| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Ash
Joined: 12 Mar 2010
Posts: 185
Location: Evanston, il, usa
|
 Posted: Mon Mar 29, 2010 8:05 pm Post subject: Any thoughts on teleconverters? |
 |
|
Ash wrote:
I just ordered a takumar 200/4 and wanted to buy a 2x or 3x teleconvertor for it. Does anyone has any idea which brand is good? Most of them are vivitars, soligor and auto branded. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
CarbonR
Joined: 31 Dec 2008
Posts: 1969
Location: Clermont-Ferrand, France
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 29, 2010 8:22 pm Post subject: |
|
|
CarbonR wrote:
The more lenses the teleconverter has, the better it is, generally speaking 
_________________
Cameras : Canon 5D, Pentax K100D, Pentax 6x7, Spotmatic
Lenses : 15mm to 1000mm (24x36)
My websites : [FR & ENG]Takumar - the eyes of the Spotmatic : info about all Takumar lenses // Kogaku - My photo site
I am selling : Takumar lenses and rare Pentax bodies, pm me if you're interested in something [MFLenses feed-back]
Information on Takumar lenses with samples :
Wide angle : Takumar 15/3.5 15mm, Takumar 17/4 17mm, Takumar 18/11 18mm, Takumar 20/4.5 20mm, Takumar 24/3.5 24mm, Takumar 28/3.5 V1 28mm, Takumar 28/3.5 V2 28mm, Takumar 35/2 V1 35mm, Takumar 35/2 V2 35mm, Takumar 35/2.3 35mm, Takumar 35/3.5 35mm, Takumar 35/4 35mm
Standard : Takumar 50/1.4 V1 50mm, Takumar 50/1.4 V2 50mm, Takumar 50/3.5 50mm, Takumar 50/4 50mm, Takumar 55/2 55/1.8 55mm, Takumar 55/2.2 V1 55mm, Takumar 55/2.2 V2 55mm, Takumar 58/2 58mm, Takumar 58/2.4 58mm
Short tele : Takumar 83/1.9 83mm, Takumar 85/1.8 85/1.9 85mm, Takumar 85/1.8 85mm, Takumar 100/2 100mm, Takumar 100/3.5 100mm, Takumar 100/4 100mm, Takumar 105/2.8 V1 105mm, Takumar 105/2.8 V2 105mm, Takumar 120/2.8 120mm
Telephoto : Takumar 135/2.5 V1 135mm, Takumar 135/2.5 V2 135mm, Takumar 135/3.5 V1 135mm, Takumar 135/3.5 V2 135mm, Takumar 150/4 V1 150mm, Takumar 150/4 V2 150mm
Long tele : Takumar 200/3.5 200mm, Takumar 200/4 200mm, Takumar 200/5.6 200mm, Takumar 300/4 V1 300mm, Takumar 300/4 V2 300mm, Takumar 300/4 V3 300mm, Takumar 300/6.3 300mm, Takumar 400/5.6 400mm, Takumar 500/4.5 500mm, Takumar 500/5 500mm, Takumar 1000/8 V1 1000mm, Takumar 1000/8 V2 1000mm
Zoom : Zoom-Takumar 45~125/4 , Zoom-Takumar 70~150/4.5 , Zoom-Takumar 85~210/4.5 , Zoom-Takumar 135~600/6.7
Achromatic : Ultra-Achromatic-Takumar 85/4.5 , Ultra-Achromatic-Takumar 300/5.6 300mm |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ash
Joined: 12 Mar 2010
Posts: 185
Location: Evanston, il, usa
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 29, 2010 8:27 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Ash wrote:
That information I got while googling  but most of the teleconverters dont have any information regarding there built and element configuration. I was wondering if people here know something about vivitars and soligors. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
peterqd
Joined: 28 Feb 2007
Posts: 7448
Location: near High Wycombe, UK
Expire: 2014-01-04
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 29, 2010 8:33 pm Post subject: |
|
|
peterqd wrote:
Use the Search link at the top of this page, it works better than Google! 
http://forum.mflenses.com/tele-converters-t26095,highlight,teleconverter.html
_________________
Peter - Moderator |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Excalibur
Joined: 19 Jul 2009
Posts: 5017
Location: UK
Expire: 2014-04-21
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 29, 2010 8:49 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Excalibur wrote:
| Ash wrote: |
| I was wondering if people here know something about vivitars and soligors. |
Well I have three different multipliers but never use them, but I did try an experiment with a matched Vivitar multiplier 2Xs for the Vivitar 70-150.....on a Canon FD 135mm prime and Vivitar 135mm f2.8 prime, and the results were quite good (i.e. not razor sharp).
