Home News Buyers Guide About Advertising
 
 
 
   
Page 1 of 4 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 32

Hybrid View

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Des Plaines, IL
    Posts
    9,560

    Talking Just to drive the "optical purists" amongst us nutz ...

    Just to drive the optical purists nutz ...

    I took the AF 200mm f/2.8 APO G HS lens and mounted to the Kenko 300 3x T/C ... mounted it on the a850 and then place it in the APS-C capture mode ... effectively making it ...

    well, let's do the math, boys and girls:

    200mm x 3x (T/C) x 1.5 (APS-C crop factor) = 900mm! Oh yeah!

    let's do the obligatory "light loss" calculation, too:

    f/2.8 x -3f/stops = f/2.8 ... f/4 ... f/5.6 ... f/8

    Hey, it still autofocuses! Hoohah!

    Obviously, it is not where near as sharp as ... hey, wait a minute, no one has a 900mm lens for the SONY mount. Cripes, you might get it with a 2x T/C and a 300mm f/2.8 APO G SSM in APS-C mode. Let's check the cost of that ... oh yeah ... $6150, for the 300mm f/2.8 lens alone! Hmmm, guess we will all just run out and pop for one of those, huh?

    Anyway ... for that long distance shot, you just cannot get closer to. Like Uncle Clyde coming down the slopes, in Vancouver, during the Olympics (2010).

    The image is pretty cool.

    200mm f/8

    Name:  200mm-f8_DSC2415.jpg
Views: 172
Size:  443.1 KB

    900mm f/8

    Name:  900mm-f8_DSC2406.jpg
Views: 174
Size:  489.7 KB

    I mean it is obviously not incredible zoom ... but the weight is incredibly light for it. The lens weight is 28 oz and the T/C is practically nothing @ 7 oz.

    The thing is, with optically zooming the image ... you still have all those pixels to blow the bad boy up either further! And there he is ... Uncle Clyde, shooshing down the slopes.
    Last edited by DonSchap; 11-19-2009 at 12:06 AM.
    Don Schap - BFA, Digital Photography
    A Photographer Is Forever
    Look, I did not create the optical laws of the Universe ... I simply learned to deal with them.
    Remember: It is usually the GLASS, not the camera (except for moving to Full Frame), that gives you the most improvement in your photography.

    flickr & Sdi

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    San Diego, CA
    Posts
    602

    Super long; Quality ... questionable

    Well, to really give the optical purists a heart attack , there is the Rokinon 650-2600mm f8 to f-16.
    http://www.overstock.com/Electronics...3/product.html

    Hey, there ain't nothin like carrying around a 4 inches in diameter x 18.5 inches long lens. Ah, but with a 5-meter minimum focal distance, you don't have to worry about scaring away your subject.
    Darin Wessel
    α 900
    Zooms: Tamron SP AF70-200mm f2.8 Di LD Macro; Sigma 28-90mm D macro, Konica-Minolta 18-70 f3.5-5.6
    Primes: Minolta 28mm f2.8; Sony 50mm f1.4
    Minolta RC-1000 remote commander

    Film:
    Calumet Cambo CC400 4x5 View Camera
    YashikaMat 6x6 TLR (other accessories)
    Minolta Maxxum 7000 w/ Minolta 35-80mm f/4-5.6 & Minolta 2800 flash
    Minolta Maxxum 5000i & Vivitar 728 AFM flash
    What's next???

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Des Plaines, IL
    Posts
    9,560

    Cool Stop the darkness, already!

    Darin,

    The real need to do what I did was to have some control over just how dark this 'bad boy' gets. After f/8 ... the AF quits working properly in most DSLRs. Heck, usually after f/6.3.

    I am pleasantly surprised the image turns out as well as it does ... and on the 200mm, it still is rather snappy.

    Name:  3x-200mm-f28.jpg
Views: 189
Size:  309.6 KB


    I have never been really BIG on T/C use ... but SONY is not leaving the world much of a choice, when it comes to long glass, at the moment. SIGMA wants almost $8000 for their 800mm f/5.6 (Minolta-mount), which is 20.5" long, weighs 10.5 lbs and has a minimum focusing distance (M.F.D.) of 23-ft!

    Name:  800MM SIGMA.jpg
Views: 168
Size:  16.6 KB

    Well, I can just suffer with f/8, 34-oz and an M.F.D. of 7-feet. ... for that kind of coin. $10 a millimeter. Yeah, right!
    Last edited by DonSchap; 11-19-2009 at 09:58 AM.
    Don Schap - BFA, Digital Photography
    A Photographer Is Forever
    Look, I did not create the optical laws of the Universe ... I simply learned to deal with them.
    Remember: It is usually the GLASS, not the camera (except for moving to Full Frame), that gives you the most improvement in your photography.

    flickr & Sdi

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Des Plaines, IL
    Posts
    9,560

    Red face 3x T/C follies

    Just for fun, I shot a pair of quick images out of the window ... of a subject probably 600 feet away. It's raining, today ... and there really isn't out there when you lean out the window. So bear with me on this ...

