[enoxatnep]

I just learned this evening about the new 1.4x teleconverter and was excited to learn more details. However, the price was over twice what I had hoped. I got partially over that by reading the specs on the Ricoh site; learning that it's AW to complement my weather-sealed lenses was one plus. Another was its compatibility with screw-mount and SDM/DC lenses. Then I put on different lenses and zoomed them out 1.4x to see if the extra reach was worth it: 50 mm to 70 mm, 135 mm to 190 mm, etc. However, especially from 135 to 190 mm, the degree of reach didn't seem all that impressive to me, especially given what one would pay.

I'd have to conclude that the amount of extra reach given the frankly outrageous price makes this a tough sell for me. God forbid if they ever come out with a 1.7x or 2x converter; the price would be almost as much as my DA* 16-50 or 50-135, respectively!! Maybe someone who disagrees with my conclusion can shed some light as to why this might be a GOOD purchase?

[boriscleto]

It's not for shorter lenses. It's for the 60-250, 300 & 560. One day it will allow the shorter DA lenses to work with the you-know-what.

[crewl1]

I think the primary sucker target market for this converter are long lens shooters, specifically those with the DA*300 like me.
I'm wanting one

[AquaDome]

It's not for shorter lenses. It's for the 60-250, 300 & 560. One day it will allow the shorter DA lenses to work with the you-know-what.

Someone should test this theory on a film-body. If it really does what you didn't say...

[DSims]

I'd have to conclude that the amount of extra reach given the frankly outrageous price makes this a tough sell for me. God forbid if they ever come out with a 1.7x or 2x converter; the price would be almost as much as my DA* 16-50 or 50-135, respectively!! Maybe someone who disagrees with my conclusion can shed some light as to why this might be a GOOD purchase?

If you take a look over here it appears normhead is getting very nice results with it. This doesn't mean I disagree with you, but if the quality's high it's a good purchase for some people. His photos have certainly made me consider it for my F*300.

https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/16-pentax-news-rumors/250767-hd-teleconve...ounced-17.html

[Barry Pearson]

Someone should test this theory on a film-body. If it really does what you didn't say...

The first thing I did when my Pentax 1.4x Teleconverter arrived yesterday was to attach it to my Pentax Z-1p film camera. Then I attached various lenses (below) that might be expected to hard-vignette. None of them showed signs of vignetting, looking through the viewfinder at a well-lit surface.

The lenses I tested that apparently didn't hard-vignette at any focal length , showing image right to the corners, were:

• DA 10-17mm Fisheye. (Not on the Pentax list of supported lenses!). This hard-vignettes on the Z-1p at 10mm and 12mm without a Teleconverter.
  
• DA 12-24mm. This hard-vignettes badly on the Z-1p at wide angles without a Teleconverter.
  
• DA 17-70mm. This hard-vignettes at all focal lengths on the Z-1p without a Teleconverter.
  
• DA* 60-250mm.

I haven't yet tested any other lenses on the Z-1p with this Teleconverter. I may shoot my last roll of film with a range of lenses using this Teleconverter on the Z-1p to complete my previous tests of lenses on the Z-1p.

My priority is to get some experience of using it on the lenses I bought it for. In priority order (most important first) these are:

• DA* 300mm f/4 (of course!)
  
• DA* 60-250mm f/4.
  
• D-FA 100mm f/2.8 WR Macro
  
• Sigma 500mm f/4.5 APO

If it is good with just the 3 Pentax lenses in that list it will be well worth the money. Being good with the Sigma would be a bonus. And so far the omens are good!

This is my 3rd 1.4x Teleconverter. I have the Kenko P-AF 1.4x Teleplus MC4 and the (acclaimed) Tamron 1.4x Pz-AF MC4. These worked on the D-FA Macro and the Sigma, but even the Tamron was poor on the DA* lenses. So if the Pentax Teleconverter does what I think it will do, it will be the Kenko and the Tamron that turn out (for me) to be a waste of money.

[AquaDome]

The first thing I did when my Pentax 1.4x Teleconverter arrived yesterday was to attach it to my Pentax Z-1p film camera. Then I attached various lenses (below) that might be expected to hard-vignette. None of them showed signs of vignetting, looking through the viewfinder at a well-lit surface.

Now there's a compelling reason to want this thing.

My priority is to get some experience of using it on the lenses I bought it for.

The DA*300, at 1x4, if you think in 35mm terms, is... uh... 630mm!! Even though its a teleconverter, its absolutely going to shame my FIVE STAR 600mm/f8 manual lens.
Crap. Now I gotta get a DA*300 too.

[goubejp]

The first reports by users justify the price. If you compare to cheaper teleconverters like Sigma for instance (priced 250 euros here vs 390 euros for the Pentax) :
There is electronic Inside to convert focal length and aperture. Focal length convertion is a must to have proper image stabilisation. Sigma seems to make a direct connection of the contacts (I have one).
There is a mechanical screw drive reduction to achieve precise AF. As focal length is increased, a demultiplication of the AF in order to maintain AF precision.
Added to WR and HD coatings, this justify at least a 100 euros add on the price. For me, the converter is only slightly overpriced, this is normal for a brand new items. Here in France it solds as hot cakes, it is a common practice to overprice this first items and let the price decrease at time goes.