Vivitar 2Xs plus Canon FD 135 f3.5 breechlock
http://i304.photobucket.com/albums/nn172/chakrata/Photo08_5.jpg
_________________
Canon A1, AV1, T70 & T90, EOS 300 and EOS300v, Chinon CE and CP-7M. Contax 139, Fuji STX-2, Konica Autoreflex TC, FS-1, FT-1, Minolta X-700, X-300, XD-11, SRT101b, Nikon EM, FM, F4, F90X, Olympus OM2, Pentax S3, Spotmatic, Pentax ME super, Praktica TL 5B, & BC1, , Ricoh KR10super, Yashica T5D, Bronica Etrs, Mamiya RB67 pro AND drum roll:- a Sony Nex 3
.........past gear Tele Rolleiflex and Rollei SL66.
Many lenses from good to excellent. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Attila
Joined: 24 Feb 2007
Posts: 57865
Location: Hungary
Expire: 2025-11-18
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 29, 2010 9:27 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Attila wrote:
Most of them crap, good ones what made by top makers, designed for a lens , not for all. 1.4X TC should ok , 2X so so, 3X totally crap and you loose many F stop what is crime in tele shooting. In tele shooting light is never enough.. I found pretty okay, Kiron made 7 elements TC what is made 1:1 macro lens from any 50mm lens. You can find as Vivitar or Kiron.
This one.
http://www.mflenses.com/gallery/v/german/meyer/meyer_optik_oreston_50mm_f1_8/
_________________
-------------------------------
Items on sale on Ebay
Sony NEX-7 Carl Zeiss Planar 85mm f1.4, Minolta MD 35mm f1.8, Konica 135mm f2.5, Minolta MD 50mm f1.2, Minolta MD 250mm f5.6, Carl Zeiss Sonnar 180mm f2.8
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
peterqd
Joined: 28 Feb 2007
Posts: 7448
Location: near High Wycombe, UK
Expire: 2014-01-04
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 30, 2010 9:36 am Post subject: |
|
|
peterqd wrote:
| Attila wrote: |
| you loose many F stop what is crime in tele shooting. In tele shooting light is never enough. |
Good advice, this is so true! 2 stops min. on 2xTC
_________________
Peter - Moderator |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
PaulC
Joined: 23 Dec 2008
Posts: 2318
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 30, 2010 10:20 am Post subject: |
|
|
PaulC wrote:
| peterqd wrote: |
| Attila wrote: |
| you loose many F stop what is crime in tele shooting. In tele shooting light is never enough. |
Good advice, this is so true! 2 stops min. on 2xTC |
Yeah, but if you start with a fast lens it's not too bad. A 200/2.8 becomes a 400/5.6. How much would you have to pay to get a 400mm lens that is faster than f5.6?
_________________
View or buy my photos at:
http://shutterstock.com/g/paulcowan |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Attila
Joined: 24 Feb 2007
Posts: 57865
Location: Hungary
Expire: 2025-11-18
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 30, 2010 11:12 am Post subject: |
|
|
Attila wrote:
I think if I have money for fast lens, I have money for 400mm f5.6 lens too and image quality is far better than with TC. Most people who is looking for TC not own fast 200mm lens. Try to hunt down a Sigma 400mm f5.6 APO manual lens.It is small like any small 300mm and lightweight, performance is very good. Don't mix with Sigma 400mm f5.6 MC (black) incredible crappy. I bought my Konica 400mm f4.5 converted to Nikon for 250 USD this is very low price I know and heavyyyyyyyy! 
If need small size and long focal length , one of the best solution is a Tamron SP350mm f5.6 (unfortunately this is fetch high price all time) You can find one in Marketplace now.
_________________
-------------------------------
Items on sale on Ebay
Sony NEX-7 Carl Zeiss Planar 85mm f1.4, Minolta MD 35mm f1.8, Konica 135mm f2.5, Minolta MD 50mm f1.2, Minolta MD 250mm f5.6, Carl Zeiss Sonnar 180mm f2.8
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Dream Merchant
Joined: 19 Jul 2009
Posts: 92
Location: Singapore
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 30, 2010 12:23 pm Post subject: Re: Any thoughts on teleconverters? |
|
|
Dream Merchant wrote:
| Ash wrote: |
| I just ordered a takumar 200/4 and wanted to buy a 2x or 3x teleconvertor for it. Does anyone has any idea which brand is good? Most of them are vivitars, soligor and auto branded. |
That would end up being really dark: 400 f/8; 600 f/12.
I'm with Attila on this one.
