On Mon, Jun 22, 2020 at 03:31:03PM -0400, John wrote:
> On 6/17/2020 16:12:20, John Francis wrote:
> > On Fri, Jun 12, 2020 at 11:48:50PM -0700, Larry Colen wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > > On Jun 12, 2020, at 11:28 PM, Alan C wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Igor, I did a lot of tests too. The TC shots were a
On 6/17/2020 16:12:20, John Francis wrote:
On Fri, Jun 12, 2020 at 11:48:50PM -0700, Larry Colen wrote:
On Jun 12, 2020, at 11:28 PM, Alan C wrote:
Igor, I did a lot of tests too. The TC shots were always inferior to the cropped
shots without TC. I only have consumer lenses so I can't comm
It looks a wee bit sharper with the teleconverter, but that could be
subject movement.
On 6/10/2020 11:25 PM, Larry Colen wrote:
I took some photos of Mombird today with the bigma, and some with the bigma
plus my 2x teleconverter (which becomes manual focus)
It’s my impression that the best
I think the non versions are better imo
Dave
On Wed, Jun 10, 2020 at 11:25 PM Larry Colen wrote:
> I took some photos of Mombird today with the bigma, and some with the
> bigma plus my 2x teleconverter (which becomes manual focus)
>
> It’s my impression that the best with the TC
On Fri, Jun 12, 2020 at 11:48:50PM -0700, Larry Colen wrote:
>
>
> > On Jun 12, 2020, at 11:28 PM, Alan C wrote:
> >
> > Igor, I did a lot of tests too. The TC shots were always inferior to the
> > cropped shots without TC. I only have consumer lenses so I can't comment on
> > how a TC perfor
ages with the
> D-FA 150-450 with 1.4x TC (=630mm) are so good which seems to suggest one
> need to start with top line glass. I'll dig out some of my test shots & post.
> I had a 1.7x TC AF converter from film days which I have now sold.
I suspect that it depends a lot on the
h the bigma, and some with the
bigma
plus my 2x teleconverter (which becomes manual focus)
It’s my impression that the best with the TC are a little bit better than
cropping without it, though with manual focus I missed many more shots.
It’s pretty warm here, I think she was opening her mouth to tr
ed, 10 Jun 2020 20:26:02 -0700
I took some photos of Mombird today with the bigma, and some with the
bigma
plus my 2x teleconverter (which becomes manual focus)
It’s my impression that the best with the TC are a little bit better than
cropping without it, though with manual focus I missed many
> On Jun 11, 2020, at 12:15 AM, Bulent Celasun wrote:
>
> Due in part to the moving target (in addition to other issues),
> a precise comparison seems impossible.
>
> Still, I found the "no teleconverter" images a bit more satisfactory.
> In other words,
Due in part to the moving target (in addition to other issues),
a precise comparison seems impossible.
Still, I found the "no teleconverter" images a bit more satisfactory.
In other words, teleconverter does not seem to contribut
I took some photos of Mombird today with the bigma, and some with the bigma
plus my 2x teleconverter (which becomes manual focus)
It’s my impression that the best with the TC are a little bit better than
cropping without it, though with manual focus I missed many more shots.
It’s pretty warm
/photos/ellarsee/sets/72157684046829556/
Also, is there an easy way to tell when, or which, teleconverter is
sharper than just cropping a photo? Is there a list of good or bad ones?
Or since there are only one or two that will work with autofocus, the
question is answered?
--
Larry Colen l
Larry, it doesn't truly work with autofocus lenses you get the same
limitations with them as when using K M and A lenses, but the AF 1.7x
works very well as a teleconverter, better than just cropping, anyway.