[aleonx3]

It's not for shorter lenses. It's for the 60-250, 300 & 560. One day it will allow the shorter DA lenses to work with the you-know-what.

I agree that this teleconverter is mostly more beneficial for longer lenses (ie. 300, 60-250 or like). But I also find this converter to be an excellent alternative to extend the reach for my DA* 16-50/50-135 lenses. It works so well that I can use both lenses nice and sharp at wide-open aperture on both short- and long-end focal length of the lenses.

[Stone G.]

Someone should test this theory on a film-body. If it really does what you didn't say...

Oh, but that's what a 1.4X TC does: It magnifies the viewing angle by a factor of 1.4 and thus, also the diameter of the image circle. You can test that with any 1.4X teleconverter on a film- or (CaNikon) DSLR body.

[JASMAZ77]

I just learned this evening about the new 1.4x teleconverter and was excited to learn more details. However, the price was over twice what I had hoped. I got partially over that by reading the specs on the Ricoh site; learning that it's AW to complement my weather-sealed lenses was one plus. Another was its compatibility with screw-mount and SDM/DC lenses. Then I put on different lenses and zoomed them out 1.4x to see if the extra reach was worth it: 50 mm to 70 mm, 135 mm to 190 mm, etc. However, especially from 135 to 190 mm, the degree of reach didn't seem all that impressive to me, especially given what one would pay.

I'd have to conclude that the amount of extra reach given the frankly outrageous price makes this a tough sell for me. God forbid if they ever come out with a 1.7x or 2x converter; the price would be almost as much as my DA* 16-50 or 50-135, respectively!! Maybe someone who disagrees with my conclusion can shed some light as to why this might be a GOOD purchase?

Stop bagging the 1.4x TC enoxatnep until you buy one and actually start using it and get the benefits from it!! you know nothing about it yet, get it some time!!

[Gray]

A great alternative to the new hyperpriced 1.4 converter is the Tamron PZ 1.4x - less than half the price, superb IQ coupled with the ability to AF screw as well as SDM and HSM lenses. Doesn't give WR and automatic adjusted focal length data, but that's not an issue for me.

The Tamron It works very well with my K-5II/DA* 60-250 set up (and even with my Sigma 50-500 HSM given enough light).

Tamron-F 1.4X Pz-AF MC4 Lens Reviews - Miscellaneous Lenses - Pentax Lens Review Database (Rating 9.4)

[Parallax]

Stop bagging the 1.4x TC enoxatnep until you buy one and actually start using it and get the benefits from it!! you know nothing about it yet, get it some time!!

You made this same comment to someone else in a different thread on the same subject. Perhaps you should stop telling other members what they should and shouldn't post!!

[awaldram]

The Tamron It works very well with my K-5II/DA* 60-250 set up (and even with my Sigma 50-500 HSM given enough light).

Please define your definition of 'very well'

Owning both the Pz variant I suspect your 'very well' equates with my 'not worth a dxmn'

To me working well means I can switch to AF-c track a birds in flight fire the shutter at will and capture a sharp image

Working OK Means I half press the shutter the camera focuses and locks

'Not worth a dxmn' means I press the shutter a number of times trying to encourage the AF to achieve lock.

With 1.4 Pz converters I've achieved between OK and 'Not worth a dxmn' with different lens on different bodies at different times, A whole world of frustration and I would not recomend purchasing a Pz converter at any price for SDM/HSM use.

A complete waste of money for that purpose IMO.

[enoxatnep]

It's not for shorter lenses. It's for the 60-250, 300 & 560.

The first reports by users justify the price. If you compare to cheaper teleconverters like Sigma for instance (priced 250 euros here vs 390 euros for the Pentax) :
There is electronic Inside to convert focal length and aperture. Focal length convertion is a must to have proper image stabilisation. Sigma seems to make a direct connection of the contacts (I have one).
There is a mechanical screw drive reduction to achieve precise AF. As focal length is increased, a demultiplication of the AF in order to maintain AF precision.
Added to WR and HD coatings, this justify at least a 100 euros add on the price.

Very good points, indeed. Regarding the first comment, it probably won't benefit me much if my longest lens is my DA* 50-135!

---------- Post added 03-14-2014 at 09:30 AM ----------

I agree that this teleconverter is mostly more beneficial for longer lenses (ie. 300, 60-250 or like). But I also find this converter to be an excellent alternative to extend the reach for my DA* 16-50/50-135 lenses. It works so well that I can use both lenses nice and sharp at wide-open aperture on both short- and long-end focal length of the lenses.

I used my old A 70-210 to extend from 135mm to 190mm (a 1.4x increase) and really didn't get excited by the difference. Likewise, I did the same experiment from 50 to 70 using my 50-135 and noticed a slightly bigger difference. I suppose, however, that those who wanted the 16-50 to be a 16-70, for example, could now have it without packing two lenses around, and you're only losing 1 f-stop - f/4 isn't so bad. But I'm glad the long-zoom users pitched in to help me realize that it's really best for their situation; NOW I understand the real purpose of a 1.4x teleconverter!

All that said, I'll probably get restless someday and buy one anyhow; if it would help my DA* zooms even a little, that would be worth it to me, especially having the weather-sealing. It would also be interesting to see the effects with my FA 50 f/1.4 and DA 35 Macro.