    900mm @ f/13 Autofocused (3x T/C + 200mm f/2.8 (@ f/4.5) + APS-C Mode)
    Name:  3x-200mm-a850-aps-c-mode_DSC2423.jpg
Views: 201
Size:  405.0 KB

    2250mm @ f22 Manual focus (3x T/C + 200-500mm f/5-6.3 (@500mm f/6.3) + APS-C Mode)
    Name:  3x-500mm-a850-aps-c-mode_DSC2433.jpg
Views: 148
Size:  353.4 KB
    Last edited by DonSchap; 11-19-2009 at 02:17 PM.
    Don Schap - BFA, Digital Photography
    A Photographer Is Forever
    Look, I did not create the optical laws of the Universe ... I simply learned to deal with them.
    Remember: It is usually the GLASS, not the camera (except for moving to Full Frame), that gives you the most improvement in your photography.

    flickr & Sdi

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    God's Country - Australia
    Posts
    10,424
    good experiment to show the difference in focal lengths and the terrible quality of a 3x converter.
    D800e l V3 l AW1 l 16-35 l 35 l 50 l 85 l 105 l EM1 l 7.5 l 12-40 l 14 l 17 l 25 l 45 l 60 l 75
    flickr

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Des Plaines, IL
    Posts
    9,560
    Actually, the 3x is a far cry better than the 1.4x. Personally, raw glass is always best. It's the ticket you have to pay for this glass I have a problem with.
    Don Schap - BFA, Digital Photography
    A Photographer Is Forever
    Look, I did not create the optical laws of the Universe ... I simply learned to deal with them.
    Remember: It is usually the GLASS, not the camera (except for moving to Full Frame), that gives you the most improvement in your photography.

    flickr & Sdi

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    1,087
    Quote Originally Posted by DonSchap View Post
    Actually, the 3x is a far cry better than the 1.4x. Personally, raw glass is always best. It's the ticket you have to pay for this glass I have a problem with.
    That's only if you buy crappy teleconverters.
    E-510
    E-1
    Zuiko 14-54 F2.8-3.5 MkI
    Zuiko 70-300 F4.0-5.6
    Konica Hexanon 52mm F1.8
    Cullmann 2503
    Benro KS-0

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Mount Pleasant, SC
    Posts
    145
    The quality was good enough to make out the empty beer kegs against the house. Maybe that's where the optical issues come from?
    Joe Holmes
    Sony α550
    Sony HVL-F42AM Flash
    Sony DT18-55 F3.5-5.6 (Kit Lens)
    Minolta Maxxum 50 1:1.7(22) Prime
    Minolta 35-70 F4 (Mini Beercan)
    Minolta 70-210 F4 (Beercan)
    Minolta 28-135 F4-4.5 (This beast is pretty heavy)
    Minolta Maxxum 100-200 F4.5
    Quantaray D28-90 1:3.5-5.6 Ver 5
    Tamron DiII 55-200 1:4.5-6

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    326
    Quote Originally Posted by joenmell View Post
    The quality was good enough to make out the empty beer kegs against the house. Maybe that's where the optical issues come from?
    Oh...so THAT'S why my images look better than his, even though I am a complete beginner with kit lenses and an A200...now it makes sense!

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Des Plaines, IL
    Posts
    9,560
    It's pretty obvious that if you are going for a long reach with a T/C ... prepare yourself for some issues.with clarity and sharpness. There just is not a lot more that can be done other than to abandon the shot altogether.

    What I wanted from this posting was what you can "expect" from the addition of such a device into your optical path. The further away the subject is, the fuzzier it gets. But, if you are taking images of people who ... well, appear better when "fuzzy" ... this could be a solution.

    Anyway ... enjoy your own adventures with these 2000mm+ contraptions. (I did not try the AF Micro-adjust ... as this was handheld and consistency wasn't possible with this shot.)

    Quote Originally Posted by jr_rodriguez View Post
    Oh...so THAT'S why my images look better than his, even though I am a complete beginner with kit lenses and an A200...now it makes sense!
    'jr' ... where did you post your 2000mm shot? or a 900mm for that matter? I must have missed it in all the confusion of this discussion and commentary.
    Last edited by DonSchap; 11-20-2009 at 11:17 AM.
    Don Schap - BFA, Digital Photography
    A Photographer Is Forever
    Look, I did not create the optical laws of the Universe ... I simply learned to deal with them.
    Remember: It is usually the GLASS, not the camera (except for moving to Full Frame), that gives you the most improvement in your photography.

    flickr & Sdi

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •