A-Mount Teleconverters Guide

amrep wrote: You may go for the cheapest option of these (the MC7). On A58 there is no benefit from a Pro 300.

It's what I thought. The only thing that makes me doubt is what is said in the thread that the 300 PRO is optimized for Tamron SP optics that have a faster focus. Something like the Minolta APO HS, but I think I will opt for the MC7 because I think that it is with the others that Kenkop came into conflict with Sony, perhaps, due to its inadequate adaptation.

amrep wrote: QuietOC wrote: I don't find that "Pro 300" means anything based on those I've had. Probably just marketing by Kenko. Pro 300 have different optics that "catches" a wider light cone (wider front element) than the similar "non pro 300." It's not just marketing. PAUMART wrote: The only thing that makes me doubt is what is said in the thread that the 300 PRO is optimized for Tamron SP optics that have a faster focus. This is not true. There are a range of very different Tamron SP lenses (SP means SuperPerformance = marketing!). The Pro 300 converters are optimized for 300mm 2.8 (and longer similar fast lenses), no matter what brand. The Pro 300 has NO specific connection to Tamron SP i general. Pro 300 is for A900/A850 or A99/A99ii with a fast supertele lens.

Thank you very much, it makes it quite clear for me.
I understand that the 300 PRO does not give me much in a combination of A58 with a Tamron SP 70-300, compared to the MC7 and that it may even work worse.
For the rest, the prices at which I can find them are almost the same.

QuietOC wrote: Kenko is currently marketing "HDpro" TELEPLUS models. Someone should have told them that HD is really out-of-date. UHD 8K is current marketing.

Kenko and Pentax

neilt3 wrote: I know your after a 2x teleconverter , but just as a warning regards tele-converters in general . I have a Kenko teleplus 300 1.4x TC ( do they do a 2x version ?)and it has a slightly protruding front element . This prevents most lenses being mounted on it .

This is a very apt statement by neilt3. I have a Kenko Teleplux Pro 300 2x TC, and it does not physically fit most of my Sony and Minolta lenses. (I have more than those listed in my signature.) The only Sony/Minolta lenses it fit for me are the Sony 70-400G1 and Minolta 400 f4.5. It does fit all the Sigma and Tamron lenses I've tried, including zooms, but the quality is not the best. In fact, the only lens I have where I'd say it is worth using is with the Minolta 400. It will autofocus with that lens, but it is slow and requires the use of the "wide" AF area. I also have a Minolta APO 1.4x TC which works very well the the Minolta 400, but fits very few other lenses.

I have found my Kenko DGX 1.4x TC to be a generally much more useful TC. It is more recessed than the 300 Pro 2x, so it physically fits all my lenses except the Sony 18-135. The Sony 35 f1.8(DT) also didn't work because it locked up. It will attempt to autofocus with almost all my lenses, but the focus can be slow or inaccurate with slower lenses. Image quality is not stellar, but it is still better the 2X Pro 300 TC at equivalent focal lengths. I think the optics of the Pro 300 2x TC are probably quite good, but any 2x TC will suffer in performance, especially with slow, zoom lenses.

All three of my TCs are chipped so there's no difference in that aspect. Good luck, PAULMART, with your search for a good teleconverter. Hope this helps.

I have finally acquired a Kenko TELEPLUS MC7 2x. It is the one that is specifically marked with the Greek alpha letter that characterizes the Sony alpha series.
I have assumed that a duplicator will make me lose sharpness and even AF on many occasions, requiring manual focus. Also, if the AF works, it will be slower.
But my purpose is not to take photos of birds in flight with the duplicator, I can do this perfectly with focal lengths between 70 and 300 or less (seagulls, corporanes, flamingos, ibis, vultures, eagles, etc.) but to take them in static when they are in the wetlands at a greater distance, for example, lunar photography, distant points in landscapes and not easily accessible, etc. Also see how it affects the macro, IN short, I will experiment with it.
As I say, for moving, even sports photography, the proximity of the subjects I hunt is rarely not covered by a focal range of 200 or 300.
When I get back in a few days and do the tests, I will tell you how it works.
What I have clear is that to play, experiment and as an amateur, I cannot afford to buy a telephoto lens with a great focal length and quality and this can bring me a bit closer to what I am looking for.
On the other hand, I like and control the post processing very well and many problems of chromatic aberrations, distortions, vignetting and even focus I correct them in this part of the process.
I just hope I enjoy it.

addy landzaat wrote: neilt3 wrote: I haven't got a translator on my phone , so I can't understand the question . It is 2021, Neil

Hey , it might have taken more than two weeks , but I've just found out my phone does have a translator thingy on it after all !
I've only had the phone for about two years .