Pentax AF 1.7 TC

[ennacac]

Took out the AF 1.7 today to see how it worked with the DS and my 200mm Pentax lens. So I guess this is a photo taken with a 340mm MF lens that is now AF with the adapter.

I know about the crop factor, but that doesn't do anything for the magnification of the lens, so I don't post that, it just crops the image more than the same lens on a 35mm FF camera.



Tom

[vIZnquest]

That is one great looking shot. Just a bit of a clip on the tail is all I see that could make this even better. Great color, clarity, detail and sharpness and minimal noise for iso 800. DS is still a great camera amongst all that is out there.

Tom

[ennacac]

Thanks!

Well that was a surprise to see I was still at ISO 800 from the inside shots last night! You just have to love the high ISO performance of the DS, since I usually shoot at ISO 400 instead of the bottom end of 200 because I can't see any less noise at 200.

The birds were not cooperating and it was cold out (18F) which is why I missed the composition with the clipped tail, but I was very happy with the rest of the shot. I was too big a baby to sit out there any longer, I will wait for a warmer day with some sunshine.

Tom

[Monza76]

Very sharp, I'll have to keep my eye out for one of these, although they always seem to be very expensive.

Ira

[ennacac]

Ira,

I got mine years ago when they were about $45 and they seem to be about 8 times that now if you can even find one.

One thing, the quality of the image you get is dependent on the quality of the glass you put it on, more so than the A 1.4X-S which is more forgiving of lower quality glass.

This photo was with the A* 200mm f/2.8 which works very well with the AF 1.7 as well as the A* 85mm f/1.4.

Tom

[bigdawg]

Beautiful Tom!



Dawg

[NonEntity1]

ennacac wrote:

I got mine years ago when they were about $45 and they seem to be about 8 times that now if you can even find one.

I have been watching them too, but the last one I saw for sale was 19 times what you paid for it ($850). This does seem to be a magical teleconverter, if Pentax would produce a run of them priced at $150 or so I bet they could sell a boatload. Oh, and nice sharp shot Tom, how I wish I had gotten into photography a few years earlier.

Tim

[mtngal]

Awesome picture - not totally surprising when the lens is such an outstanding one. I mentioned to the Pentax rep that I wish they would reproduce the AF 1.7 TC and he was surprised I mentioned it. He laughed and said that they needed to fill out the lens line first. Too bad, because I'd love to have one, at least at a reasonable price!

[simowills]

After my recent posting re teleconverters and their effect on image quality, your pic demonstrates what was said about the starting quality on the lens's being used. That is, with a class lens little or no effect, average lens, a more spoiling effect on the final result.

thanks

It will be interesting to compare with Ishino's examples if he has the chance to take and post his pic's.

Simon

[snostorm]

mtngal wrote:

Awesome picture - not totally surprising when the lens is such an outstanding one. I mentioned to the Pentax rep that I wish they would reproduce the AF 1.7 TC and he was surprised I mentioned it. He laughed and said that they needed to fill out the lens line first. Too bad, because I'd love to have one, at least at a reasonable price!

Hi Harriet,

I'd think that reintroducing the 1.7x AFA (or even a 1.4x) and making it compatible with SDM (for a nice bonus) would quell some of the complaints about lack of tele FL lenses in their lineup -- and at a bargain price, considering the cost of long glass. It would also reinforce the perception of their support for legacy MF lenses in the K mount.

If you couldn't tell, I'm a big fan of the F 1.7x AFA -- I actually have 2 of them and consider them an essential component in my gear. While mine weren't as inexpensive as Tom's, I was lucky enough to realize their usefulness before the asking prices went over the top tho. . .

Scott