I think they're still part of the Pentax system available in Jap
t; try at the bald eagles at Curtner Elementary school:
> https://www.flickr.com/photos/ellarsee/34698172421/
>
> For those that want the whole set
> http://www.flickriver.com/photos/ellarsee/sets/72157684046829556/
>
> Also, is there an easy way to tell when, or which, telecon
Alan C
-Original Message-
From: Paul Stenquist
Sent: Monday, May 22, 2017 11:54 PM
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
Subject: Re: PESO suburban eagle also, teleconverter question
The eagle shot is nice, but it's crying out for levels adjustment and
rendering finesse. The best Pentax conver
421/
For those that want the whole set
http://www.flickriver.com/photos/ellarsee/sets/72157684046829556/
Also, is there an easy way to tell when, or which, teleconverter is sharper
than just cropping a photo? Is there a list of good or bad ones? Or since
there are only one or two that will work
lickriver.com/photos/ellarsee/sets/72157684046829556/
>
> Also, is there an easy way to tell when, or which, teleconverter is sharper
> than just cropping a photo? Is there a list of good or bad ones? Or since
> there are only one or two that will work with autofocus, the question is
> a
an easy way to tell when, or which, teleconverter is
sharper than just cropping a photo? Is there a list of good or bad
ones? Or since there are only one or two that will work with autofocus,
the question is answered?
--
Larry Colen l...@red4est.com (postbox on min4est) http://red4est.com/lrc
A lightly used Pentax A 1.4 X-S Teleconverter with original caps and soft
case - $165 USD
Buyer pays shipping - U S only.
Kenneth Waller
http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/kennethwaller
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to
Automatic Tele Converter
2X-1. Am I right in assuming this is a screw-mount converter for Pentax-M42
something? Anyone know anything about this? Is it possible to use with DSLRs?
I’m assuming some kind of mount adapter for the K-mount?
The truth is I’ve never used a teleconverter before
x-M42 something? Anyone know anything about this? Is it possible to
> use with DSLRs? I’m assuming some kind of mount adapter for the K-mount?
>
> The truth is I’ve never used a teleconverter before, though I understand the
> concept and purpose. I have absolutely no idea, ho
the K-mount?
The truth is I’ve never used a teleconverter before, though I understand the
concept and purpose. I have absolutely no idea, however, how I came upon this
teleconverter. It’s a mystery.
Cheers, Christine
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman
200mm. They've
had the lens since last Friday, so hopefully news will be coming soon...
MCC
- Original Message
From: Boris Liberman
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
Sent: Thu, June 16, 2011 1:57:34 AM
Subject: Re: D-FA 100mm Macro Plus Teleconverter
On 6/14/2011 14:52, Mark Cas
On Thu, 16 Jun 2011 08:57:34 +0300
Boris Liberman wrote:
> You appear to have proven yet again, Mark, that a good photographer
> can extract the best from their gear, whereas the said gear does not
> have to be the best of the best of the best.
There has been a glut of youngsters complaining abo
On 6/14/2011 14:52, Mark Cassino wrote:
This weekend I tested out the D-FA 100mm macro combined with a Kiron MC-7 2x
teleconverter and also combined with a Pentax 1.7x AF adapter as alternatives to
a 200mm macro lens. The combo with the Kiron was OK, but not great. However, I
was really
On Wed, 15 Jun 2011 22:22:58 +0200
Ecke PDML wrote:
> > This thread inspired me to try something a bit silly. I put my
> > vivitar 2x macro teleconverter on my bigma to see how close I could
> > get.
> >
> > In terms of image quality, the experiment was not a re
2011/6/15 Larry Colen :
>
> This thread inspired me to try something a bit silly. I put my vivitar 2x
> macro teleconverter on my bigma to see how close I could get.
>
> In terms of image quality, the experiment was not a resounding success, but
> if I ever need to do macr
105mm alone; did you get better working distance with your test? (wasn't that
> one of your main concerns?)
This thread inspired me to try something a bit silly. I put my vivitar 2x
macro teleconverter on my bigma to see how close I could get.
In terms of image quality, the experimen
harley
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
Sent: Tue, June 14, 2011 9:11:45 PM
Subject: Re: D-FA 100mm Macro Plus Teleconverter
On 2011-06-14 05:52 , Mark Cassino wrote:
> I'm pretty satisfied with the 1.7x telelconverter - though I still hope to
hear
> from Pentax that they can fixed
On 2011-06-14 05:52 , Mark Cassino wrote:
I'm pretty satisfied with the 1.7x telelconverter - though I still hope to hear
from Pentax that they can fixed the lens!
very nice practical experiment; i also have a 1.7x AF TC; i tried it
with my Sigma 105mm, and found the quality pretty good, and i
LOL - For my part, I like the expression (if you can call it that) of the
bottom
fly (in the side shot...)