However, I'm not sure if the old Tamron TCs are as good as the modern AF version, and other than that, the only TC I've heard good things bout are the Carl Zeiss Mutar. Pretty much rules out using them on a Tak I guess ... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Attila
Joined: 24 Feb 2007
Posts: 57865
Location: Hungary
Expire: 2025-11-18
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 30, 2010 12:28 pm Post subject: Re: Any thoughts on teleconverters? |
|
|
Attila wrote:
| Dream Merchant wrote: |
| Ash wrote: |
| I just ordered a takumar 200/4 and wanted to buy a 2x or 3x teleconvertor for it. Does anyone has any idea which brand is good? Most of them are vivitars, soligor and auto branded. |
That would end up being really dark: 400 f/8; 600 f/12.
I'm with Attila on this one.
However, I'm not sure if the old Tamron TCs are as good as the modern AF version, and other than that, the only TC I've heard good things bout are the Carl Zeiss Mutar. Pretty much rules out using them on a Tak I guess ... |
I had old TAMRON TC I didn't like it. It is ruin image quality in my opinion.
_________________
-------------------------------
Items on sale on Ebay
Sony NEX-7 Carl Zeiss Planar 85mm f1.4, Minolta MD 35mm f1.8, Konica 135mm f2.5, Minolta MD 50mm f1.2, Minolta MD 250mm f5.6, Carl Zeiss Sonnar 180mm f2.8
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Anu
Joined: 14 Apr 2009
Posts: 879
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 31, 2010 1:04 pm Post subject: Re: Any thoughts on teleconverters? |
|
|
Anu wrote:
| Ash wrote: |
| I just ordered a takumar 200/4 and wanted to buy a 2x or 3x teleconvertor for it. Does anyone has any idea which brand is good? Most of them are vivitars, soligor and auto branded. |
If you have a crop-DSLR, I recommend either Soviet KOHBEPTEP of any of the East German ones (as they're probably all the same). I made some tests a while back; the results are somewhere in this forum.
Of courtse the lens you use the TC with must also be sharp (and otherwise of high quality) enough for the extra magnification. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
torbod
Joined: 31 Jan 2010
Posts: 379
Location: Sweden
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 31, 2010 4:06 pm Post subject: |
|
|
torbod wrote:
Any good tip on how to quickly evaluate a teleconverter. What focal length, aperture, and setup is best to test with.
What is the most common flaw to look out for? CA, sharpness, distorsion, flare etc?
/T
_________________
For Sale or Trade: Pick from the list below.
Manual Lenses: CV 15 4.5 | MIR-20H 20 3.5 | Elmarit-R 28 2.8 | Flektogon MC 35 2.4 | S-M-C Tak 50 1.4 | Rollei 50 1.8 HFT | Helios 44-3 MC 58 2 | MC ROKKOR-X 58 1.2 | MacroPlanar 60 2.8 | Vega-12b 90 2.8 | Tamron 52B 90 2.5 | CZJ 135 3.5 | Jupiter-21A 200 4 | Tair-3s 300 4.5 | KOHBEPTEP K-1 | Takumar x2 |
Camera: Sony Nex 5N |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LucisPictor
Joined: 26 Feb 2007
Posts: 17633
Location: Oberhessen, Germany / Maidstone ('95-'96)
Expire: 2013-12-03
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 31, 2010 4:19 pm Post subject: |
|
|
LucisPictor wrote:
Yes, CA, loss of sharpness and contrast, mostly.
I'm not a big fan of TCs, but they save a lot of room and weight.
And if you use a Leica 2xTC on an Elmarit 2.8/180m, the results will be better than of the most regular 5.6/400 lenses (OK, it's just 360mm, but well...).
Depends a lot on the manufacturer, really.
_________________
Personal forum activity on pause every now and again (due to job obligations)!
Carsten, former Moderator 
Things ON SALE
Carsten = "KAPCTEH" = "Karusutenu" | T-shirt?.........................My photos from Emilia: http://www.schouler.net/emilia/emilia2011.html
My gear: http://retrocameracs.wordpress.com/ausrustung/
Old list: http://forum.mflenses.com/viewtopic.php?t=65 (Not up-to-date, sorry!) | http://www.lucispictor.de | http://www.alensaweek.wordpress.com |
http://www.retrocamera.de |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
torbod
Joined: 31 Jan 2010
Posts: 379
Location: Sweden
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 31, 2010 4:35 pm Post subject: |
|
|
torbod wrote:
I just got a KOHBEPTEP K-1 that I'd like so see if it is a normal or a bad copy.
Perhaps I can take some shots and compare to other members findings.
One thong that puzzles me is that it doesn't seem to work any good with apertures faster than 3.5, is that normal?
