Nikon Teleconverter for S3

For those interested in obtaining a teleconverter for your S3IS...

If you investigate the relavent threads you will discover that the Nikon TC-E15ED receives outstanding reviews. The posted images are outstanding and convinced me to purchase the Nikon instead of the Sony VCL-DH1758.

Unfortunately, Nikon no longer sells this converter. The only place to obtain it is ebay. Fortunately there is almost always one or more on sale there at any given time. To determine the going price of this converter, I've been tracking the auctions at ebay for several weeks now. Thought I'd post this info for those that are interested...

The final sale prices, including shipping:
95, 111, 130, 150, 90, 101, 110, 100, 103, 128, 140, 140, 97, 91
price range: $90 - $150
average price: $113

I paid $97 for mine yesterday, but also needed to pay about $7 in state sales tax. Can't wait for it to arrive.

-David

Great choice for a TC. Nikon got that weird 50mm mounting thread and step-rings are needed. If you got a 52mm lens adapter here's a link to 52-50mm step-down ring, http://cgi.ebay.com …%3D120096471070​%26fvi%3D1. Other sources for mounting rings are @ http://www.pemaraal.co​m/sr.html, a 55-50mm step-ring and http://nextphoto.net/8​800.htm, a 55-50 and 62-50....both will require another + or - ring depending on your lens adapter. Here's a couple of comparsion pics I made with my Nikon and Sony.

Nikon TC-E15ED

Boy the Nikon is much sharper. I may have to look into this more. Thanks for posting these.

Can you post a shot of the adapter mounted on the S3 ?

Here is the S3 with the lensmate 58mm adapter; 58-55mm and 55-50mm step rings; and the nikon converter.

http://img297.imagesha​ck.us/my.php?image=nik​onxf1.jpg

-David

davidgp wrote in post #3037191
Here is the S3 with the lensmate 58mm adapter; 58-55mm and 55-50mm step rings; and the nikon converter.

http://img297.imagesha​ck.us/my.php?image=nik​onxf1.jpg

-David

is that a flash ? what brand is it ? what is it mounted on ?

Cindi wrote in post #3013017
Boy the Nikon is much sharper. I may have to look into this more. Thanks for posting these.

not only that, but look at all of the detail the sony missed. I have the Sony and happy with it, but the Nikon it sure blows it out of the water!!!

thanks for the shot. Can you please post the EXIF fot both shots? TIA!

The flash is a Sunpak 383 Super. I just got it a week ago and haven't had much time to explore it's capabiities. But I've used it enough to know that it will meet my needs for years to come. I couldn't be happier. It's triggered by an optical slave trigger ($10 on ebay). I attach the trigger to the flash using a PC cord instead of the hot shoe so that I can point the trigger directly at the camera's on-board flash (which is set to it's lowest setting). I hand hold the trigger in my left hand. The camera is set to either Av or M mode (with the camera preflashes off) and it works like a charm.

IMO using a regular (non-slave) flash and a separate optical trigger is the best way to go. I looked for a long time at various slave flashes on the market and felt that I would be compromising on features, quality or/and power if I went with any of them. Using an optical trigger turns any flash into a slave so you can choose from among all the flashes on the market, not just the few with a built-in trigger.

The flash is mounted on an inexpensive Kaiser bracket. It's OK. I bought it because it was foldable. It flexes more than I would like and it's uncmfortable for my right hand. But I do like that it folds and fits nicely into the camera bag. If I had to do it over again I might purchase a different bracket if I could find another one that folds.

-David

silvex wrote in post #3037985
thanks for the shot. Can you please post the EXIF fot both shots? TIA!

I don't have the original photos anymore, but @ http://picasaweb.googl​e.com/pugs95/TCs, after opening each pic, on the far right click on 'more info' and most EXIF data is shown....ISO I think was 80 or 100 thou and mode was Av set @ f/3.5

I know that I probably don't deserve the answer, but could someone please point to me what is the difference between the 2 posted pictures that is so different? Blown out of the water? I guess I don't even see the water!!!

I would appreciate it from a kind soul.

In my oponion, neither of those photos blows the other one out of anywhere. There's just not all that much difference in them. At least not on my monitor.

Jus' shootin' - you are starting to be my hero.

lol

ceriltheblade wrote in post #3064246
Jus' shootin' - you are starting to be my hero.

lol

Thanks ceriltheblade. Anyway, it's "into the weeds", not, out of the water. Just ask Herbert Keppler!

One nice feature on the Nikon lens is the 58mm threads on the end..For filters or even
( God help us) another teleconverter