Teleconverter Minolta Free Interesting Guide

September 5, 2010 lenses No comments

Perhaps I should not have been … but I was surprised by the things I had not thought of before buying this lens extender. The first is that it made my autofocus shock reduction camera into basically a manual camera. Perhaps I had not attached the tele-extender properly to my camera, (several times under different conditions). But I could not get the autofocus to work. There’s also another consideration: when you increase the telephoto power, you reduce the area of the objects you are imaging. You are also increasing the speed of the subject in relationship to the frame. When I took a picture of a goose in the back yard, the goose ended up walking partially out of the frame by the end of the extended exposure. When I took a (tripoded) picture of Jupiter, the planet had moved away from the focus point – blurring the image and giving it an extended oval shape. Although I was able to distinguish the moons of Jupiter, four that night, they too were blurred. In both cases the tele-extender worked correctly – as far as I could tell. And in itself it gave clear images. However, I may have been able to gain a better final image by cropping and editing an original from the standard telephoto lens. I haven’t abandoned the tele-extender. I’m experimenting with it to find the appropriate application.
Al.

Help answer the question about Teleconverter Minolta
Opinions of a 2X Teleconverter?
I created a Set of pictures taken with my 70-210mm f4 zoom fitted with a 2X teleconverter. The lens is a Minolta MD manual focus; the teleconverter Teleconverter Minolta is a Minolta 300S (for lenses under 300mm). All pictures taken at 420mm, handheld. The waterlillies were taken using Fujicolor Superia Reala ISO 100. The butterflies were taken using Kodak Royal Supra ISO 200 (sadly discontinued).All opinions, good, bad or indifferent, are welcome. Thanks!http://www.flickr.com/photos/drifter45h/sets