Home

Please support mflenses.com if you need any graphic related work order it from us, click on above banner to order!

SearchSearch MemberlistMemberlist RegisterRegister ProfileProfile Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages Log inLog in

Best M42 Teleconverter ?
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Sun Feb 15, 2009 9:48 am    Post subject: Best M42 Teleconverter ? Reply with quote

what are the 2-3 best Teleconverter M42 ?

(i prefer x2)


PostPosted: Sun Feb 15, 2009 10:21 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I have no experience, but local users prefer Vivitar MC and Komura. Try forum search, some example images are here Smile


PostPosted: Sun Feb 15, 2009 12:32 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Probably the Telemore-95 II Komura ... Very Happy


PostPosted: Sun Feb 15, 2009 12:58 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Kiron made 7 elements vivitar for example pretty good one.


PostPosted: Sun Feb 15, 2009 2:37 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I read about one with eight elements, but don't remember the brand.

Komura and vivitar are very good, sure.

In shutterbug, @1990/1992, there were a test of the nikon E 100 mm, the normal 50/1,8 with vivitar teleconverter and a prime 105 mm lens.

There, the teleconverter had a very good note.

Rino.


PostPosted: Sun Feb 15, 2009 4:59 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I'm afraid that there is no such thing as the best teleconverter.

My experience is that it is the combination of converter and lens that should be considered, and that can lead to strange results.
The Soligor 1.7x that i grabbed last year did magic to my Sigma AF 70-300 zoom where i expected it would completely ruin its IQ. In fact you can't tell by the imagequality if the converter was mounted or not.
I expected the same effect on my macro 50mm, where the converter worked as a shredder on sharpness and contrast.

As MF-converters hardly get too expensive, it's the best thing to experiment with more converters of different constructions. Remember that 7 elements compared to 4 elements can mean 3 extra chances to spoil your quality.
And where cheap experimenting can be so much fun...


PostPosted: Sun Feb 15, 2009 6:07 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Toeteraar wrote:
Remember that 7 elements compared to 4 elements can mean 3 extra chances to spoil your quality.

Does it mean that I should prefer Meyer Lydith to Zeiss Distagon, because Distagons 4 extra elements will spoil imaqe quality?


PostPosted: Sun Feb 15, 2009 6:50 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

no-X wrote:
Toeteraar wrote:
Remember that 7 elements compared to 4 elements can mean 3 extra chances to spoil your quality.

Does it mean that I should prefer Meyer Lydith to Zeiss Distagon, because Distagons 4 extra elements will spoil imaqe quality?


In that example it's obvious that the Distagon should have better corrections than the Lydith.
My experience with converters is that a 4-element is not always a bad choice over a 7-element. As i posted above, it's the combination of lens and converter and it's always a kind of gambling how such a combination will work out. Good lens + good converter is not always to proof a good combination.


PostPosted: Sun Feb 15, 2009 6:51 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Generally, the planars design (MC version) produces best IQ than tripletes and its derivatives.

Of there, I can infer that teleconverters of 7 or more elements (MC) can alter with less damage the IQ of the primary lens.

Until there the logic. It can be that the reality of the use of teleconverters says another thing to us.

Rino.


PostPosted: Sun Feb 15, 2009 6:58 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Toeteraar wrote:
no-X wrote:
Toeteraar wrote:
Remember that 7 elements compared to 4 elements can mean 3 extra chances to spoil your quality.

Does it mean that I should prefer Meyer Lydith to Zeiss Distagon, because Distagons 4 extra elements will spoil imaqe quality?


In that example it's obvious that the Distagon should have better corrections than the Lydith.
My experience with converters is that a 4-element is not always a bad choice over a 7-element. As i posted above, it's the combination of lens and converter and it's always a kind of gambling how such a combination will work out. Good lens + good converter is not always to proof a good combination.


Very interesat, Toereraar, your experience, Thank you.

Tell us, please, which teleconv's are so good with 4 elements and which so bad with 7. It could be a very usefull information and an economic benefit Wink

Regards, Rino.


PostPosted: Sun Feb 15, 2009 7:11 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I have a vivitar 3x that's great at making things smooth. Laughing

It came with a bundle of stuff or I would never have bought one.


PostPosted: Sun Feb 15, 2009 7:44 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

martinsmith99 wrote:
I have a vivitar 3x that's great at making things smooth. Laughing

It came with a bundle of stuff or I would never have bought one.


Laughing Laughing

Did you put any pics taken with it?

Rino


PostPosted: Mon Feb 16, 2009 9:17 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I have the best m42 teleconverter ever made! Very Happy Mr. Green
It is a soligor 2x teleconverter with the glas knocked out, nothing to spoil the IQ
i use it as an extension tube for macro Twisted Evil


PostPosted: Mon Feb 16, 2009 9:20 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Rusty wrote:
I have the best m42 teleconverter ever made! Very Happy Mr. Green
It is a soligor 2x teleconverter with the glas knocked out, nothing to spoil the IQ
i use it as an extension tube for macro Twisted Evil



Laughing Laughing Laughing YES!


PostPosted: Wed Feb 18, 2009 8:15 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

estudleon wrote:
martinsmith99 wrote:
I have a vivitar 3x that's great at making things smooth. Laughing

It came with a bundle of stuff or I would never have bought one.


Laughing Laughing

Did you put any pics taken with it?

Rino

Next time ther'e a clear evening I'll try some moon shots.

I'll try and get some pics when I get home so you can see how bad it is.