kenko 3x tc

I don't know ... Roger Clark has admitted to using stacked 1.4x and 2x
multipliers which would probably be equivalent, and his standards are
pretty high.


"gmr2048" <gmr2048 RemoveThis @nuthin.com> wrote in message
news:u476415p7qd262mtsphcnk8hbrqe54k1cd@4ax.com...
 > I've never heard about this specific TC, but I've always heard that
 > the 1.4x TCs produce acceptable results, while the 2.0x TCs produce
 > soft results. Based on that, I'd guess that a 3.0x TC would produce
 > very soft results. Hope that helps some.
 >
 > -gary
<font color=purple> > <a style='text-decoration: underline;' href="http://www.eighteenpercent.net</font" target="_blank">http://www.eighteenpercent.net</font</a>>
 >
 > On Tue, 15 Mar 2005 06:15:32 +0100, ".::SuperBLUE::."
 > <superblue RemoveThis @dontusefakkevip.hr> wrote:
 >
  > >Any info about the quality of this teleconverter, please
  > >Thanks
  > >
 >
 >
 > -gary
 > gmr2048 at yahoo dot com
 > Washington DC, USA
<font color=purple> > <a style='text-decoration: underline;' href="http://www.eighteenpercent.net</font" target="_blank">http://www.eighteenpercent.net</font</a>><!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: kenko 3x tc 

"gmr2048" <gmr2048 RemoveThis @nuthin.com> wrote in message news:u476415p7qd262mtsphcnk8hbrqe54k1cd@4ax.com...
 > I've never heard about this specific TC, but I've always heard that
 > the 1.4x TCs produce acceptable results, while the 2.0x TCs produce
 > soft results. Based on that, I'd guess that a 3.0x TC would produce
 > very soft results. Hope that helps some.

I've heard several people complain that the Kenko brand TCs were
junk. Buyer beware and you get what you pay for kind of stuff.<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: kenko 3x tc 

"RSD99" <rsdwla.NOSPAM.TakeThisOut@gte.net> wrote in message news:j4J0e.20517$b_6.702@trnddc01...
 > I don't know ... Roger Clark has admitted to using stacked 1.4x and 2x
 > multipliers which would probably be equivalent, and his standards are
 > pretty high.

I think a lot of it depends upon which end you are stacking from and the
quality of the TC. A lot of the fixed lens P&S camera makers offer lens
add-ons but they very greatly in their quality and performance. Compare
these with the multipliers that DSLR and SLR owners use for doubling
their zooms and I think you will find quite a bit of difference in the
performance of the two application methods.

I recently tried lens stacking with my Panasonic FZ20 and the results were
mediocre at best. See -http://ken.smugmug.com/gallery/436065


See also - <a style='text-decoration: underline;' href="http://www.pbase.com/10kzoomfz/tele_pd62_comparisons" target="_blank">http://www.pbase.com/10kzoomfz/tele_pd62_comparisons</a><!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: kenko 3x tc 

In message <hyK0e.2261$zl.2011@newssvr13.news.prodigy.com>,
"Ken" <ken RemoveThis @ken.ken> wrote:

 >"gmr2048" <gmr2048 RemoveThis @nuthin.com> wrote in message news:u476415p7qd262mtsphcnk8hbrqe54k1cd@4ax.com...
  >> I've never heard about this specific TC, but I've always heard that
  >> the 1.4x TCs produce acceptable results, while the 2.0x TCs produce
  >> soft results. Based on that, I'd guess that a 3.0x TC would produce
  >> very soft results. Hope that helps some.

 >I've heard several people complain that the Kenko brand TCs were
 >junk. Buyer beware and you get what you pay for kind of stuff.

I have the Tamron SP 2x, and from what I can see, it is as good as the
Canon 2x. It is actually a rebadged Kenko, from what I understand.
There is more than one series of Kenko converters; the cheap ones are
allegedly just that, and the better ones are excellent.
--

<>>< ><<> ><<> <>>< ><<> <>>< <>>< ><<>
John P Sheehy <JPS RemoveThis @no.komm>
  ><<> <>>< <>>< ><<> <>>< ><<> ><<> <>><<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: kenko 3x tc