Chip Louie wrote (edited): 
> 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?


Chip, they are designed to work optimally with fast lenses and 90mm and
longer but that is not to say they cannot be used with other lenses, nor can
we say they will perform poorly with say an 85mm or 50mm lens. I use mine
with my 28-135mm IS lens when traveling and my results are very very good.
Now, as to Canon's EF 1.4x II, have you checked THEIR website? If you did
you would see that what they say about their Canon EF1.4x is as follows:
"This tele extender can be used with fixed focal length lenses 135mm and
longer (except the 135mm f/2.8 Softfocus lens), and the EF 70-200 f/2.8L,
70-200 f/2.8L IS, 70-200 f/4.0L, and 100-400 f/4.5-5.6L IS zoom lenses."
So here is an advantage for you. I can use the Tamron with my 105mm Macro or
a Canon 100mm Macro. ALthough I have not tried it I would bet the Tamron
would work on the Canon 135 F2.8 soft focus lens while the Canon TC cannot. 
I use mine with the 100-400 f/4.5-5.6L IS zoom and it works splendidly and
exactly like Canon's EF 1.4x with regard to the metering as well.

> 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?

You know, I feel like Ronald Reagan debating Walter Mondale. Shaking his
head her replies, "There you go again...." You are comparing "used" Canon
(and older model at that) to "new" Tamron. In a "new" to "new" the Canon EF
1.4xII is $380 the Tamron is $173, so you save quite a bit. In the used
market you can get a Tamron for about $125 v. $225 for the Canon. Still a
pretty good savings. As for trading and reselling, I buy my stuff to use not
to sell/resell. Hence, as Alfred Eisenstadt once said. "If I like a lens, I
use it."
Last, as to compatibilty issues, Tamron has always been 100% compatible to
Canon EOS systems. Others like Sigma and Tokina require you to upgrade
certain lenses to work with newer bodies, this has never been an issue for
Tamron lenses. When you consider you get a better than $200 savings buying
the Tamron (new not used) versus the Canon (current model nit older one) it
may be worth it to take a chance, although I am not worried since Tamron has
a good reputation in this area.


*
****
*******
***********************************************************
*  For list instructions, including unsubscribe, see:
*    http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/eos_list.htm
***********************************************************

Reply via email to