[UserAccessDenied]

I know the new HD1.4x tc is praised by some DA*300 owners. I've never used a TC before and am a big skeptical.
I love the DA*300, but a little more reach would be welcomed.

My big questions, I'm sure using the 1.4x provides better results compared to a comparable crop from the DA*300 alone. But is the result worth the $450?

I can pull up pictures from the forum and compare, sure. Not many have compared the exact framing between the two on identical subjects.
ie: Setup a tripod and take 10 subjects with 300 alone, and 10 with 1.4x+300.

But, I just want to hear it from actual owners of the lens, the tc and preferably the K-3ii/k-3.

If you have the combo and have an opinion, please share it!

[normhead]

I don't have the 300, but yesterday I took some test shots with my new DA-200 and TC TCs.

https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/10-pentax-slr-lens-discussion/317758-my-l...ml#post3589213

MY A-400 is ƒ5.6. A DA*300 with the TC is ƒ5.6 with auto-focus. My A-400 cost me $450. If anything the 300 and 1.4 have better IQ. To me it's like carrying both the 300 and 400 for half the weight and bulk. Really a no brainer. In fact, I'd also argue carrying the 1.7 if you can find one is also a no brainer.

My tests from yesterday... the difference in each is quite noticeable. The difference in IQ is minimal.

The DA*200 at ƒ8, nice lens, I like it.



But then you'd be thinking "Well 200mm is a bit short"... and you put on the 1.4 , that gets you 280 and ƒ4, darn close to that 300mm lens you wanted.



But you can still do better. Put the 1.7 on, and you've got 340 and ƒ4.5. Still not too shabby.



The whole post here.
https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/10-pentax-slr-lens-discussion/317758-my-l...ml#post3589213

[jpzk]

This has been discussed at length in several threads already but here is my ten-cents worth:

Most users of this set up are happy with this TC, some reporting (and showing) great IQ while some, like me, find it "OK".
As with any TC, you are likely to experience some IQ loss.
I haven't used this TC/DA*300/4 for several months now (with the K5) and will soon test it again on the K3.
Frankly, I wasn't impressed with the K5 + DA*300/4 + the HD 1.4X TC.

For now, I just use the lens as is and crop as needed.

Norm seems to have great results with this TC and the DA*200 and, if I recall, with his 60-250 lens.

JP

Edit: just found one pic taken two days ago with the DA*300/4 + TC on the K3 ... same results as with the K5: decent but not to impress me.

[UserAccessDenied]

This has been discussed at length in several threads already but here is my ten-cents worth:

Most users of this set up are happy with this TC, some reporting (and showing) great IQ while some, like me, find it "OK".
As with any TC, you are likely to experience some IQ loss.
I haven't used this TC/DA*300/4 for several months now (with the K5) and will soon test it again on the K3.
Frankly, I wasn't impressed with the K5 + DA*300/4 + the HD 1.4X TC.

For now, I just use the lens as is and crop as needed.

Norm seems to have great results with this TC and the DA*200 and, if I recall, with his 60-250 lens.

JP

Edit: just found one pic taken two days ago with the DA*300/4 + TC on the K3 ... same results as with the K5: decent but not to impress me.

Thanks for the dime of info!

I know there are a lot of threads, but most that I've seen are a bit dated and I wanted to know if anyone had the particular setup (K-3ii, DA*300, HD1.4x) and could speak on it.
I know the K-3ii is basically the same as the K-3, but some updates were made.

I'm thinking the money could be spent elsewhere and was seeing if someone out there had a strong opinion to convince me otherwise.

THanks!

[zzeitg]

If you need some extra reach, I would say 1.4x TC is the tool which can provide it.


The only comparable alternative would be DFA 150-450, but that's a toy priced much higher. And what would you gain? 30mm.

[nomadkng]

I have the Sigma 100-300 f4 and the Pentax TC.

I think the K3 plays better with the TC than the K5(ii(s)) does. I know my Sigma likes my K3 better than my old K5iis.

In terms of TCs, I've owned 2 Sigmas, a Kenko, a Vivtar and a Tamron. I can say, the Pentax is the best of the bunch, so if you were going to go with a TC, that's the way to go.

If you want AF 400mm you have 2 options, 1700 for the Pentax 150-450 or 2k for the FA400. So the real question(s) might be -
How much am I willing to pay to GET to 400mm?
How imperative is it that I GET to 400mm?

In my case, the answer was, yes I need 400mm, but all I can afford is $450, so I purchased the Pentax TC.

The real solution to your dilemma is to get the Sigma 500 f4.5. Everything else is a compromise.

[normhead]

Most users of this set up are happy with this TC, some reporting (and showing) great IQ while some, like me, find it "OK".

My own experience would suggest that going from a 300 to a 400 prime will also lead to some loss of IQ. Closer is always better. The farther away you are from your subject the more atmospheric distortion etc. For myself I've never resolved the question, do people find the TC less than brilliant because they don't have a 400mm lens to compare the results with and don't understand the difference between shooting 300 and 400 that are inherent in shooting with a longer lens, or is the 1.4 TC just pedestrian. My impression is that the 300 with 1.4 TC is sharper than my A-400.