- Original Message
From: Steven Desjardins
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
Sent: Tue, June 14, 2011 10:02:12 AM
Subject: Re: D-FA 100mm Macro Plus Teleconverter
That side
Macro Plus Teleconverter
Very impressive, Mark!
I like the DOF. Did you do anything special for it?
You didn't do focal-HDR, did you?
I tried to play with the same combination of lenses a few times, and
my results were acceptable but not as good.
My biggest struggle was the DOF, even with the apert
Tue Jun 14 14:15:20 EDT 2011
Ecke PDML wrote:
> 2011/6/14 Igor Roshchin :
> >
> > Very impressive, Mark!
> >
> > I like the DOF. Did you do anything special for it?
> > You didn't do focal-HDR, did you?
>
> High DOF Range? =)
> On that occasion: just wondering, does anyone here use DOF stacking
4, 2011, at 4:52 AM, Mark Cassino wrote:
>
>> This weekend I tested out the D-FA 100mm macro combined with a Kiron MC-7 2x
>> teleconverter and also combined with a Pentax 1.7x AF adapter as
>> alternatives to
>> a 200mm macro lens. The combo with the Kiron was OK, but
un 14, 2011, at 4:52 AM, Mark Cassino wrote:
> This weekend I tested out the D-FA 100mm macro combined with a Kiron MC-7 2x
> teleconverter and also combined with a Pentax 1.7x AF adapter as alternatives
> to
> a 200mm macro lens. The combo with the Kiron was OK, but not great.
2011/6/14 Igor Roshchin :
>
> Very impressive, Mark!
>
> I like the DOF. Did you do anything special for it?
> You didn't do focal-HDR, did you?
High DOF Range? =)
On that occasion: just wondering, does anyone here use DOF stacking
such as Helicon Focus and would share their findings?
Cheers
Ecke
e DFA-100/2.8 macro):
http://science.komkon.org/~igor/PHOTOS/Raspberries/100-2_0x-1_7x/
Igor
On Tue, Jun 14, 2011 at 7:52 AM, Mark Cassino
wrote:
> This weekend I tested out the D-FA 100mm macro combined with a Kiron
> MC-7 2x
> teleconverter and also combined with a Pentax 1.7x
They all look great.
Dave
On Tue, Jun 14, 2011 at 7:52 AM, Mark Cassino wrote:
> This weekend I tested out the D-FA 100mm macro combined with a Kiron MC-7 2x
> teleconverter and also combined with a Pentax 1.7x AF adapter as alternatives
> to
> a 200mm macro lens. The combo with t
That side picture of the Syrphid flies is my favorite position, er,
shot of the bunch.
Your usual high standards, sir.
On Tue, Jun 14, 2011 at 7:52 AM, Mark Cassino wrote:
> This weekend I tested out the D-FA 100mm macro combined with a Kiron MC-7 2x
> teleconverter and also combined
ron MC-7 2x
> teleconverter and also combined with a Pentax 1.7x AF adapter as alternatives
> to
> a 200mm macro lens. The combo with the Kiron was OK, but not great. However,
> I
> was really impressed with the results with the 1.7x converter. Here's one
> test
>
This weekend I tested out the D-FA 100mm macro combined with a Kiron MC-7 2x
teleconverter and also combined with a Pentax 1.7x AF adapter as alternatives
to
a 200mm macro lens. The combo with the Kiron was OK, but not great. However, I
was really impressed with the results with the 1.7x
Mon Aug 30 14:27:54 CDT 2010
Joseph McAllister wrote:
> On Aug 30, 2010, at 04:40 , Igor Roshchin wrote:
>
> > Here is what DAF 100-MACRO with 2x-s and AF-1.7 stacked together
> > can do with a raspberry:
> > http://www.komkon.org/~igor/PHOTOS/Raspberries/100-2_0x-1_7x/IMGP9609.jpg
> > http://w
On Aug 30, 2010, at 04:40 , Igor Roshchin wrote:
Here is what DAF 100-MACRO with 2x-s and AF-1.7 stacked together
can do with a raspberry:
http://www.komkon.org/~igor/PHOTOS/Raspberries/100-2_0x-1_7x/IMGP9609.jpg
http://www.komkon.org/~igor/PHOTOS/Raspberries/100-2_0x-1_7x/IMGP9608.jpg
Igor
M
On Aug 30, 2010, at 4:40 AM, Igor Roshchin wrote:
>
>
> Larry,
> First of all, 20/1.8 with x1.4 will be close to f/2.5 if I am doing the
> math right at this ungodly early hour.
