- #ONE MORE LIGHT ALBUM 600X600 UPDATE#
- #ONE MORE LIGHT ALBUM 600X600 MANUAL#
- #ONE MORE LIGHT ALBUM 600X600 FULL#
Got to say, the prospect of an 840mm f/11 lens (equivalent wide open f/4) at this IQ is attractive for some uses.
The IQ seems to hold up remarkably well, and the old Saitex A-2x is not too bad. Then started playing with double up of 2x and 1.4x not expecting too much.
Obviously the IQ suffers a bit from addition issues of subject motion, atmospheric distortion and camera vibration as the magnification becomes enormous. And the DA*300 doesn't have much of that. The performance of the DA*300 with these TC versions is remarkable, and it seems to confirm my view that a good TC just magnifies lens defects. Don't have access to Pentax A-1.4xS from but impression is that new DA-1.4x is very similar performance, just with all the convenience of AF.
#ONE MORE LIGHT ALBUM 600X600 UPDATE#
TC comparison DA300-4 Aerial Mount 3 by KevinR38, on Flickrįinally getting to doing an update on this with new DA-1.4x AF AW teleconverter included alongside native and old MF 2x TC. TC comparison DA300-4 Aerial Mount 2 by KevinR38, on Flickr Hope HD 1.4x AF WR TC as good if not better, as one now on order for late next week. Seemingly still the same indicative result, although not as much blocky pixelation on the crops with the higher resolution. I think I did the opposite and down-sampled the large images to the cropped resolution in some, so took the time to redo the aerial mount resolution as this was the best for outright resolution test. I find it's always hard to compare images unless they are at or near the same resolution.Thanks for useful comment. Whenever I've run my own tests, I have been much less impressed with the TC results, especially considering the loss in speed (light), handling, and magnification of lens flaws.
#ONE MORE LIGHT ALBUM 600X600 FULL#
I am curious though if you have compared your native shots with the TC shots after cropping it and then resizing back to full resolution using lanczos or some other similar algorithm? I'm a bit of a tester also and Iike to compare images in this way as well. Thanks for taking the time to post your results. So with the really sharp lenses used here, the IQ remained very high in all cases.Īnd then the view cropped up close: Order 2x Native 1.4xĪnd then a similar comparison using the Tak 200 And finally, the TC don't seem to degrade the image much, but rather just amplify the poor lens qualities. Both TC's are a significant improvement on the native with cropping. Resolution with 2x TC is the highest by a fair amount, but the image quality of the 1.4xS appears slightly better (or at least more pleasing). Typical processing was to enlarge native and 1.4x images to same size as 2x TC image, and then compare side by side using Faststone. All the lenses are very sharp although the older Tak 500 is a bit prone to CA. The reference lenses are the DA*300 a Tak 200 f/3.5 preset and a Tak 500 f/4.5 preset. I played around a bit with native crops compared to the 1.4x and an old 2x TC that I picked up a year ago. George got to try out the DA-15 for a few weeks in exchange. Have decided to go for HD 1.4x AF WR from this image quality and the desire to have AF.
#ONE MORE LIGHT ALBUM 600X600 MANUAL#
Perhaps not ideal given the manual focus, but perhaps a good test of likely performance from the HD 1.4x WR TC. In anticipation of getting a decent TC for my DA*300, I was tempted to try out a A-1.4xS TC courtesy of.
0 kommentar(er)