/T
_________________
For Sale or Trade: Pick from the list below.
Manual Lenses: CV 15 4.5 | MIR-20H 20 3.5 | Elmarit-R 28 2.8 | Flektogon MC 35 2.4 | S-M-C Tak 50 1.4 | Rollei 50 1.8 HFT | Helios 44-3 MC 58 2 | MC ROKKOR-X 58 1.2 | MacroPlanar 60 2.8 | Vega-12b 90 2.8 | Tamron 52B 90 2.5 | CZJ 135 3.5 | Jupiter-21A 200 4 | Tair-3s 300 4.5 | KOHBEPTEP K-1 | Takumar x2 |
Camera: Sony Nex 5N |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Anu
Joined: 14 Apr 2009
Posts: 879
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 31, 2010 5:38 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Anu wrote:
| torbod wrote: |
I just got a KOHBEPTEP K-1 that I'd like so see if it is a normal or a bad copy.
Perhaps I can take some shots and compare to other members findings.
One thong that puzzles me is that it doesn't seem to work any good with apertures faster than 3.5, is that normal?
/T |
KOHBEPTEP K-1 should give just about perfect pixel level detail if the lens you use with it is capable of handling the extra magnification.
Contrast will be lower and all the flaws of the lens you use with it will also be magnified (and some will be introduces by the TC as well). Still you should get massively more details with the TC on a solid lens (like the CZJ teles). |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Anu
Joined: 14 Apr 2009
Posts: 879
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 31, 2010 5:46 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Anu wrote:
| torbod wrote: |
Any good tip on how to quickly evaluate a teleconverter. What focal length, aperture, and setup is best to test with.
What is the most common flaw to look out for? CA, sharpness, distorsion, flare etc?
/T |
Here is a comparison image crops of mine - one with a TC, one without, but upsized to match the magnification. Funny but true - the TC use was a flawed copy
Both shot wide open.
How to test a TC? Well, it depends on how you plan to use it. Just simulate the conditions you plan to use it and make upsize comparison shots without the TC. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
PaulC
Joined: 23 Dec 2008
Posts: 2318
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 31, 2010 8:47 pm Post subject: |
|
|
PaulC wrote:
| Attila wrote: |
I think if I have money for fast lens, I have money for 400mm f5.6 lens too and image quality is far better than with TC. Most people who is looking for TC not own fast 200mm lens. Try to hunt down a Sigma 400mm f5.6 APO manual lens.It is small like any small 300mm and lightweight, performance is very good. Don't mix with Sigma 400mm f5.6 MC (black) incredible crappy. I bought my Konica 400mm f4.5 converted to Nikon for 250 USD this is very low price I know and heavyyyyyyyy!
If need small size and long focal length , one of the best solution is a Tamron SP350mm f5.6 (unfortunately this is fetch high price all time) You can find one in Marketplace now. |
Yeah, but you were saying that the loss of light with a TC is a crime, so it stands to reason that you should be looking for a prime that delivers more light - i.e 400mm f4 to beat the teleconverter's criminal f5.6. You're looking at many thousands of dollars for a modern 400/4.
It would be interesting to see a comparison of a Canon 70-200/2.8 with a good 2x tc against a Tamron 350/5.6 without one. The Tamron ought to win - but would it?
_________________
View or buy my photos at:
http://shutterstock.com/g/paulcowan |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
torbod
Joined: 31 Jan 2010
Posts: 379
Location: Sweden
|
| Posted: Thu Apr 01, 2010 7:07 am Post subject: |
|
|
torbod wrote:
| Anu wrote: |
| torbod wrote: |
Any good tip on how to quickly evaluate a teleconverter. What focal length, aperture, and setup is best to test with.
What is the most common flaw to look out for? CA, sharpness, distorsion, flare etc?
/T |
Here is a comparison image crops of mine - one with a TC, one without, but upsized to match the magnification. Funny but true - the TC use was a flawed copy
Both shot wide open.
How to test a TC? Well, it depends on how you plan to use it. Just simulate the conditions you plan to use it and make upsize comparison shots without the TC. |
Thanx, I'll try that. I guess off center crops is most interesting in my case.
To me your sample doesn't look too bad, how was the flaws appearing? Is it visible in the shots above?
/T
_________________
For Sale or Trade: Pick from the list below.
