After Paul's comment about using the 2x on the 150-450 I looked into
them a bit.
It seems as if the Pentax 2x will crop on FF, but that Tamron has one
that won't.
Also, after looking at some posts by folks who pixel peep, that when it
comes to fine detail, the teleconverter doesn't actually gain you
anything in detail in the final image over cropping. In short, when the
sensor is outresolving the lens, a 2x TC will give you four times as
many pixels, but each pixel is only 1/4 as good.
It seems to me, that if you are shooting professionally, where post
processing time is of the essence, then if the detail in the final image
is about the same, then the TC is definitely worth it, particularly if
you aren't shooting wide open anyways, and the loss of a stop or two
doesn't matter.
My only real experience with this was many years ago, I did some tests,
photographing the moon, and the final images, cropped to the size of the
moon and processed to the same number of pixels, if anything the TC
images were degraded over the cropped images. Back in the days of film,
where film, particularly tri-X, didn't out resolve the lens, then the
TCs would make a significant improvement.
So, do TCs help? If so when? Thoughts? Experience?
If so, which ones do the best?
I can definitely understand that even if a TC isn't a full 24x36, when I
actually would use one, I'd go to a crop sensor first, so that doesn't
really matter.
--
Larry Colen [email protected] http://red4est.com/lrc
--
%(real_name)s Pentax-Discuss Mail List
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow
the directions.
