I was about to sell my new Tokina/Kenko branded Pz-AF 2x Teleplus MC7 converter. I bought it new about $90.00 and I used it last with some reasonable moon shots with Pentax F* 300mm f/4.5. I don't have a reliable setup of tripod and ball-head and I test the same setup further in a birding tour with Don Edwards SF wildlife refuge. I brought along the setup and before I knew it, a Pelican fly by filling big part of my view finder and I take few shots hoping for a reasonable shot to convince myself to keep the TC.I spotted the White Pelican from a good distance
from the 600mm rig
1/1600 sec, 600mm, f/6.3, iso 1600, O Ev
from the 600mm rig
1/1600 sec, 600mm, f/6.3, iso 1600, O Ev
I missed 2nd shot in the framing and the 3rd one is
the sharpest of the bunch with no editing
1/1600 sec, 600mm, f/6.3, iso 2000, O Ev
the sharpest of the bunch with no editing
1/1600 sec, 600mm, f/6.3, iso 2000, O Ev
1/1600 sec, 600mm, f/6.3, iso 1600, -1/3 Ev
They all landed in an area far away from me
the 600mm rig kept me in a good distance from the birds
the 600mm rig kept me in a good distance from the birds
Next come the black necks
leaving the Pelicans behind
A candid shot on the marsh landing plants
with focal b&w
Impressions & Notes
- Not the best in IQ but very much hand-holdable setup that I can shoot without a tripod
- If you expect AF to work reliably, don't buy this TC as you may get disappointed. Though it has the power zoom contacts that look like the SDM contacts, it is not found to work with Pentax DA* 50-135mm f/2.8 in auto-focus.
- Though the TC worked with F* 300mm with AF, the motor noise and AF seem to take a long time to travel to focal point, I ended up shooting all birds flying shots in manual focus mode along with TAv where I set the shutter speed to a fast shutter as in 1/1600 sec and set Av to f/6.3, probably the lowest that is allowed after the TC is mounted.
- Unlike the time that I shot the moon with this set up, the manual focusing seem to work better than AF as I can get more responsive to the birds movement in MF. With the moon, the AF pretty much stay about the same spot not changing. With the birds, things around the birds as well as panning their movement kept the focusing to re-focus and somehow make the shot more difficult to do in AF than MF. Shame, I don't know how to explain it well, it is an odd feeling why MF works better than AF in this difficult shooting scenes with the birds.
- I had similar bad experience with AF on the F* 300mm f/4.5 without the TC that I divide my shots to have a balance between AF and MF subject to the scene and shooting conditions. There are many times that the AF foul up on me especially with AF.C and panning birds with distracting backgrounds or background with low contrast. And I can hardly rely on the semi-working AF for panning the birds movement.
- I am going to keep the TC as I find it worth keeping for $90 to bring my 300mm into a workable 600mm lens. Of course, there are many cons that go with the TC approach in degradation of IQ. My approach in assessing the usefulness on the TC is making the shot with compromises and the TC does let me stay at a good distance in not disturbing the wildlife.
Related:
9 comments:
I have a 1.4X MC4, 2X MC7, 3X Pro 300 which can be used with my F*300, so the maximum theoretic maximum focal length is 2520mm (on Pentax DSLRs, film equivalent focal is 2520 x 1.5 = 3780mm!) but that the aperture is just f/37.8 with (13 + 4 + 7 +7) = 31 glass elements!
Well, practically, I would use only 1.4 or 3X TC on my F*300 alone (before I acquired my 3X, I used to cascade my 1.4 and 2X) which are fairly usable combos depending on what I am to shoot (e.g., 1.4 for birds and 3X for scenery or moon shots).
Thank you so much for the visit and comment. I promise that I will visit and comment on your blog every time you have something positive to share.
And I love your copy of Pentax F*300mm f/4.5. You showed it one time with your K-m body. Spotless clean. I wish mine is like your copy, almost like a Canon L lens look-alike.
My copy came from Kerrick James, one of the 4 pentax users in pentaxian.com who sold it in ebay after his DA* 300mm f/4.0 purchase. And Kerrick used his 300mm quite extensively in the outdoor and hence all the paint loss. I don't mind as much as the lens is still working great.
I will take your suggestions and try out 1.4x with 2x and perhaps 1.7x. Pentax misses the long due development of 1.4x compatible TC and the like and I hope it can get back to it along with a good 400mm in the making in its lens road-map.
Hi Hin, thanks for sharing this test ...