It's kind of silly to put a 1.4x on a 20 rather than just using my 30, or just
using the 20 on my aps-c. The 1.4x
Larry,
First of all, 20/1.8 with x1.4 will be close to f/2.5 if I am doing the
math right at this ungodly early hour.
SEcond, while I don't have experience with Tamrox TCs,
I have been happily using Pentax's MF 2x-S and "AF" x1.7.
I just wanted to remind that the TCs can also be used with a ma
On Aug 29, 2010, at 8:11 PM, Miserere wrote:
> On 29 August 2010 00:47, Larry Colen wrote:
>> I probably got it when I bought someones bag of gear, saw that it was a TC
>> and just tossed it in the drawer without looking at it.
>>
>> I just tried it out and it seems to work fine on autofocus.
I have a 1.4x Pz-AF MC4 Tamron-F TELE-CONVERTER.
I'm not impressed with it as much as I am with the Tamron AF ASPHERICAL
LD 28-200 1:3.8-5.6 lens I bought it for. And I'm pretty sure I've
mentioned before how disappointing I found that lens.
The lens is not sharp and has a lot of CA. The lens
On 29 August 2010 00:47, Larry Colen wrote:
> I probably got it when I bought someones bag of gear, saw that it was a TC
> and just tossed it in the drawer without looking at it.
>
> I just tried it out and it seems to work fine on autofocus. Does anyone have
> any experience with one of these?
List
Reply-To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
Subject: I just found a Tamron -F AF 1.4x teleconverter in my stuff
I probably got it when I bought someones bag of gear, saw that it was a TC and
just tossed it in the drawer without looking at it.
I just tried it out and it seems to work fine on auto
On Sun, Aug 29, 2010 at 10:46 AM, CheekyGeek wrote:
> I have no experience with AF teleconverters, but have the MF Adaptall
> 2 version of both the 2x and 1.4x that I planned to use with my 52B
> 90mm f2.5 Macro SP. It will do 1:2 by itself and 1:1 with the 2x, so I
> believe that means it will do
I have no experience with AF teleconverters, but have the MF Adaptall
2 version of both the 2x and 1.4x that I planned to use with my 52B
90mm f2.5 Macro SP. It will do 1:2 by itself and 1:1 with the 2x, so I
believe that means it will do 1:1.5 with the 1.4x.
The main advantage of the 1.4x (to me)
I probably got it when I bought someones bag of gear, saw that it was a TC and
just tossed it in the drawer without looking at it.
I just tried it out and it seems to work fine on autofocus. Does anyone have
any experience with one of these? Would it degrade an image less than cropping
it by a
Subject: Re: WTB: TAMRON-F AF PZ-AF 1.4X MC4 TELECONVERTER
Are the 1.4x and 2.0x Tamron-F AF PZ-AF Teleconverters the only ones
that work with the FA-DA screwdriver and SDM lenses?
The BBAR versions have better multi-coating than the non-BBAR ones,
The MC4 indicates multi-coating and the # of elements
Halpin
[s...@stans-photography.info]
Sent: 24 May 2009 03:19
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
Subject: Re: WTB: TAMRON-F AF PZ-AF 1.4X MC4 TELECONVERTER
I have a Tamron-F 2X Pz-AF BBAR MC7
Is that close enough?
stan
On May 23, 2009, at 5:43 AM, John Whittingham wrote:
> Good price paid, c
Are the 1.4x and 2.0x Tamron-F AF PZ-AF Teleconverters the only ones
that work with the FA-DA screwdriver and SDM lenses?
The BBAR versions have better multi-coating than the non-BBAR ones,
The MC4 indicates multi-coating and the # of elements, MC7 for the 2x.
