View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
kawasakiguy37
Joined: 13 Jul 2010 Posts: 132
|
Posted: Wed Nov 16, 2011 6:48 am Post subject: CZJ 300mm F/4.0 use with teleconverters? |
|
|
kawasakiguy37 wrote:
Just won a CZJ 300mm F/4.0 for $300 US on ebay. I intend to use it mainly for macro and wildlife - hence the need for a teleconverter
I would prefer a manual focus converter as they are cheaper and I wont be getting AF with the Zeiss lens anyways.
I will be using this with a tilt adapter on my Nikon DSLR.
Anybody know how the quality is (optically) of the TC16 compared to the 1.4 and 2.0x converters sold by Nikon? I dont intend to use this odd converter for its hackable AF capabilities, just in manual focus only. And I like that 1.6x is right between 1.4 and 2.0
Also recommendations for solid extension tubes would be appreciated as well (this lens I believe is too heavy for any bellows!) _________________ Nikkor
75-150 series E
105 2.0 DC
28 2.0 AIS
T-mount bellows + Spiratone 75mm Flat Field macro
300 4.0 CZJ F |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Olivier
Joined: 18 Feb 2009 Posts: 5078 Location: France
Expire: 2015-08-06
|
Posted: Sat Nov 19, 2011 9:03 am Post subject: |
|
|
Olivier wrote:
Hello Kawa.
About extension tubes, I use Kenko ones, the 3 tubes kit. _________________ Olivier - Moderator
Dslr : Olympus Pen E-P2 - Fujifilm X-Pro2 - Canon 5D MkII.
SLr and MF lenses : for feedback and helping people, cameras and lenses I own : full list here http://forum.mflenses.com/viewtopic,p,1442740.html#1442740 |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Orio
Joined: 24 Feb 2007 Posts: 29545 Location: West Emilia
Expire: 2012-12-04
|
Posted: Sat Nov 19, 2011 9:11 am Post subject: |
|
|
Orio wrote:
I definitely do advice against optical multipliers with long tele lenses that are not APO.
For unavoidable reasons, the longer the normal telephoto lens, the bigger the chromatic aberration.
Optical multipliers do not only multiply the focal lenght, they also multiply the defects (aside from
introducing new problems).
A short tele lens, such as 85mm, may still remain acceptable if the multiplier is a good one.
But longer focal lenses have the CA problem more and more critical.
As for extension tubes, there can be no recommendations, a tube's a tube, there are not good tubes
and bad tubes. The only thing to look for in a tube is the presence of a chip at the mount, which may
allow for focus assist of manual focus lenses. _________________ Orio, Administrator
T*
NE CEDE MALIS AUDENTIOR ITO
Ferrania film is reborn! http://www.filmferrania.it/
Support the Ornano film chemicals company and help them survive!
http://forum.mflenses.com/ornano-chemical-products-t55525.html |
|
Back to top |
|
|
scsambrook
Joined: 29 Mar 2009 Posts: 2167 Location: Glasgow Scotland
Expire: 2011-11-18
|
Posted: Sat Nov 19, 2011 9:29 am Post subject: |
|
|
scsambrook wrote:
Although extension tubes ought to be problem-free, I recently got a used, as new, set in Pentax K fitting, made during the 1970s in Japan. They are indeed nicely finished but none of them lock firmly into either my digital or film Pentax bodies. There's some radial movement which (although not a "problem" as far as results go) is a little disconcerting. Oddly, the tubes themselves are all a tight fit between each other. _________________ Stephen
Equipment: Pentax DSLR for casual shooting, Lumix G1 and Fuji XE-1 for playing with old lenses, and Leica M8 because I still like the optical rangefinder system. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Attila
Joined: 24 Feb 2007 Posts: 57865 Location: Hungary
Expire: 2025-11-18
|
Posted: Sat Nov 19, 2011 11:51 am Post subject: |
|
|
Attila wrote:
macro is definetly bad idea , lens weight is 2kg and designed for tele -shooting _________________ -------------------------------
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 |
|
|
noddywithoutbigears
Joined: 13 Jan 2010 Posts: 215 Location: Leek, Staffordshire
|
Posted: Sat Nov 19, 2011 11:55 am Post subject: |
|
|
noddywithoutbigears wrote:
Orio wrote: |
I definitely do advice against optical multipliers with long tele lenses that are not APO.
For unavoidable reasons, the longer the normal telephoto lens, the bigger the chromatic aberration.
Optical multipliers do not only multiply the focal lenght, they also multiply the defects (aside from
introducing new problems).
A short tele lens, such as 85mm, may still remain acceptable if the multiplier is a good one.
But longer focal lenses have the CA problem more and more critical.
As for extension tubes, there can be no recommendations, a tube's a tube, there are not good tubes
and bad tubes. The only thing to look for in a tube is the presence of a chip at the mount, which may
allow for focus assist of manual focus lenses. |
Totally agree, I've used a cheap set of 3 section PK tubes for the last year and they do everything I require from them and are much more preferable to the converter with their CA problems (unless you spend serious money on the lens) and cheap to boot. Never quite understood why more people don't use tubes as opposed to spending large sums of money on dedicated macro lenses, but I'm tight with money or shall we say I have to work on a "restricted budget". We ought to have a "Tube" thread so we can convert more people to this cheap solution. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Olivier
Joined: 18 Feb 2009 Posts: 5078 Location: France
Expire: 2015-08-06
|
Posted: Sat Nov 19, 2011 12:05 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Olivier wrote:
Nice !
Kawa got answers. _________________ Olivier - Moderator
Dslr : Olympus Pen E-P2 - Fujifilm X-Pro2 - Canon 5D MkII.
SLr and MF lenses : for feedback and helping people, cameras and lenses I own : full list here http://forum.mflenses.com/viewtopic,p,1442740.html#1442740 |
|
Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|