Trying Out a Kenko Pro 2x TC
May 2, 2014 21:43:19 #
Thanks Bret... I appreciate your comments...
The fuzzy Blue Jay was my fault... hurried hand-held shot before he flew away... I have some at 30 feet that are as clear as the ones at 15-20 feet...
The fuzzy Blue Jay was my fault... hurried hand-held shot before he flew away... I have some at 30 feet that are as clear as the ones at 15-20 feet...
Bret wrote:
The Jay is a bit fuzzy...but the other 2...not bad at all. Worth $50 bucks for sure. I'd say inside of 20 feet or so...looks like its going to work pretty good.
May 3, 2014 06:23:18 #
Nice shots. Seems like a great deal. Didn't notice much as far as loss of sharpness.
May 3, 2014 07:05:00 #
Lamanup
Loc: Darjeeling
brucew29 wrote:
I am thinking of buying a used 2x Kenko Pro 300 to... (show quote)
Lovely images Brucew29. I like them all.
May 3, 2014 11:31:52 #
May 3, 2014 15:15:00 #
brucew29 wrote:
Thanks Jackinthebox... I appreciate your comments.... (show quote)
Yes I did see your added set. Real good. Thanks also for correcting my $9 typo.
Just why does the 9 come before the 0?
May 3, 2014 15:15:51 #
May 3, 2014 17:01:54 #
Thanks Erv... I appreciate your comments... I am always keeping an eye out for a good/great deal... I don't believe in paying "Fool" price... :)
Erv wrote:
These are pretty awesome for the price Bruce!! Nice buy!!!
Erv
Erv
May 3, 2014 17:35:18 #
Thanks PierreH... I appreciate your comments... I am starting to get use to the 2x Kenko Pro 300... because of the extra magnification I had to change my techniques a little... will get better with use... hopefully...
PierreH wrote:
There'll be many times you'll be happy with the extra reach and you'll no doubt work out strategies to make it work very well. You've got a good beginning with this series.
Pierre
Pierre
May 3, 2014 18:58:03 #
I tried a tamron 2x F on my 24-105L and it worked fine. Good photos. It did not work on my old zeiss 135 so I didn't keep it.
May 3, 2014 20:12:21 #
Thanks colo43... I appreciate your comments... I added a second set of photos in case you missed them...
colo43 wrote:
very nice.
May 3, 2014 21:07:05 #
Hi Erv...
No I didn't see that in my Canon 60D menus unless it is under a different name but I didn't see anything like it... maybe that was in the Canon 50D where there was adjustments to the camera body and lens to accurize lens focusing... Canon did away with it because it was being misused and created more problems then it fixed... so they say...
No I didn't see that in my Canon 60D menus unless it is under a different name but I didn't see anything like it... maybe that was in the Canon 50D where there was adjustments to the camera body and lens to accurize lens focusing... Canon did away with it because it was being misused and created more problems then it fixed... so they say...
Erv wrote:
Bruce does Canon have a "add shapeless" to a lens in your menus? With my 28-300 and my 80-400. I had to add+4 for the 28-300 and +3 for the 80-400 when I put the TC's on the lenses.
Erv
Erv
May 3, 2014 22:14:04 #
Thanks coolshot1... I appreciate your comments... now I have a tad more reach and I might get addicted to it and want a lens with even more reach...
coolshot1 wrote:
Nice shots. Seems like a great deal. Didn't notice much as far as loss of sharpness.
May 4, 2014 08:59:18 #
Thanks Lamanup... I appreciate your comment...
Lamanup wrote:
Lovely images Brucew29. I like them all.
May 4, 2014 09:43:19 #
Thanks rimcon... I appreciate your comments...
rimcon wrote:
$50? No brainier. Great shots 👍👍
May 4, 2014 10:47:34 #
Thanks Jackinthebox... I appreciate your comments...
Jackinthebox wrote:
Yes I did see your added set. Real good. Thanks also for correcting my $9 typo.
Just why does the 9 come before the 0?
Just why does the 9 come before the 0?
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.