logo. > Its a slightly lighter beige than the Canon cream colored > L lenses, but its an L of a TC (sorry, could not resist). > > > Peter K >
Hi Peter, When I bought the Canon converters there was not much choice in the matter, all that was available at the time in third party converters was the Kenko I tried. This was several years ago and there may indeed have been improvements in the converters being sold by the lens makers. I was relating my own experiences with a third party converter and I think that it's entirely possible that the new Tamron SP PRO 1.4x is a good converter. I've also heard good things about the new Sigma converters and it's even cheaper yet. A quick look at Tamron's site, they state that the SP series are designed to work with f/2.8 and faster lenses of 90mm and longer. The fact that you can mount most any lens on these converters is not an advantage per Tamron as for lenses slower than f/2.8 there is little or no advantage in optical performance vs. the standard converters. For me this would not present a problem as I don't have any slower lenses than f/2.8, for others on the list this may be a problem and should be mentioned. So how is the SP version better than the standard version for the people with slower lenses? I just looked on B&H's site and they are selling the Tamron SP converter for $173USD and the Canon is listed at $285USD. I watch eBay a lot and go to both of the major southern California camera shows as you may know. The lowest price I have ever seen a clean condition (mint), used EF 1.4x converter sell or offered for was $185USD. Lately the going rate for a good clean EF 1.4x has been $200-$225. Being used and sold as they are for cash at these shows and on the internet this is the all up price. Shipping from B&H is probably $7-$8 so it looks to me (at least here in the USA), like there is not much difference in prices upfront. In the long run, hopefully the Tamron, Sigma, and Kenko converters will not be victims of a Canon "upgrade" and also are typically (not always, but almost always), worth less at resale time. Can you explain where the savings are? Regards, Chip Louie * **** ******* *********************************************************** * For list instructions, including unsubscribe, see: * http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/eos_list.htm ***********************************************************
