Subject: Re: Quality of pentax teleconverters.
on 05.07.04 6:25, Verge Scott at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
So has anyone seen any tests of the pentax ones?
I've seen that in German Foto Magazin - AFAIR they have been rated much
higher than anything from Sigma or Tamron (something like 9.6 vs
Technician
-- Original Message ---
From: Sylwester Pietrzyk [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Mon, 05 Jul 2004 14:35:49 +0200
Subject: Re: Quality of pentax teleconverters.
on 05.07.04 6:25, Verge Scott at [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
So has
On 4 Jul 2004 at 21:25, Verge Scott wrote:
Actually from the testing I have read good 1.4
teleconverters can actually be very good and almost
indistinguishable at times. If used with a high
quality prime lens also.
Quite correct, 30 years ago this wasn't the case, now a lot of the
Yeah its too bad they don't pass through the AF
stuff, you would think they would redo them, keep the
same optics to keep the development costs down but
just add the pass through for the AF.
Well for now I'll look into getting the AF adaptor
1.7 because I'm used to that and it will give me
On 5 Jul 2004 at 9:56, Verge Scott wrote:
Well for now I'll look into getting the AF adaptor
1.7 because I'm used to that and it will give me some
autofocus. I wish they weren't so hard to find and
expensive, but what can you do.
You just need to keep your eyes open, set up some automated
Right now I use a Sakar 1.7 teleconverter and its not
horrible but I wouldn't mind upgrading to something of
better optical quality.
I've been looking for one the well regarded
kenko/tamron pro ones but they are pricey and hard to
find in pentax mount.
What are the pentax ones like for
Verge,
I had an AF 1.7 TC until very recently. Overall, I was pretty happy with
the results it could produce when paired with a Tokina 300mm F2.8 ATX
lens. The AF is never going to rival a dedicated lens, but if you use
the MF barrel to quick focus, and then let the AF adaptor take over for
If K200/2.5 takes A1.4X-L or A2X-L, they are the best option. If not,
A1.4X-S is the next best thing. F1.7X has plastic body which might not be
able to withstand the weight of 1kg.
Alan Chan
http://www.pbase.com/wlachan
Right now I use a Sakar 1.7 teleconverter and its not
horrible but I
On Sun, 04 Jul 2004 15:42:32 -0700, you wrote:
If K200/2.5 takes A1.4X-L or A2X-L, they are the best option. If not,
A1.4X-S is the next best thing. F1.7X has plastic body which might not be
able to withstand the weight of 1kg.
The Pentax XL teleconverters do not fit the K200/2.5, but the
Quality Teleconverter - That's a photographic oxymoron for sure.
sorta like fine grained ASA3200 film.
jco
-Original Message-
From: Alan Chan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, July 04, 2004 6:43 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: Quality of pentax teleconverters.
If K200/2.5
, July 04, 2004 6:43 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: Quality of pentax teleconverters.
If K200/2.5 takes A1.4X-L or A2X-L, they are the
best option. If not,
A1.4X-S is the next best thing. F1.7X has plastic
body which might not
be
able to withstand the weight of 1kg.
Alan Chan
11 matches
Mail list logo
