Kenko Pro 300 1.4x teleconverter with Sigma 150-500mm & Nikon 18-200mm

Just got this Kenko Pro 300 1.4x Teleconverter today in the mail and went to try it out. It was 6:30pm in the evening and I used it with my Nikon D300 with both the Sigma 150-500mm and Nikon 18-200mm VR lens. All shots were handheld and I tried to take the full range of shots both with and without Teleconverter and at both minimum and max focal lengths. Also remember that it is very hot and humid in Galveston, TX where I am shooting, even in the evening, thus you will see some heat wave artifact on the higher focal length shots. I am not showing this pictures to push any of this products are brag about their performance. It is just a demonstrations of what they can do in the hand of an amateur who has been shooting with a Digital SLR for about 6 months now. thus I would prefer for the negative comments to be kept to yourself as I am taking time out of my eveing to post these so others can benefit. Also some will want to know about autofocus ability. Again, this is from one time shooting but the Kenko Pro 300 1.4x Teleconverter DID allow autofocus with my Nikon 180-200mm lens at both 18mm and 200mm. The shots that I am uploading were done with this autofocus. It did not appear to slow the autofocus but I am not expert. This teleconverter also allowed autofocus with the Sigma 150-500mm at 150mm focal length. Again, it seemed to do a pretty effective job of autofocusing and as a result the pictures that I have submitted were autofocus on. At "500mm" (700mm) and the lower loght condition, it was unreliable. It was able to capture autofocus on some shots but took a long time to do it. So most of the shots I took at "500mm" (700mm) and the one that I am posting was with manuel focus. Hope this helps somone.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/kleskue/sets/72157606731604118/detail/

--
KEskue

Definitely looks like the 1.4x teleconverter and the Sigma can produce usable images. I am curious as to why you chose the Kenko rather than the Sigma 1.4x teleconverter. I have the Sigma 150-500 myself and was considering a sigma teleconverter for it.
--
Allan Thornton

It was a tough decision but after reading a quite a few reviews and forums about the two, it seemed like the Kenko was a more universal teleconverter. there seemed to be more reports of good results with the kenko and more claims of the ability to still use autofocus with the Kenko, even at greater than 2.8f. One person also wrote "The Kenko will AF but won't report correct EXIF. The Sigma can AF if you tape the first lens' side contact". Honestly I was not sure what to believe but in general they seemed to point to the Kenko as the more compatible with multiple brand lenses and more likely to autofocus with other lenses. Not sure if these were good reasons or not but so far I am happy. I may try the Sigma 2x teleconverter when I get around to buying one. If you end up getting the 1.4x Sigma teleconverter, please let me know how it works! thanks

KEskue

Thanks Kleskue

These samples would be very helpful if we would see some 100% crop or full sized pictures but unfortunately the samples are very small. You can only see sharpness on 100% something as you know.

I am also interested what the 150-500 can do at 400-500mm with the Kenko 1.4.

I also bought the Kenko for the same reasons as you did, and I like it although I only tried it withe the Nikkor 70-300 where it has not much use. The quality of the 70-300 at 300 is not good enough that the TC could have any meaning.

I also suspect that will be the same with the 150-500 at 500mm. But we will see.

Thanks
jano

Jano,

they can be viewed at 100% crop now. Also, it depends on what you are planning to do with the photos whether or not they are "usable". True 100% crop are basically worthless for printing with this lens and/or the combo with teleconverter (unless the subject is very close in my limited experience and shooting handheld). Personally, my goal in getting this teleconverter was to get me close enough that I don't have to ventue anywhere near 100% crop (ideally not to crop at all) and I usually don't print large enough to tell the difference. For my purposes and for the money, I am content with the results or at least accepting that they are what they are. Take the oil tanker, it from a barely visible object at 18mm to one that I could and did print as an 8x10 without visible loss of quality. All for around $1000 and all handheld. Not bad if you ask me. Then again ignorance is bliss, as I have no real basis of comparison until I am done with my residency and can afford some super fine glass. Until then this serves my purposes. Also, I will likely post pics later as I take more with the combo at different focal lengths. If you don't mind me asking, what do you do with most of you pictures? Do you significantly crop and/or print large enough to see the weakness between 80-100% crop on a lens/teleconverter like this one? Just curious base on your current and previous comments. I can tell that you expect or require more than this lens can give you. Thanks an hope this helps
--
KEskue

Thank you for the samples on Flickr.

The combination with the 1.4x TC looks usable in the utmost case of emergency, but really nothing to write home about ... in fact rather mushy

At 500mm the lens seems to be okay.

Thanks Kleskue

No I don't expect wonders from a $1000 lens, I will probably by one, there is no better alternativ in this price range.

I don't really think it is reasonable to use this lens with TC.