I just ran some limited tests
I have a Tamron-F 2X Pz-AF BBAR MC7
Is that close enough?
stan
On May 23, 2009, at 5:43 AM, John Whittingham wrote:
Good price paid, cash waiting or may exchenge for Pentax related
equipment.
Regards,
John
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdm
Good price paid, cash waiting or may exchenge for Pentax related equipment.
Regards,
John
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow
the directions.
> Teleconverters, by default, always DEGRADE image quality; never improve
> I'm also beginning to suspect that in some circumstances, my camera
> body may be a limiting factor.
>
It depends on the light. If you are able to step down to the sweat
spot of the lens/TC combo you will generally get goo
On Thu, Feb 19, 2009 at 6:44 PM, Christian wrote:
> Larry Colen wrote:
>
>> Another factor that also played a part is the 20km or so of atmosphere
>> that I was shooting through:
>
> Yeah I guess I wouldn't be doing those kinds of images. Atmospherics are
> always a problem.
>
>> I certainly don'
inexpensive TCs you are going to suffer
greatly.
Not necessarily. For instance, if you have a lens that vignettes a
little or suffers from a little edge softness, and a very high quality
teleconverter, the combination might actually improve evenness of
illumination and emphasize the center
> Teleconverters, by default, always DEGRADE image quality;
> never improve
> it. Anytime you put something between your lens and your
> camera you are
> going to lower image quality.
Compared to what?
If you want the perspective that the teleconverter gives you you have,
Larry Colen wrote:
Another factor that also played a part is the 20km or so of atmosphere
that I was shooting through:
Yeah I guess I wouldn't be doing those kinds of images. Atmospherics
are always a problem.
I certainly don't claim that the experiment was definitive. About all
that I pr
On Thu, Feb 19, 2009 at 03:54:09PM -0500, Christian wrote:
# Really those are all pretty bad. I wouldn't be happy with any of them.
I'm certainly not.
I should probably also post some uncropped versions.
# Perhaps it is also the white on white subject and your tripod/head
# combo might not
r
using a teleconverter, or multiple TCs. The answer seems to be "it
depends". It seems to depend on a lot of factors, and I bet that the
results would be different with a 14mp K20 than with my 6mp K100, or a
D700.
Despite the rig being on a tripod, I also probably should have tried
bumpin
I did a quick experiment yesterday with my bigma and teleconverters,
and posted some examples and my notes at dpr:
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/readflat.asp?forum=1036&thread=31052869
The question was, for extreme telephoto am I better with cropping, or
using a teleconverter, or mult
Cotty wrote:
> On 9/5/08, drew, discombobulated, unleashed:
>
>> I have a Vivitar 2x Teleconverter
>
> If you buy a K20D and try and use it on there, apparently you'll have to
> trash the camera as it's crap.
>
Yes, and at least by DL can meter properly with
at 2:39 PM, drew wrote:
>
>> I have a Vivitar 2x Teleconverter that came with a P30 I bought ages
>> ago. I have just tried it on my *ist-DL but it does not appear to
>> meter
>> correctly, Every shot is overexposed and the aperture does not display
>> on the
Thanks Brian,
This thing seems to break communication of the aperture completely, When
I put the lens into A the camera spots it that has happened because
the F-stop display becomes underlined, but the actual display shows --
no option to set it.
Thanks,
Drew.
Brian Walters wrote:
> On F
ecification probably breaks the A protocol as far as the
> DSLRs are concerned. I just learned to live with it, (not like I use it
> much). Hell, I paid $3.00 for that particular converter so I guess I
> can't complain much.
>
> drew wrote:
>> Hi all,
>>
>&g
On 9/5/08, drew, discombobulated, unleashed:
>I have a Vivitar 2x Teleconverter
If you buy a K20D and try and use it on there, apparently you'll have to
trash the camera as it's crap.