I have used the "father" (or maybe, grand-father) of this converter, the Kenko MC7 Macro, with my Canon F1 for some years, long time ago ...
Actually, i'm thinking about getting one for my K10D, although i'm not sure whether i should look for this one or for the Vivitar 2x Macro Focusing converter ...
Have you ever used one ?
I have used the Kenko 2x MC7 teleplus Macro Teleconverter and as far as I can tell, they look and function the same as the Vivitar 2x Macro Tele-converter in which one end serves as a tele-converter and the other end serves as a macro converter.
For that macro converter, I find it more useful on close up purpose as it turns any K-mount 50mm such as the A 50mm f/1.7 into a powerhouse of 1:1 macro lens. Caveats lie in PF and CA noted.
Hin, great test, but I am convinced that you could make good pictures with anything :)
> Hin Man said...
> Thank you so much for the visit and comment. I promise that I will visit and comment on your blog every time you have something positive to share.
I believe that every word I wrote in my blog is positive as it is always *constructive* to make "negative" reports and comments. Pentax should always know the issues and shortcomings of their offered gear and make necessary changes and improvements accordingly - should be much promptly, too. This is the only way they can be competitive and survive.
In fact, they should have a special team to do what I have been doing for long. Now, I do it all by myself with one person and they can now get all those information so easily, just by reading my Blog! I think they should thank me afterall! :-D
> And I love your copy of Pentax F*300mm f/4.5. You showed it one time with your K-m body. Spotless clean. I wish mine is like your copy, almost like a Canon L lens look-alike.
Yes, all of my gear are of good conditions as I have been using them with great care. Also, as I have so many gear and as a measurbator I rarely use my gear to take photos, their conditions have been very good over years! ;-D
See:-
http://ricehigh.blogspot.com/2009/07/k-m-olive-colour-matching.html
(Well, the above lenses are only a fraction of the original Pentax lenses and collection that I own =V=)
Btw, the F* 300 is surely a great lens, optically. Just have a look for the dragon boat photos which I snapped last time (no serious shooting, anyway) and I think any readers of yours can have an idea on how nice this lens really is!
http://ricehigh.blogspot.com/2008/10/chinese-dragon-boat-race.html
(Some of the photos were taken under light rain)
> My copy came from Kerrick James, one of the 4 pentax users in pentaxian.com who sold it in ebay after his DA* 300mm f/4.0 purchase. And Kerrick used his 300mm quite extensively in the outdoor and hence all the paint loss. I don't mind as much as the lens is still working great.
No damage/worn-out to the optics?
> I will take your suggestions and try out 1.4x with 2x and perhaps 1.7x. Pentax misses the long due development of 1.4x compatible TC and the like and I hope it can get back to it along with a good 400mm in the making in its lens road-map.
I used the 1.7X b4 for once and I think optically it is just not that great. The SMC coating is nice but other than that the resolution and image fidelity are not kept. And, it is somehow inconvenient to get the lens in the focus range with its variable internal focusing, too. The Kenkos do not have such problem.
@RiceHigh, thanks for the friendly visit. You impress me as I seldom get visitor valuable comments such as yours. My face can be a bit red as I have been trashy and a bit harsh on you. I need to keep open minded to you, your inputs as well as your blog.
I see your points and tremendous efforts in holding Pentax accountable for issues and problems. However, I have to be in violent disagreement with you that it is a positive thing to Pentax.
I am with regarding pushing Pentax to improve on its weakness and QC issues but I also see the negative side of repeating similar issues day in and day out. It is doing more harm than good to the customers of Pentax. I hope you consider that in your writing. Think of a love letter writing to Pentax and its customers. If you pick only on the negative things and forget to praise it for what it is. In life, it is much harder to praise than to criticize. But you and I are Pentaxians and we should strike to have a balance between praises and criticism when they are due.
I actually like my Pentax F-1.7x AFA and the partial AF don't bother me as it is a gain of value to MF lens. Yes, it hampers when a AF lens is in use. I do agree with you on the degradation on image quality with TC use but I tend to go after making the shot instead of perfecting the shot.
First of all I would like to say that I just love to take photograph. Even I know good photography also. I must say that What a lovely photographs it is. Very good work. Thank you very much for sharing a beautiful work with us.
Great shots, Hin!
Is the F*300 compatible with the Pentax-A X-L converters? ie- is the rear element recessed? If so, another TC to try if you ever come across one is the Sigma APO EX 1.4x. This converter isn't compatible with many lenses because its front element is flush with the mount. However, I tried and it works with my FA*200/2.8 (including AF). Best wishes!
Post a Comment