If you just crop your picture (12 Mpixel from the D300 is quite a lot) let's say you crop 1/2 than you effectively get a 1000mm lens (when it is at 500mm) you still get 6 Mpixel information which is good enough for a normal sized printout at about A5-A4 size.

And the quality would be about the same as the lens with a 2XTC and reduced to half of the original size I think.

It is only reasonable to use TC when the lens is good enough for it.

Thanks
jano

Thanks for the pictures. I have the Kenko 1.4 and the pnly lens I really use it with is with my Nikon 105. I find that using it on any of my other lens usually ends up with a crop being sharper than using the TC which is what most of your pictures show.

What you efforts have demonstrated though is that the Sigma 150-500 is a good lens for the money even at 50mm in the right light.

I do use the TC with some of my slower lens but only when I shoot film as you can't crop that so easily especially as I shoot reversal.

--
Bluenose

Jano and others,

Your opinions are understood and well taken but the fact is that some people including myself will use this lens in combination with the teleconverter. That is why I posted my results. And to Jano, I disagree with your statement that it is only reasonable to use a TC when the lens is as you say "good enough". Who deems what is good enough. And does that mean that only people who can afford expensive prime lenses should be allowed to buy teleconverter? Again that is a very narrow minded way of looking at things because it DOES depend on what people plan to do with the photos whether or not the results are good enough. Honestly its critics like you that have made posting results on here frustrating and not worth my time. As a result, this will be my last posting and I will remove the samples for my webpage.
--
KEskue

kleskue said:

Jano and others,

Your opinions are understood and well taken but the fact is that some
people including myself will use this lens in combination with the
teleconverter. That is why I posted my results. And to Jano, I
disagree with your statement that it is only reasonable to use a TC
when the lens is as you say "good enough". Who deems what is good
enough. And does that mean that only people who can afford expensive
prime lenses should be allowed to buy teleconverter? Again that is a
very narrow minded way of looking at things because it DOES depend on
what people plan to do with the photos whether or not the results are
good enough. Honestly its critics like you that have made posting
results on here frustrating and not worth my time. As a result, this
will be my last posting and I will remove the samples for my webpage.
--
KEskue

Click to expand...

I am sorry you feel this way. Yes the lens plus the TC does have value and you have posted pictures to demonstrate that. A lot of us feel though that a TC on a slow lens is not worth it unless you have very good light. Digital does enable everyone to PP each picture and the main thing which is normally worth PPing is the picture itself which means cropping anyway. A few cms off here and there normally makes a big difference. Blowing up pictures is also not done as a norm by most people and poster size is not done by many so a crop is very easy to do compared with using a TC. I have just blown up a crop of a 6mp picture from my D70s to 16*24 inches and it looks just great.

I personally am glad you did what you did as it gave me a lot of info on the 150-500. It doesn't change my views on using a TC with the lens though.

--
Bluenose

Allan_Thornton said:

Definitely looks like the 1.4x teleconverter and the Sigma can
produce usable images. I am curious as to why you chose the Kenko
rather than the Sigma 1.4x teleconverter. I have the Sigma 150-500
myself and was considering a sigma teleconverter for it.
--
Allan Thornton

Click to expand...

The Kenko has tested out better vs. the Sigma in the past.

I also am glad you posted the pics but a little larger size would be nice.....I have no need for 100% but something that I may show to friends would be nice....perhaps 1200 pixels.
--
Gene from Western Pa

http://imageevent.com/grc6
http://grc225.zenfolio.com/
FZ10....20 and 30 and FZ18

D50 ....D80 - 18 to 200VR- 50mm 1.8 - 80 to 400 OS



Just trying to learn and it's slow going!

don't leave this forum because of one post against what you are saying. everyone is intitled to their opinion. let the readers sort it out for thereselfs. i can't afford high dollar lens either so am interested in getting the best results possible with the money i have available. if i was into it prof. would be different. also keep in mind a lot of us are using 6mp cameras, not 10 and up mp. this affects how much you can crop so the tc is worth looking into. i have a 300mm 4.5 with a tc200 converter that does not produce good results plus 600mm is a little more than i need so am considering a kenko or sigma 1.1 or 1.7 so your results were imformative to me. seeing the high dollar results on this forum are interesting and imformative to me but not very useful to my budget. stick around and don't take anything personal and i think you and many other posters will be glad. good shooting by the way.
--
swampers

Kleskue

I am very-very sorry is if I insulted you, it was not intentional.

I do not feel that my comments were insulting if yes sorry consider please that english is not my nativ language, so I cannot express myself that precisely than you can.

Your samples were helpful I just tried to express my opinion about it, if I was not polite enough than I am really sorry.

I still feel nevertheless that TC with this kind of lens is not really worth to use, but you can do whatever you want to do, it is your time and life anyway.

So please forgive me if I insulted you

jano