teleconverters

i am a dslr new boy. i have a gx 10 and 18 to 55 and 50 to 200 kit lenses. As always you are after more reach for sports pictures. As i do not yey want to buy another zomm lens, say a tamron 80 to 300 or simular, has anyone had any experiance with the 1.4 x teleconverter that would do much the same to my 50 to 200 kit lens. Please share your experiance, are they worth considering.

help is always very appreciated.

thank you

Hello Suds. I am afraid i have not tried a teleconverter (yet!) with my K10d, but I do use the sigma 70-300mm lens a lot. Probably more than any other lens if I'm honest, and I reckon it performs well, and is probably (somehow) about the same price (or maybe even less) than a teleconverter (based on a quick price check on amazon.co.uk)... I think from memory the one I have is the APO DG lens, f4/f5.6, and it also has a macro function (operated via a switch) between 200 and 300mm, which I use a lot too.

You said you don't want to buy another zoom lens, but it might be worth thinking about (?). Not sure whether that is helpful or not...

Cheers

Mat

If you are interested in sports you need fast shutter speeds, which usually means using fast lenses, ie lenses with wide apertures. The problem is the teleconverter takes away a stop so your f/5.6 aperture at 200mm will become become f/8.0 at 280mm. In order to shoot action you will need good light and a very high ISO causing lots of noise.

Using a teleconverter will always result in a worse image - that's not to say you shouldn't try, but a 1.4 converter will cost you £200 (although you could get a Teleplus 1.5 for less). The Tamron 70-300 will cost you £120 with f/5.6 at the top end.

(Incidentally, I have a 1.5 converter for sale on eBay)

If you want a 70-300 zoom I just bought a Tamron 70-300, and picked it up for £96 including next day postage and a Tamron filter (which had a £15 price sticker on it). see this thread and good luck! I'm really pleased with mine, and the thread shows others have achieved some great shots!

A generalisation of what you could expect ...


Excellent Lens + Good TC = Good Pictures

Good Lens + Good TC = Average Pictures

Average Lens + Good TC = Poor Picture


Excellent Lens + Average TC = Average Pictures

Good Lens + Average TC = Poor Pictures

Average Lens + Average TC = don't even bother


Where do you put your lens? And what TC?

I only tend to use my TC on a Pentax M400-600 zoom and DA*300 both of which are excellent lenses and my TC is a good/decent one.

I do use it on other lenses, but only when I have taken the minimum of equipment with me, such as taking the K20D and DA*50-135 and the TC tucks in a pocket "just in case" and is easier than taking the DA*300 too.

TCs work best with lage aperture long focal length prime lenses. A X1.4 TC looses one stop and a X2 TC looses 2 stops so you really want to start with a fairly wide aperture - F2.8 or F4. I find that my DA*300mm F4 works pretty well with a Tamron 1,4 TC. I have tried using the TC with my Tamron 18-250mm zoom but it really does not work in anything but the brightest light and even then hunts a lot. Apart from the portability of a TC you would be better spending your money on a longer zoom or even better a long prime.

Archie

Interesting. My DA*300 and Tamron 1.4 TC do nor get on well. My 60-250 is best on the TC.

Usually a crop from the DA*300 is the best photo.

Have a look at an older post of mine:

https://www.pentaxuser.com/forum/topic/union-flag-9669/p-0#comm_87539

Oh those were the days when we thought the Pentax TC was coming