--
Cheers,
Cotty
___/\__
|| (O) | People, Places, Pastiche
||=|http://www.c
On May 9, 2008, at 2:39 PM, drew wrote:
> I have a Vivitar 2x Teleconverter that came with a P30 I bought ages
> ago. I have just tried it on my *ist-DL but it does not appear to
> meter
> correctly, Every shot is overexposed and the aperture does not display
> on the camera. It
On Fri, 09 May 2008 22:39:24 +0100, "drew"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> I suppose by question is, should the camera be able to display the
> aperture and should it be able to meter correctly with an A lens?
>
Depends on how you use it.
If you set the aperture on the lens in Av mode, the camer
to live with it, (not like I use it
> much). Hell, I paid $3.00 for that particular converter so I guess I
> can't complain much.
>
> drew wrote:
>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> I have a Vivitar 2x Teleconverter that came with a P30 I bought ages
>> ago. I have
in much.
drew wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I have a Vivitar 2x Teleconverter that came with a P30 I bought ages
> ago. I have just tried it on my *ist-DL but it does not appear to meter
> correctly, Every shot is overexposed and the aperture does not display
> on the camera. It ca
Hi all,
I have a Vivitar 2x Teleconverter that came with a P30 I bought ages
ago. I have just tried it on my *ist-DL but it does not appear to meter
correctly, Every shot is overexposed and the aperture does not display
on the camera. It calls itself a PK-A/R-PK.
I suppose by question is
I believe it's the same as the CPC version. Mine never worked in all modes.
Toralf Lund wrote:
> Has anyone here tried the Takumar-A 2X teleconverter on the digital
> bodies? I'm referring to this unit:
> http://www.bdimitrov.de/kmp/teleconverters/Takumar-A_2X.html
>
&g
that my MZ-5n doesn't report
the focal length for lenses where it otherwise would, when they are
connected via this converter.
But as long as all exposure modes work, everything should be all right.
Thanks,
- T
> -Adam
>
>
> Toralf Lund wrote:
>
>> Has anyone here tri
I had one for a bit (Got it off Aaron) and did use it a few times with my A
70-210/4. Worked in all modes, but doesn't support the extras of the KAF mount
(MTF data, AF, focal length communication)
-Adam
Toralf Lund wrote:
> Has anyone here tried the Takumar-A 2X teleconverter on the
Has anyone here tried the Takumar-A 2X teleconverter on the digital
bodies? I'm referring to this unit:
http://www.bdimitrov.de/kmp/teleconverters/Takumar-A_2X.html
I'd like to know if it works in all metering modes. I mean, I think it
should since it should have full "A"
>1. FA 100-300/4.7-5.8
>>2. M150/3.5
>>3. A50/1.7 or M50/1.7, if anyone will consider paying anything at all
>> for another 50...
>>4. Takumar-A 2X teleconverter.
>>
>> I haven't really decided on prices yet, so if you're intere
gt;> are...
>>
>>1. FA 100-300/4.7-5.8
>>2. M150/3.5
>>3. A50/1.7 or M50/1.7, if anyone will consider paying anything
>> at all
>> for another 50...
>>4. Takumar-A 2X teleconverter.
>>
>> I haven't really decided on pr
FA 100-300/4.7-5.8
>2. M150/3.5
>3. A50/1.7 or M50/1.7, if anyone will consider paying anything
> at all
> for another 50...
>4. Takumar-A 2X teleconverter.
>
> I haven't really decided on prices yet, so if you're interested, just
> make an offer.
but I will at least
> mention it here and see if there's any interest at all. The items are...
>
>1. FA 100-300/4.7-5.8
>2. M150/3.5
>3. A50/1.7 or M50/1.7, if anyone will consider paying anything at all
> for another 50...
>4. Takumar-A 2X telecon
/1.7, if anyone will consider paying anything at all
for another 50...
4. Takumar-A 2X teleconverter.
I haven't really decided on prices yet, so if you're interested, just
make an offer.
Everyone knows how nice all of this is, right? So I don't have to
describe any of i
OK, so its a day early but this is not a FS post.
Surely someone here in the PDML has to have a spare 1.4X-L
teleconverter laying around that they would like to unload for a
little extra cash?
If so, or if you know of someone who might be willing to part with
their copy please email me off
Yesterday, I saw a pdf-file from a Danish photodealer, showing a Pentax 1.7x
AF adapter/teleconverter.
