PDA

View Full Version : TC 1.4 with 70-300 DO

Dante King
24th of May 2005 (Tue), 16:11
many have been intersted in results with the Kenko 1.4 TC and Canon 70-300 DO. Here are some pics. Put this set up thru its paces pretty well today with the kids at the park. All in all I am pretty pleased. Excellent AF and AV. Last night this set up was focusing pretty darn quick in low light. 1st pic is at 180mm (no incl. TC factor) Second is at 300mm (thats 672mm with crop and TC factor Boys and Girls! Whooohooo!)
Dante King
24th of May 2005 (Tue), 16:12
another at 300mm (672mm). All pics were just auto leveled and mode changed for SRGB and saved for web.
mrclark321
24th of May 2005 (Tue), 16:20
Great shots Dante...at least the sun was shining for you today!!

Dan
Dante King
24th of May 2005 (Tue), 16:23
Yeah it was! Very warm and sunny here.
mrclark321
24th of May 2005 (Tue), 16:34
I just got my 70-200f/4 today and it was raining and overcast, not good for this lense....

Dan
Dante King
24th of May 2005 (Tue), 21:18
Dan,
That sucks. I know the feeling. There will be sunny days ahead!
Skip Souza
24th of May 2005 (Tue), 21:21
Dante, I'm impressed. I can hardly wait 'til I get one of those T.C.s and a DO to which to attach it.:lol: :lol: :lol:
Dante King
24th of May 2005 (Tue), 21:31
you know, its pretty nice, I am findiing it a tad soft at 300. nothing a little usm wont fix. will post some more here soon.
Dante King
25th of May 2005 (Wed), 08:27
one more, this bird was way up there. 300mm
Karl Johnston
5th of June 2009 (Fri), 01:57
WOW that is sharp for 700 mm, nearly!
Super-Nicko
5th of June 2009 (Fri), 06:42
holy cow - thread reviver!!

Thought i hadnt heard from Dante for a while!
xarqi
5th of June 2009 (Fri), 08:12
WOW that is sharp for 700 mm, nearly!

It's not nearly 700 mm, it's only 420 mm.
Karl Johnston
5th of June 2009 (Fri), 14:26
It's not nearly 700 mm, it's only 420 mm.
Oh sorry I was talking about the OP's first post (2nd picture, 670 mm)
xarqi
5th of June 2009 (Fri), 18:55
Oh sorry I was talking about the OP's first post (2nd picture, 670 mm)

Yeah - that's 420 mm. Focal length isn't changed by crop factor.
Karl Johnston
5th of June 2009 (Fri), 18:57
Technically no, but it looks that way :D and gives you that extra reach as if it were 1.6x as longer..
Treat me like a tourist
5th of June 2009 (Fri), 19:01
Technically no, but it looks that way :D and gives you that extra reach as if it were 1.6x as longer..

No it doesnt give you extra reach its called a crop factor for a reason, its a crop of a FF image not a magnification. FOV i believe is the correct term.
CyberDyneSystems
5th of June 2009 (Fri), 19:01
For gods sake man do we have to turn every comment using the excepted lexicon into a debate on the X-factor?

Really,. no. It's not worth it.

If you must, simply point people to the FAQ/Sticky thread that covers it ad nauseum,
http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=45388


......but don't re-hash it every time you see a post that includes the X-Factor in it's calculations. That is akin to pushing an agenda, aka Spam.
At least if they can do the math, then that means they already understand enough to decide for themselves how to interpret the effects.
It's OT to this thread, and OT to this forum, pixel density and X-Factor is about Format, and belongs in EOS Forum, where the other 10,000 threads on X-Factor already are.