So the issue becomes when you say "while some, like me, find it "OK", what are you comparing it with?

It took me a long time to become comfortable with my A-400, but I got there. Are you sure you put in the time?

The real solution to your dilemma is to get the Sigma 500 f4.5. Everything else is a compromise.

The size and weight of the Sigma 500 ƒ4.5 is a serious compromise. Everything has compromises. Nothing has it all. let's not get carried away here.

[UserAccessDenied]

that Sigma 500 is a beaut...

A bit out of my budget though. Unless I start selling my work, I doubt I'll ever own such glass.
Even the DA*300 was a stretch for me at $700.

---------- Post added 04-01-16 at 11:52 AM ----------

The size and weight of the Sigma 500 ƒ4.5 is a serious compromise. Everything has compromises. Nothing has it all. let's not get carried away here.

Certainly has compromises.
I like the ability to take the DA*300 on a walk without even a monopod, unless it's dusk and I need to bring the shutter speed down a bit.

But I can compare the DA*300 to my old Bigma and say for sure it is better. Even when cropped to a comparable 500mm to match the Bigma.
Albeit not capring a 400/500 prime, but still.

I'd like to see an AW 400mm f2.8 from Pentax.
Or better yet, a 500mm f2.8 AW.
Problem being that would be a monster and cost a FORTUNE!

So I'm happy with my DA*300 at f4 for the time being.
that TC will likely find it's way into my bag in the future though.

[normhead]

that Sigma 500 is a beaut...

A bit out of my budget though. Unless I start selling my work, I doubt I'll ever own such glass.
Even the DA*300 was a stretch for me at $700.

---------- Post added 04-01-16 at 11:52 AM ----------



Certainly has compromises.
I like the ability to take the DA*300 on a walk without even a monopod, unless it's dusk and I need to bring the shutter speed down a bit.

But I can compare the DA*300 to my old Bigma and say for sure it is better. Even when cropped to a comparable 500mm to match the Bigma.
Albeit not capring a 400/500 prime, but still.

I'd like to see an AW 400mm f2.8 from Pentax.
Or better yet, a 500mm f2.8 AW.
Problem being that would be a monster and cost a FORTUNE!

So I'm happy with my DA*300 at f4 for the time being.
that TC will likely find it's way into my bag in the future though.

Just bought a DA*200 to save weight and size from carrying my DA*60-250. It's 2/3 of a pound lighter, fits in my smaller camera bags, and is ƒ2.8 instead of ƒ4. Thinking of a 400 (or even 300) 2.8 just makes me hurt in many places.

[nomadkng]

I'd like to see an AW 400mm f2.8 from Pentax.
Or better yet, a 500mm f2.8 AW.
Problem being that would be a monster and cost a FORTUNE!

Nikon's 400 f2.8 runs 11k
the only 500 f2.8 in the world is apparently this for 26k:

[bertwert]

the only 500 f2.8 in the world is apparently this for 26k:

A 200-500/2.8... with built in 2x converter for 400-1000/5.6...

I wonder how big a stand alone 500/2.8 prime would be?

[UserAccessDenied]

Nikon's 400 f2.8 runs 11k
the only 500 f2.8 in the world is apparently this for 26k:

I wonder what the recoil is like?!

---------- Post added 04-01-16 at 01:08 PM ----------

A 200-500/2.8... with built in 2x converter for 400-1000/5.6...

I wonder how big a stand alone 500/2.8 prime would be?

RIght, a 500mm f2.8 prime wouldn't nearly be this big. right?

Just give me AW sealing with it...

[MJSfoto1956]

I generally keep my 1.4x more or less permanently mounted on my FA* 300mm f/4.5. I use that in combination with my DA* 60-250mm. Makes for a decent "long" setup and not "terribly" heavy (at least compared to anything that CaNikon offers). In my case, both also use the same 67mm filters also reducing weight and size while traveling.

Michael

[derekkite]

Results have been mixed. I found that it gave quite good results in some circumstances. It takes a surprising amount of light to get it to work well, and if you drop shutter speed to compensate you run into mirror slap and vibration issues. This with the K3 and DA*300. If you have enough light to keep above 1/1250 or so, it is fine. I found the bokeh in some situations very unpleasant, essentially when the DA*300 has nasty bokeh. It generated contrasty images, more so than the 300 by itself, which worked sometimes an not others. I sold it and got the 500 f4.5 Sigma.

Some people have gotten very nice results from it.

[JML69]

This picture was just taken with the very same combination, with a double pane window as a "protective filter" and aprox 25 yards from the feeder. It is currently an overcast dreary afternoon so I am going to punch out of the old time clock to make an Adult Beverage.

Seriously, this combination works perfectly for me and my type of shooting although I suffer from LBA as do many others around here. In fact I want a D FA 150-450 so bad but can't afford it now that it has jumped back up in price that I just spent some money to rent one for 7 days to satisfy my Addiction and see how it performs with the 1.4 TC.