FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

Which T/C for my SAL70200G?

Page  <12
Author
nitrosyl View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 05 October 2008
Country: United States
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Posts: 942
Post Options Post Options   Quote nitrosyl Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 23 February 2012 at 23:09
In general, it's not a good idea to add any TC to a zoom lens, even for a G. Simply too much of a compromise to be worthwhile.

If 400mm is a must, I'd save that $$ to get a Minolta 100-400 APO if I were you. It's not that much more expensive that a Sony 2X APO TC, but the image quality at 400mm should be better than a 70-200/2.8 combined with 2X.
FS: Sony 16/2.8 Fisheye, Minolta 28-135/4-4.5
 



Back to Top
FineArt View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 28 July 2007
Country: Canada
Location: Alberta
Status: Offline
Posts: 1692
Post Options Post Options   Quote FineArt Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 23 February 2012 at 23:33
Originally posted by Serdar A Serdar A wrote:

Originally posted by FineArt FineArt wrote:

I don't understand why you would want to buy 70-200G plus tele when you already have the 70-300G. What were you trying to do?

He already bought the 70200G and inquiring about how it will perform with the SAL-20TC giving him a 140-400mm f/5.6 zoom. He will probably use it w/o the TC between 70-200 @ f/2.8 and with the TC between 200-400 @ f/5.6. Speed and range wise this makes the SAL-70300G he already owns redundant and probably could save a couple of hundred dollars if he sells the 70300G and buys a 2x TC. He is concerned that the resulting combo may not be as good IQ wise and asking people who have experience.

Now, do you understand what he is trying to do?


I would suggest just use the 70-300G. Add a 1.4x if required for 420mm. A 2x should only be used on a prime with no filter. Teles in general are for primes. Adding them to a set of 15-20 lens elements is ugly.
Back to Top
Effstop View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 29 January 2011
Country: Australia
Location: Melbourne
Status: Offline
Posts: 414
Post Options Post Options   Quote Effstop Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 24 February 2012 at 03:57
Greatly appreciate everyone's opinions and advice. My current inclination is to wait until I've had a chance to "road test" the 2 teleconverters with the 70200 before making a decision (or even a decision not to go with one at all). A local Dyxum'er has offered me the opportunity to do that, and I will most likely take him up on his offer when my lens eventually shows up.

Thanks again for your input

Cheers

Dave
Dynax7,a700,a55,a77+VG,CZ1680,85f14,135f18,SAL3514G,70200G,70400G,M24f28,35105,50f14,70210f4,100f28M,100f28SF,200f28G,500f8,Tok1116,TCs 1.4 & 2.0
Back to Top
vbpholaw View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 12 March 2007
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Posts: 2192
Post Options Post Options   Quote vbpholaw Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 24 February 2012 at 04:37
Originally posted by Serdar A Serdar A wrote:

Joe and Mark: Based on what you said, is it OK to assume that SAL-20TC is OK with 200/2.8G and 300/2.8G? Maybe not wide open, but stopped down slightly.


OK yes, particularly stopped down. But, don't expect it to give the performance of a "high quality" fixed focal length of the same effective length. My 300/2.8 and 2x, while providing decent performance (publishable quality, as I have had photos with this combination published in a book), is not as sharp as my 600/4. I used to have a 200/2.8 and with the 2x it was pretty good as well. It was equal to or better than an old Sigma 400/5.6 lens that I had, probably in the late 1980's or early 1990's - before I got my 300/2.8 in 1993. But, that was then, and lenses today are much better. I can't do a comparison now, but I would bet the 300/2.8 and 1.4x is better than the 200/2.8 and 2x. Of course, more people likely have the 200/2.8 than 300. If you have both, you have even more flexibility.
Back to Top
Jozioau View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 13 May 2007
Country: Australia
Location: Melbourne
Status: Offline
Posts: 1456
Post Options Post Options   Quote Jozioau Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 24 February 2012 at 06:21
I full agree with Mark. I have taken highly satisfactory images using my former Minolta 200mm f2.8 HS APO G plus Minolta APO 2.0x teleconverter combo, and also my current SAL300F28 G plus SAL20TC combo. Particularly when stopped down rather than wide open.
The latter combo (600mm) is sometimes affected by atmospheric shimmer through that distance more than any other impact on IQ.
So now I'm basically keeping the SAL20TC for occasional extra reach on the 300mm f2.8, most frequently use it on its own, or with the SAL14TC when needed which still yields very fine IQ, and the only TC I occasionally use on the SAL70200 G is the 1.4.

Edited by Jozioau - 24 February 2012 at 07:44
a900;a77II;a700;VCGs;CZ50F14,85F14,1635,2470,1680;SAL70200G,70400G,100M28,300F28G,TCs;M500F8;Σ1020,Σ15fisheye
My Link
Back to Top
vbpholaw View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 12 March 2007
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Posts: 2192
Post Options Post Options   Quote vbpholaw Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 24 February 2012 at 15:30
Adding to what's posted above, the SAL 300/2.8 G SSM lens seems to be a bit better than the Minolta 300/2.8 which is what I have. Thus, one would expect that the Sony 300/2.8 would perform a bit better with a 2x than the Minolta 300/2.8. The only caveat here is that given the different optical formulas of the two lenses, it might affect just how well the 2x converter (which I believe uses the same optical formula/design that Minolta originally used with the first generation converters in the late 1980's) interacts with the newer 300/2.8. However, I don't think such differences would be sufficient to alter my or Jozioau's suggestions.
 



Back to Top
klw10 View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 06 May 2009
Country: United States
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Posts: 1334
Post Options Post Options   Quote klw10 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 24 February 2012 at 16:10
I had the Sony 1.4 TC and got the Kenko DGX variant in 1.4 and 2.0. I could not distinguish any noticeable difference between the two 1.4s so I sold the Sony and kept the Kenko which was much cheaper.
Back to Top
Dyxum main page >  Forum Home > Equipment forums > Lens Talk > Adapters and converters Page  <12

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down



This page was generated in 0.125 seconds.

Monitor calibration strip

Dyxum.com - Home of the alpha system photographer

Find us on Google+

Feel free to contact us if needed.

Links monetized by viglink VigLink