I was reading about the Tamron 1.4 and the Kenko Teleplus DG 1.5X MC on one of the links that Mike put up on one of the threads, quite a long read but very enlightening and interesting.
The price looks reasonable from SRS (the kenko one) to use it as a "fun" item and get the hang of it experimenting, but from that link it seems that the Tamron one is the one to go for, but they are not available anymore it seems. And I think that's the one that Mike got, unless I am mistaken.

If I went for one I would like to know if it would work with the DA*300 that I am looking to get in the foreseeable future. That is what I haven't managed to get cleared. Through that thread I got so jumbled up that my brains started smoking , started by thinking the Kenko was the one to go for and then it ended up being the Tamron the better one.

Is anyone using the kenko TC 1.5 here? Also it seems that there might have been 2 versions of it from what I came across on one of the threads. If it AF with the 55-300mm I have at the moment and with the DA*300 then I would be quite keen to go for one. The fact that doesn't input the correct focal length hence the SR not being properly adjusted in the body doesn't worry me much as I mostly would use it on a tripod.

Many suggests about waiting for the pentax TC but I can just imagine the price when it comes out.

Well, just like you said, "fun" item, so I am not giving it a huge deal of importance, just toying with the idea and as I am a bit keen on a purchase for a a budget that I have allocated within the next few days it could be the TC or something else. A good tripod is not ruled out of the picture either, but I would want a really good one and lighter to take out with me for the day, and those I think they dont come cheap, unless you all would point me out to a right direction and I could get a bargain . The Velbon budget tripod I am using just kills my back and I end up leaving it in the car and go out shooting handheld.

Amin

EDIT: Velbon

Bob,

Those are lovely shots. And yes after reading some more about TC and from what you have just commented also I am quite inclined to keep taking these shots without the TC.

And I definitely want to give a go to your tip. Seems that it will work great with subjects that don't move a lot. The song thrush I shot would be a great candidate for that. But the blue tit for example would be almost impossiblev . I would just take my risk, point and shoot and see what I coudl get. I find it difficult even to use MF, so I have been having some luck with AF.C.

thanks for the tip

Amin

Howard,

I was just pulling your leg ha , I didnt get annoyed with your flippancy, on the contrary it just lightened the mood.

Good question about those three hills , I will have to make sure to check what they are called. I actually live about 3 miles from there. Towards the other side of A40, well you know what I mean, if you checked the Ruislip Woods then you know it. I am literally 300 yards from the woods .

Gosh, I didn't know you were so familiarised with the area, Ealing, Perivale that is all around here and I used to live down in Greenford Rd, just behind Perivale. Oh and used to work in Perivale. How long ago did you move out of the area?

By all means, drop by to the woods and we can meet and go around in the woods and shoot some birds . When spring comes the woods are really a great place to go and see wildlife. I have lived here for 7 years and never explored that side of the woods, all I do is just run there with the club members, and most time I just follow them as I get lost in there, yeah yeah you think I am joking, but it is the truth . Dont forget to bring your wellington boots because if we have to wonder around off the tracks then they will be needed. it does get pretty muddy there as there are horse tracks in there and they leave the ground pretty messy .

A couple of more months and the woods will be great for a bit of wildlife photography, and if you drop by we can even have a barbie by the Lido

Amin

David

Let me add one more point to the above list:

e: The improvement of one's ability can be traced with time and specially for a newbie like me aided with the comments and advice of everyone else can make improvements and check the mistakes of the previous images.

But well, seems like its not a place for newbies like me. I must admit though that I like the gallery, not only because of all the above points that David has mentioned but also because I was getting comments and advice from the more experienced ones. And it wasn't only backslapping because I did get suggestions and advice on some of my images that I had uploaded and went back and made the corrections and improvements.

I read somewhere in one of the comments above regarding some of the members who are not using the forum at all but just come and upload their images in the gallery. Well, in IMHO personally I fail to see what the problem is, and here again I reiterate, I might be wrong, but some of the images from the so called members who dont use this forum are truly nice. And I dont think that is something bad. All you have to do is just look at the images for example of aGinger. No comments, no participation at all in the forum and look at her portfolio, and if you can get to her flickr page there are still more stunning images.
But all this is just my personal opinion, and as a newbie in the field I admit I might be totally wrong.

Thanks

Amin

Stefan
Looks nice, the top one, after you have worked on it. I really like the way the clouds are so closely scattered, gives a nice impression to the eye. It does become captivating in my view.
Like Mike said that little reflected circle on the bottom is a bit distracting, otherwise a great image.
But I see you have already done a lot of work on PP , to remove all the glare, I guess the little one is just one stubborn one huh?

iceblinker

Thanks very much for your advice. I will definitely take that on board and also regarding the TC which I think its quite wise to go down that route rather than the 500 mm.

I second that, word for word and am removing my pictures too.
Didn't intend to cause any disruption to the normal flow of this forum.
People have been extremely helpful and kind over here and this is how I learn by getting feedback and criticisms and suggestions. I had no idea that the gallery was for pictures with high quality in that sense.

As a newcomer into the field I am the first one to admit that it will be a very long time before I can have an image that is worthy even for comparision to some of the ones I have seen from the experienced ones around here. I almost feel embarassed for having uploaded my picss up there.
I am in the process of removing them then. I do not intend to cause any controversies around here.

Thanks

Amin

Thanks for your kind comments Stefan . That is very encouraging.

With this one I was at my limit. The tree was on someone's back garden and I would have to jump the fence to get closer . But I was quite happy with the way it came up.

let's see some of yours, have you processed them arleady? We are all waiting for your little marvels, the ones you took while your internet was down .

Thank you so much for all your input . Reading all the above has definitely helped me BIG time undestanding some of the stuff I was a bit confused.

Howard , you just being cheeky or really serious? ,
If the round structures you realy mean by those three small hills they have built for people like us to go there and watch the sunrises , then yup, you might find me up there, but best chances to catch me is in the woods, make a diversion soon you pass by RAF airport and find me in there. .

Reading all your advice and post I feel less embarassed in displaying my poor little shot taken at the long range. I was approximately 50 ft away and it was handheld .




it was heavily cropped 100 %

Gwyn

Thanks for your advice. I definitely am not looking to buy anything at the moment.

May be I didn't leave it very clear my question for help in my post (well, not surprising I guess with such huge post one is bound to get lost :wink, but what I wanted to know from those who are using the 300 mm lens what is the usual distance they physically are from the subject, roughly, or what are the basics for making full use of the 55-300 mm lens based on the physical distance.

This is what I was enquiring.

But thanks for your kind advice anyway regarding the fact that I need to improve. Right now I am quite aware I am just starting to scratch the bottom steps in this field , but it would be nice to know if I am not overdoing it in any way, specifically when it comes to distance judging.

If you recall you very kindly even mentioned a few days ago about the fact that the 300mm being too short for my trip to Africa, so I just wanted to have this clear if even now I am not being too short for certain subjects, that's all.

Amin