Combining the Tamron 18-300MM with the Olympus TCON 17X Converter

XRAY51 · Nov 9, 2021

Hello Folks.

A few weeks ago there was a thread about the Sony 70-350MM lens being used with an Olympus TCON 17X converter(1.7 X power).

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/63749908

There is a surf photographer who uses that combination and is happy with it.

https://www.learningsurfphotography.com/sony-70-350mm-for-surf-photography/

It uses an adapter ring of 67-55MM to allow the use of the converter on the lens. I have had the converter for a number of years and used it on the Sony 55-210MM kit zoom with some success, as have many others.

So I got to thinking about it. I recently acquired the new Tamron 18-300MM E-mount zoom which has been well received. I like it a lot. And it also has the 67MM filter size. And I already had the converter. So for eight dollars I bought the adapter ring. 67-55MM. Guess what? It works. It now gives me a lens that goes functionally from 18MM APSC all the way out to an 765MM equivalent with full frame, if you multiply the 300MM X 1.7 of the converter and 1.5 for the APSC factor it gives 765MM equivalent full frame. And it autofocuses just fine, at least so far. And the image quality is just fine for me.

Does it vignette? Yes, but it does it only from the 18 to 35MM setting on the lens. So it is useful through most of the range. But if you simply unscrew the converter, which is like taking a filter off, you have access to the full range of 18MM- 765MM. Of course, if you wanted to use the digital zoom feature, you could go even farther, but this would degrade the images to some degree. Occasionally I will use that feature out to maybe 1.5X power. You could theoretically mount the converter and go full 2X digital zoom and get to 1530MM, but of course it would affect the quality. But even 765MM is significant.

My main photography interest is travel, and the 18-300MM is a great travel lens. But this converter opens up a greater range that I know will be useful. And you don’t have to dismount the main lens from the camera, which is important to me. You just screw on the converter into the filter threads on the objective end of the lens. It does add some weight and length to the lens, but it is easily manageable for me and I am able to hand hold it without a problem, and I am no youngster. And you can easily attach it and remove it as needed, for when you need the extra reach.

So here are a few images to give an idea of what it does so you can see the different magnifications. All on an A6500. All tweaked a bit to my taste of contrast and brightness.

A boat and house along the intracoastal waterway. At 300MM. X1.5X APSC 450MM equivalent FF. Without the converter.

The same boat at 300MM with the converter. X1.5 APSC 450MM + X1.7. 765MM equivalent FF.

The same boat and house are in the center of the image. At 18MM. Without the converter.

A lifeguard station at the beach at the normal 300MM without the converter. Equivalent to 450MM FF.

The same lifeguard station at 300MM with the converter. 450MM X1.7. 765MM equivalent FF.

The same beach at 18MM. No converter. You can see the lifeguard station a bit to the right on the beach.

Martin_99 · Nov 9, 2021

Thanks for your report. You could share full resolution 24Mp photos instead of low res 1.7Mp. This way you can only guess the image quality with/without converter.

Dick Barbour · Nov 10, 2021

Interesting, but I wonder how a cropped image, to the equivalent field of view with the converter, would compare? I'm getting great results with either my a6500 or a6600 with the 18-300 just by cropping, no converter needed. See attached example.

****

Original

Cropped

XRAY51 · Nov 10, 2021

Good shot. I crop when appropriate as well. But the converter does very well for me. I think I would still be able to crop some on top of that.

Son Of Mustang Ford · Nov 10, 2021

XRAY51 said:
It now gives me a lens that goes functionally from 18MM APSC all the way out to an 765MM equivalent with full frame, if you multiply the 300MM X 1.7 of the converter and 1.5 for the APSC factor it gives 765MM equivalent full frame. And it autofocuses just fine, at least so far. And the image quality is just fine for me.

Does it vignette? Yes, but it does it only from the 18 to 35MM setting on the lens. So it is useful through most of the range. But if you simply unscrew the converter, which is like taking a filter off, you have access to the full range of 18MM- 765MM.

Please, one or the other, your set-up with this lens is either 18-510 (actual focal length on APS-C) or 27-765 (FF equivalent. But to start APS-C at the short end and finish with FF equivalent at the long end, as Buffy would say - it's wrong (and misleading, it reads like the zoom ratio is far larger than it actually is)

Cheers

XRAY51 · Nov 10, 2021

Son of Mustang. Thanks for the input. Interesting name.

The point is taken in appreciation. You are right about the short end. It should be 27-765 FF equivalent. But I am making no attempt to exaggerate the range of the lens/converter combination. The lens itself shows 18-300MM. People commonly convert APSC to FF on this forum. That’s why for each sample image I point out what the various focal lengths are on the long end with the multiplication factor of the APSC as 1.5 as well as that of the converter, which is 1.7. I thought we all (should) know that the cropped sensor of the APSC results in the 1.5 factor. The purpose of the exercise is show the advantage of the converter on the long end of the 18-300MM lens, yet still note that it is useful without the converter to use the lens as low as its 18MM in APSC format. (27MM FF). The images are provided to show what the actual range looks like. Those are right out of the camera. They are not cropped or changed in any way to affect magnification. It is what it is.