Manual Lenses: CV 15 4.5 | MIR-20H 20 3.5 | Elmarit-R 28 2.8 | Flektogon MC 35 2.4 | S-M-C Tak 50 1.4 | Rollei 50 1.8 HFT | Helios 44-3 MC 58 2 | MC ROKKOR-X 58 1.2 | MacroPlanar 60 2.8 | Vega-12b 90 2.8 | Tamron 52B 90 2.5 | CZJ 135 3.5 | Jupiter-21A 200 4 | Tair-3s 300 4.5 | KOHBEPTEP K-1 | Takumar x2 |
Camera: Sony Nex 5N |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Anu
Joined: 14 Apr 2009
Posts: 879
|
| Posted: Thu Apr 01, 2010 7:16 am Post subject: |
|
|
Anu wrote:
| torbod wrote: |
To me your sample doesn't look too bad, how was the flaws appearing? Is it visible in the shots above?
/T |
There wasn't much difference in this area of the image compared to a flawless TC. And I agree,, the sample doesn't look bad at all |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
torbod
Joined: 31 Jan 2010
Posts: 379
Location: Sweden
|
| Posted: Thu Apr 01, 2010 2:14 pm Post subject: |
|
|
torbod wrote:
Here is the test result on my Russian converter.
It is actually not as bad as I first thought, perhaps even a keeper
I have so far only looked at center crops. It seems to give more detail than upscaling and adds minimal CA when lens i stopped down.
What do you think?
KOHBEPTEP K-1 on left row (100%). Only lens on right (200%)
First sample is Super Takumar 105 2.8 @ 3.5, a few meters away.
Second sample is CZJ 35 2.4 @ 2.4, macro shot
Upside down girl: Opera singer Jenny Lind (1820-1887) on Swedish 50 Kronor bill.
Only auto-levels used in PS.
/T
_________________
For Sale or Trade: Pick from the list below.
Manual Lenses: CV 15 4.5 | MIR-20H 20 3.5 | Elmarit-R 28 2.8 | Flektogon MC 35 2.4 | S-M-C Tak 50 1.4 | Rollei 50 1.8 HFT | Helios 44-3 MC 58 2 | MC ROKKOR-X 58 1.2 | MacroPlanar 60 2.8 | Vega-12b 90 2.8 | Tamron 52B 90 2.5 | CZJ 135 3.5 | Jupiter-21A 200 4 | Tair-3s 300 4.5 | KOHBEPTEP K-1 | Takumar x2 |
Camera: Sony Nex 5N |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Anu
Joined: 14 Apr 2009
Posts: 879
|
| Posted: Thu Apr 01, 2010 3:34 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Anu wrote:
Lot more detail in the hair of the guy on the bill with the TC.
Hard to say much about the Flek-image as the DOF is tiny Well, lot more detail in the center of the "round thing"... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
torbod
Joined: 31 Jan 2010
Posts: 379
Location: Sweden
|
| Posted: Thu Apr 01, 2010 3:54 pm Post subject: |
|
|
torbod wrote:
Yes, and most obvious is perhaps the better detail on the lower lip (which is upper in the image).
I also think the short eyelashes on the lower image show more detail with the TC. So it could be a good combo to reach approximately 1:1 macro with the CZ 35.
With my 135mm Fujinon the result is really really bad though. Perhaps some lenses don't cope with TCs any good. It seems that the TC does a better job in the close range than in the infinity end.
/T
_________________
For Sale or Trade: Pick from the list below.
Manual Lenses: CV 15 4.5 | MIR-20H 20 3.5 | Elmarit-R 28 2.8 | Flektogon MC 35 2.4 | S-M-C Tak 50 1.4 | Rollei 50 1.8 HFT | Helios 44-3 MC 58 2 | MC ROKKOR-X 58 1.2 | MacroPlanar 60 2.8 | Vega-12b 90 2.8 | Tamron 52B 90 2.5 | CZJ 135 3.5 | Jupiter-21A 200 4 | Tair-3s 300 4.5 | KOHBEPTEP K-1 | Takumar x2 |
Camera: Sony Nex 5N |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Anu
Joined: 14 Apr 2009
Posts: 879
|
| Posted: Fri Apr 02, 2010 6:01 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Anu wrote:
| torbod wrote: |
With my 135mm Fujinon the result is really really bad though. Perhaps some lenses don't cope with TCs any good. It seems that the TC does a better job in the close range than in the infinity end.
/T |
What TC does it enlarges the center part of the image - if the lens one uses the TC with is not of good enough quality, then the TC won't do any good. One should only use premium glass with TCs. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Arkku
Joined: 28 Feb 2007
Posts: 1416
Location: Helsinki, Finland
|
| Posted: Fri Apr 02, 2010 7:58 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Arkku wrote:
| torbod wrote: |
| It seems that the TC does a better job in the close range than in the infinity end. |
Is it possible that infinity focus is a bit off, either with the whole setup (adapter?) or with the TC? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
Search
Memberlist
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
