Jump to: navigation, search

Teleconverters are secondary lens whose function is to enlarge the central part of an image obtained by the objective lens. They produce the same effect as increasing the focal length of the lens. For example, a 2X doubles the focal length. Usually available in 1.4×, 1.7×, 2× and 3× models -- of which the 1.4×, 2×, and 3x are the most common. Unfortunately, teleconverters also decrease the intensity of the light reaching the film (by a factor of their power squared) as well as causing a significant reduction in resolution. I'd avoid them in low-light work or when seeking the highest possible resolution, but they are certainly nice to carry and "good enough for general work."
You can buy one at any well-stocked camera store--either local or online (BH, Adorama) etc. Another possibility is to check the manufacturer. Prices there are often a bit higher than the discounters, but optical quality may be better.

Hi Don,

Those big negs from 4x5 are a spoiler. I've shot digital and, good as it is, it just doesn't compare. Magazine reproduction is such that the difference is minimal but you really notice the difference in book publishing or in 16x20 display prints. Happily, it isn't either/or. I could save a lot of time and hassle by shooting digi most of the time and breaking out the "big gun" when necessary.

Meives, Dick, Simon, and Frank,

Thank you. You're all making me feel very welcome.

Tanks ebbote. I'm also working on digital, but I can't seem to give up my E6 now that Kodachrome has gone bye bye.

Thanks. It's nice to be here where people know an f-stop from f-sharp.

To be or not to be is the question all right. More and more, I'm thinking of staying with film, taking the money I'd need to spend on a good digital and lenses and investing it instead in a quality scanner that will give me files for online submission or loading to disks.

Thank you! Seems like a righteous group of people.

I have about 3,000 4x5 images and 12,000+ 35mm, but nothing that approaches decent quality in a scanner. I've bought several, but mediocre is a generous description. That cuts way down on posting and emailing my work until I get a scanner that doesn't destroy resolution and color balance. I guess the "trick" is to take the money I've been spending on film!

I've been lurking here for a while and finally decided to join. I'm employed as a college professor but I'm trying to start a photography/videography business. If it goes well, I may go full time. I have a hard time parting with 4x5 and with 35mm shot with a Canon F-1--love the properties of real film, but it's getting hard to find fresh film stock so it's probable that I may go with digital and Photoshop the bejeezus out of it. No idea yet whether I'll stick with Canon or go to Nikon or ??? for digital. If you've had any experiences--good or bad--I'd sure like to hear them.