I am just trying to show the usefulness of the option of using a converter which is already in wide use for many years, easily attachable to a lens that is new to us as a community. Then people can make their own judgment as to whether it is something that they would like to take advantage of.

Anyway, take it for what it is worth. I find it to be a very useful feature, but It’s everyone’s choice as to what they decide.

cchen2 · Mar 11, 2022

Thanks for posting this info- I have been using my TCON17x on my 18-135 and I was thinking of upgrading to the 18-300 and wanted to see if this would work and I’m grateful to hear that it does. I appreciate you taking the time to post on this.

XRAY51 · Mar 11, 2022

cchen2 said:
Thanks for posting this info- I have been using my TCON17x on my 18-135 and I was thinking of upgrading to the 18-300 and wanted to see if this would work and I’m grateful to hear that it does. I appreciate you taking the time to post on this.

I am grateful for your kind comments, and pleased that you found it helpful. It is also interesting that you found that it works well on the Sony 18-135, which is a very popular lens. To me, the Olympus TCON17X is one of the most useful accessories one could have for the Sony APSC family. I always have it with me when I take one of my APSC cameras.

I have used it for many years on the 55-210MM zoom, with excellent results, and of course now the Tamron 18-300MM zoom, and I know that some are using it effectively on the Sony 70-350MM as well, but also, I use it on the Sony 50MM 1.8, which gives it 50 X 1.7 =85MM.

Here are a couple of samples of the 50MM + the TCON 17X.

For show/entertainment close ups.

Lovely singer on a cruise ship

And for portraits.

A close family member, looking good.

I don't need an 85mm, with this combination.

There might be other lens combinations that are being used with this, other than those mentioned above. I would be curious to hear about them.

cchen2 · Mar 12, 2022

Yes!! I use it with my Sigma 56 to get an 95 mm f/2.1 equivalent (or something close) lens. It is such a versatile lens- I love it. I also have used it on my RX10 as well. Great shots.

Dennis Bayer · Mar 13, 2022

cchen2 said:
Yes!! I use it with my Sigma 56 to get an 95 mm f/2.1 equivalent (or something close) lens. It is such a versatile lens- I love it. I also have used it on my RX10 as well. Great shots.

Before I bought the Sigma 100-400 I used the 55-210 with the TCON very often and got very good results. It has a 55 mm mounting end so I bought a 52-55 step up ring and I can also use it with several Nikkor ais lenses as 52m was very common back in the day.

XRAY51 · Mar 14, 2022

Dennis Bayer said:
cchen2 said:

Yes!! I use it with my Sigma 56 to get an 95 mm f/2.1 equivalent (or something close) lens. It is such a versatile lens- I love it. I also have used it on my RX10 as well. Great shots.

Click to expand...

Before I bought the Sigma 100-400 I used the 55-210 with the TCON very often and got very good results. It has a 55 mm mounting end so I bought a 52-55 step up ring and I can also use it with several Nikkor ais lenses as 52m was very common back in the day.

That is very interesting info. The Sigma 56 is highly regarded on the forum, and now you have another choice with it. But used on an RX10. Now that is something. That would give you a 1020mm lens. Does it work normally, with the zoom and focusing etc? And the Nikon stuff is interesting as well. It is amazing. Great information. It just reinforces the value of the Olympus converter. Thanks to both of you.

cchen2 · Mar 14, 2022

Ahhh sorry no, I have the OG RX10 with the 28-200 mm lens. So it maxes out at 340 mm equivalent on the RX10. It’s ok- I don’t use my RX10 too much anymore because the lens delamination on the front element affects some of its clarity. But I’m planning on letting my daughter use it when she is big enough to shoot with it. A little sad that a former $1000 camera is now relegated to being a beater camera but that is the speed of the advancement in the camera industry!

cchen2 · Mar 14, 2022

And btw it works use fine. It’s not the fastest focusing camera anyways. I always like the color science of the newer Sonys anyways. There is vignetting if you are wide but you’re going to only using the converter at the tele end anyways. Not sure if I’d trust it on a RX10 that had the long lens.

Jim Cummings · Mar 19, 2022

Reading about this I purchased the TCon-17F which is also labeled the TCon-17X and the rear diameter is very, very small. Did I buy the wrong one and if no,t what is the rear diameter if you know - as a 55mm is way too large. Thanx!

XRAY51 · Mar 19, 2022

Jim Cummings said:
Reading about this I purchased the TCon-17F which is also labeled the TCon-17X and the rear diameter is very, very small. Did I buy the wrong one and if no,t what is the rear diameter if you know - as a 55mm is way too large. Thanx!

XRAY51 · Mar 19, 2022

XRAY51 said:
Jim Cummings said:

Reading about this I purchased the TCon-17F which is also labeled the TCon-17X and the rear diameter is very, very small. Did I buy the wrong one and if no,t what is the rear diameter if you know - as a 55mm is way too large. Thanx!

