telephoto lens.

  • Thread starter Thread starter Guest
  • Start date Start date
Re: telephoto lens.

Ok I did some tests, and my 3x adapter (cannon tele-converterer TL-55L 3X), vingnetts at about Z98, but clears at Z99! I have never noticed because if I use it, I use it all the way. It also is meant for a 55mm lens, so a 58 or more should be better. It also reduces light by ~1.5 stops. That said, I sure am glad I have it in my case if I need it. If I dropped it and broke it, I'd pay $99 on ebay for another one wihtout hesitation.

Below is a comparison with a standard object. One full zoom, and one full zoom w/ the 3x.
www.emrl.com/j/MOON1x.jpg
www.emrl.com/j/MOON2x.jpg

-j
 
Re: telephoto lens.

The 3x looks to have a little bleed/smear... Do other shots have that effect? It seems the adaptor really changes the image in more ways that just magnification.
 
Re: telephoto lens.

I was wondering about that too -- looks to have a significant color smear on the right side. Hard to argue with the magnification though!
 
Re: telephoto lens.

[quote author=Barry_Green link=board=Links;num=1079915578;start=0#12 date=03/26/04 at 10:40:40]And, again, let's repeat the famous phrase: "Never save money on anything that goes in front of your lens."

Why get a $3,400 camera, with a Leica lens, and then stick a $100 "ghetto" piece of glass in front of it?  If you spent the money to get the camera so your images will look good, putting junk glass in front of it makes no sense.[/quote]
Amen, Brother.  That should be camera scripture.
 
Re: telephoto lens.

Yeah, I guess it depends on your use. It does degrade the image, but I don't do doccumentaries, I use it for narrative, and it always seems to enhance the shot. I only use mine for the occasional telephoto or super tight ECU (I hate the wide macro look). I probably only pull it out for 3 or 4 shots per feature film, and it works just fine. If I were to use itf requently, then I would invest in good glass and zoom thru capability.

-Jay
 
Back
Top