I'ts an excellent piece of equipment.
Regards
Jens Bladt
http://www.jensbladt.dk
+45 56 63 77 11
+45 23 43 85 77
Skype: jensbladt248
-Oprindelig meddelelse-
Fra: [EMAIL PROT
For sale:
DOI 2X teleconverter for Pentax K mount.
Near mint condition, possibly unused. Comes with original front and rear caps
and leatherette case.
This was an exceptionally good teleconverter, thought by many to be the best
that was ever made for Pentax lenses. It received excellent
>
> From: "Bryan Vyhmeister" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Date: 2006/07/07 Fri AM 05:17:27 GMT
> To: PDML
> Subject: Looking for Pentax 1.4X-S or 1.7X Teleconverter
>
> I am now looking for a Pentax A 1.4X-S teleconverter. I would be
> possibly interested in a
I am now looking for a Pentax A 1.4X-S teleconverter. I would be
possibly interested in a Pentax F 1.7X AF teleconverter although I
would prefer the former. Any leads? Thanks.
Bryan
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Sure, was talking about the rest but obviously at f/8 it won't work :)
Should have been more precise.
2005/9/8, Fred <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> >> Another problem with the mirror is most are t-mounts and most t-mounts,
> >> (all I've seen in fact), are painted. The Pentax autofocus system needs
> >>
e, or some other clever guy)
> -Original Message-
> From: Marco Ferrari [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: 7. september 2005 14:32
> To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
> Subject: Teleconverter F 1.7x AF: any comment?
>
> Dear all,
>
> have you ever used this Telecon
Bladt
Arkitekt MAA
http://hjem.get2net.dk/bladt
-Oprindelig meddelelse-
Fra: Marco Ferrari [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sendt: 7. september 2005 14:32
Til: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
Emne: Teleconverter F 1.7x AF: any comment?
Dear all,
have you ever used this Teleconverter?
Have you some com
AF essentially stops working when the effective F-stop drops smaller than
f5.6.
Herb...
- Original Message -
From: "Marco Ferrari" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To:
Sent: Wednesday, September 07, 2005 8:31 AM
Subject: Teleconverter F 1.7x AF: any comment?
I shot slid
>> Another problem with the mirror is most are t-mounts and most t-mounts,
>> (all I've seen in fact), are painted. The Pentax autofocus system needs
>> a metal lens mount to short the right contacts to autofocus.
> The Tamron 500mm SP with a KA adaptor should work nicely then :)
> I know KA adap
ts, (all I've seen in fact),
are painted. The Pentax autofocus system needs a metal lens mount to
short the right contacts to autofocus.
Marco Ferrari wrote:
Dear all,
have you ever used this Teleconverter?
Have you some comments?
I shot slide films, and I'm interested in convertin
On Wed, Sep 07, 2005 at 09:32:39AM -0400, Tom Reese wrote:
> > have you ever used this Teleconverter?
> > Have you some comments?
>
> In my experience, it doesn't work well with long lenses because it has a
> limited focusing range. The instructions are to set the len
On Wed, 7 Sep 2005, Tom Reese wrote:
have you ever used this Teleconverter?
Have you some comments?
In my experience, it doesn't work well with long lenses because it has a
limited focusing range. The instructions are to set the lens at infinity
then allow the teleconverter to do the foc
The Pentax autofocus system needs a metal lens mount to
> short the right contacts to autofocus.
>
> Marco Ferrari wrote:
>
> >Dear all,
> >
> >have you ever used this Teleconverter?
> >Have you some comments?
> >
> >I shot slide films, and I'm
nd
most t-mounts, (all I've seen in fact),
are painted. The Pentax autofocus system needs a metal lens mount to
short the right contacts to autofocus.
Marco Ferrari wrote:
Dear all,
have you ever used this Teleconverter?
Have you some comments?
I shot slide films, and I'm interested in
>
> From: "Marco Ferrari" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Date: 2005/09/07 Wed PM 12:31:48 GMT
> To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
> Subject: Teleconverter F 1.7x AF: any comment?
>
> Dear all,
>
> have you ever used this Teleconverter?
> Have you some comments?
1 - 100 of 309 matches
Mail list logo