Click to expand...

Hey Jim.

For whatever lens you want use it on you may need an adapter filter ring to make it work accordingly. My 55-210 lens is one size ring, the 50mm is the same one, but the Tamron 18-300 is a different one. They are very inexpensive and you can get them on Amazon.

I am not home now but will check and see what adapters I have for each in a few hours when I get home.

Also, on both the 55-210 and the 18-300 there is vignetting at the short end but it works just fine at the longer end. I use it for the longer end to extend its reach. At the shorter end I use the lens without the converter. But it just unscrews.

Ok. Home now. For the Tamron 18-300MM it has a filter thread size of 67MM. The Olympus TCON-17X converter has a thread size of 55MM. So you need a step down filter thread adapter of 67-55MM.

For the 55-210MM you have a lens filter thread size of 49MM and the converter thread size of 55MM. So for that one you need a step up adapter of 49-55MM. This also works on my 50MM.

And again, both of these zooms do vignette at the shorter end. But they work really well at the longer end. The 50MM lens does not vignette.

Which lens are you using it with?

Here is an image of the Tamron 18-300MM extended at maximum 300MM with the TCON 17X extender attached with the 67-55MM adapter ring. At that setting it works really well.

Tamron 18-300MM with Olympus TCON 17X converter, extended to full length of 300MM.

And here an example image taken with the 55-210MM lens and TCON 17X extender using the 49-55MM adapter ring.

Image taken with Sony 55-210MM with TCON 17X converter

Hope this helps.

Xray51

Jim Cummings · Mar 20, 2022

Thanks for your effort but my TCON is much smaller than the one on your lens. It is still in the Olympus box and the labelling is correct but it seems the right size for an Olympus P&S or their tough series. I wonder if they made two different TCON 17x?

cchen2 · Mar 20, 2022

This is the one that I have:

Olympus Teleconverter TCON-17X (Black) https://www.amazon.com/dp/B007703QDO/ref=cm_sw_r_cp_api_glt_i_FXQXRWCX3R8VTERJ8BYC

cchen2 · Mar 20, 2022

There are a bunch for sale used on EBay from Japan. That is where I got mine from many years ago.

I love my kit now:

Tamron 18-300 for general purpose shooting

With TCON17x, it is equivalent to FF 765 mm at the tele end. Slow but stabilized and decent in good lighting conditions.

when I need portraits / low light then I use my 56 1.4 for a FF 85mm f/2.1 equivalent.

or add on my TCON17x for FF 142mm f/2.1 equiv with quite pleasant bokeh.

and then my Viltrox 24mm f/1.4 which give me a FF 35mm f/2.1 equivalent for general prime shooting or low light.

total for the full kit was around $1400. Not counting a6300, of course.

I know it isn’t apples to apples exactly, but the closest full frame kit that I can think of seems to cost close to $6300.

Sony 35mm f/1.8, 85mm f/1.8, 135mm f/1.8, Sony 24-240mm, Sony 200-600mm . I’m sure that the full frame equivalents can resolve more and of course the dynamic range / high ISO bump to FF is not nothing, but you know what- I’m happy to stick with my smaller, lighter kit. Love having this kind of flexibility with the APSc lenses. Suspect I’ll be able to resist going to full frame for a while.

XRAY51 · Mar 20, 2022

cchen2 said:
There are a bunch for sale used on EBay from Japan. That is where I got mine from many years ago.

I love my kit now:

Tamron 18-300 for general purpose shooting

With TCON17x, it is equivalent to FF 765 mm at the tele end. Slow but stabilized and decent in good lighting conditions.

when I need portraits / low light then I use my 56 1.4 for a FF 85mm f/2.1 equivalent.

or add on my TCON17x for FF 142mm f/2.1 equiv with quite pleasant bokeh.

and then my Viltrox 24mm f/1.4 which give me a FF 35mm f/2.1 equivalent for general prime shooting or low light.

total for the full kit was around $1400. Not counting a6300, of course.

I know it isn’t apples to apples exactly, but the closest full frame kit that I can think of seems to cost close to $6300.

Sony 35mm f/1.8, 85mm f/1.8, 135mm f/1.8, Sony 24-240mm, Sony 200-600mm . I’m sure that the full frame equivalents can resolve more and of course the dynamic range / high ISO bump to FF is not nothing, but you know what- I’m happy to stick with my smaller, lighter kit. Love having this kind of flexibility with the APSc lenses. Suspect I’ll be able to resist going to full frame for a while.

Yup. That one is the that I have. To Jim, it looks like yours is different. I would return it and get the other one.

And just to add a comment to what cchen2 said, just having that converter does create a whole range of options and can provide a broad capability for very low cost and weight. For me its a no brainer.

Combining the Tamron 18-300MM with the Olympus TCON 17X Converter

Active member

Veteran Member

Senior Member

Active member

Senior Member

Active member

Senior Member

Active member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Active member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Forum Enthusiast

Active member

Active member

Forum Enthusiast

Senior Member

Senior Member

Active member

Similar threads

Keyboard shortcuts