Re: The Poor Man's 608mm APSC Superzoom
2
ChrisPCrunch wrote:
jackwelch wrote:
Here are a series of pictures:
Cool. Thanks for posting the sample pictures.
I have thought about trying one of these teleconvertors myself. I too don't have a lot of money to spend on a longer tele lens. However, I think I would be worried about the extra weight on the end of the plastic lens. Also, from your sample images, I don't know if it really is worth it. Taking a look at the shots, I see that the ones with the 1.9x convertor have a lot more CA. Along bright edges there is red or purple CA where I don't see it on the ones without the teleconvertor. Also, I took your samples and upsized the regular shots in Photoshop to match the ones with the teleconvertors and there isn't really much difference in detail to my eyes. So I am not sure if you really gain anything with the teleconvertor.
Chris
You could be right about damaging the lens, something to be wary off - I don't always have it on, but when I do need the extra reach, it's just a simple screw on.
For what it's worth, you get to enjoy the full 6,000 × 4,000 (24 MP) image uncropped.
Personally I don't like to do or have much time to edit photos in post, so these things are a time saver too.
Also the CA on these teleconverters are actually not as bad, I have tried many teleconverters and these old models from Olympus (together with some Nikon models) have the least CA - though I'd admit the dark vignetting fragments are very noticeable here.
Anyways it's $10 teleconverter, expectations need to be managed.