Win a Pentax Limited Lens: Raffle Now Live!

normhead · 12-07-2016, 07:53 AM

Just wondering what kind of results it might produce.

wissink · 12-07-2016, 08:23 AM

I've only tried the sigma 1.4x EX APO DG. I think it protrudes to much.. I couldn't seem to connect them.

normhead · 12-07-2016, 08:45 AM

If it protrudes then that will be the issue. Sad. My dream of using the 1.4 TC to fill the gap between 105 and my DA*200, without additional gear looks like it's not going to happen. The approximately 150mm FL would have been perfect.

**boriscleto** · 12-07-2016, 09:24 AM

Originally posted by normhead

If it protrudes then that will be the issue. Sad. My dream of using the 1.4 TC to fill the gap between 105 and my DA*200, without additional gear looks like it's not going to happen. The approximately 150mm FL would have been perfect.

I think he means the Sigma protrudes too much...

The Sigma can only be used with lenses that have a recessed rear element...

normhead · 12-07-2016, 11:08 AM

Originally posted by boriscleto

I think he means the Sigma protrudes too much...

The Sigma can only be used with lenses that have a recessed rear element...

That is one skinny TC that Sigma.

**boriscleto** · 12-07-2016, 11:43 AM

Originally posted by normhead

That is one skinny TC that Sigma.

And a long list of lenses it doesn't work with...

surfar · 12-07-2016, 12:15 PM

If you look on the Sigma website, theres a list of lenses that the mentioned TC does work with.Mostly top end glass.

---------- Post added 12-08-16 at 06:17 AM ----------

Originally posted by normhead

Just wondering what kind of results it might produce.

About 147mm plus a stop less(but that's just a guess).

normhead · 12-07-2016, 12:38 PM

Originally posted by surfar

If you look on the Sigma website, theres a list of lenses that the mentioned TC does work with.Mostly top end glass.

---------- Post added 12-08-16 at 06:17 AM ----------

About 147mm plus a stop less(but that's just a guess).

I'm pretty much guessing too.. I guess others don't treat their lenses like I do. I sit down and put everything that might work together together and see what happens. If I had a 28-105 it would have been on there by now.

surfar · 12-07-2016, 01:03 PM

Originally posted by normhead

If I had a 28-105 it would have been on there by now.

I don't own one yet, its a toss up between 55-300plm and 28-105?....next year( k1 was this years outlay)

normhead · 12-07-2016, 02:54 PM

Originally posted by surfar

I don't own one yet, its a toss up between 55-300plm and 28-105?....next year( k1 was this years outlay)

Maybe I can keep this thread alive long enough someone who actually owns both will come home and clue us in. But, I'm running out of things to say.

I should mention how good older glass has been on my K-1. But on APS-c I'm a DA 18-135 kind of guy. So to match my 18-135 APS-c on the K-1, I need 28-200. That will be the 28-105 and my 60-250. But using the 18-135, the K-3 has a heck of a weight advantage over that combo. And the 28-200 I bought is so bad for IQ and purple fringing, I'm going to have to eat it. I couldn't in good conscience sell a lens like that. It came with a film body, and I'm sure it was an acceptable low end zoom on film, but on digital it's atrocious.

**boriscleto** · 12-07-2016, 02:57 PM

Originally posted by normhead

It came with a film body, and I'm sure it was an acceptable low end zoom on film, but on digital it's atrocious.

It was atrocious on film too...

normhead · 12-07-2016, 02:59 PM

Originally posted by boriscleto

It was atrocious on film too...

Ya, I thought I'd pull another 18-135, buy the lens everyone else said was awful and come away with a winner. I guess I was defying the odds. It just couldn't happen twice.

MikeD · 12-07-2016, 08:00 PM

Originally posted by normhead

Ya, I thought I'd pull another 18-135, buy the lens everyone else said was awful and come away with a winner. I guess I was defying the odds. It just couldn't happen twice.

Norm the 1.4 TC works great with the 60-250 why wouldn't the 28-105, isn't the size the same where lens meets camera.

normhead · 12-08-2016, 06:17 AM

Originally posted by MikeD

Norm the 1.4 TC works great with the 60-250 why wouldn't the 28-105, isn't the size the same where lens meets camera.

The 1.4 works on my DA*200, and Tamron 300 on the K-1 without vignetting, but not my A-400 or the 150-0450. The design of the lens seems o be a factor. I haven't tried the 1.4 and 60-250 on the K-1 bu focus creating seriously limits the value of that lens as a candidate for a TC. The two other telephoto I own are awesome withe he TC. I'd be wasting my time putting it on the K-1 even if it worked.

GeneV · 12-08-2016, 08:10 AM

It fits and it focuses. I post some quick pics in a few minutes.

---------- Post added 12-08-16 at 08:21 AM ----------

This is about a quick and dirty as it gets because I need to get to the office, Jpegs out of the K1, no PP, starting with 28mm and ending at 105, all with HD 1.4x. Sorry, but I did not see that the ISO was set to 800, but it gives an idea.

12-07-2016, 07:53 AM	#1
normhead Pentaxian Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Near Algonquin Park Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 40,451	Anyone tried the 1.4 TC on the long end of the 28-105? Just wondering what kind of results it might produce.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Has anyone tried the Sigma Art 30 1.4 on Pentax K-1?	Belnan	Pentax K-1 & K-1 II	18	08-30-2019 01:20 PM
Pentax 28-105 or Tamron 28-75 on the K-1	sumitkar1971	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	4	11-29-2016 06:19 PM
Anyone tried the DA* 200 f2.8 on K-1 ?	BarryE	Pentax K-1 & K-1 II	13	08-29-2016 02:40 AM
Anyone tried the Sigma 35mm f1.4 Art on the K-3II?	schnitzer79	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	13	05-17-2016 10:10 PM
Has anyone tried the Samyang 85mm f1.4 with the Pentax 1.7x AF teleconverter?	ChopperCharles	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	11	10-17-2013 09:31 PM

12-07-2016, 08:23 AM	#2
wissink Veteran Member Join Date: May 2014 Location: S-ON Photos: Gallery Posts: 609	I've only tried the sigma 1.4x EX APO DG. I think it protrudes to much.. I couldn't seem to connect them.

12-07-2016, 08:45 AM	#3
normhead Pentaxian Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Near Algonquin Park Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 40,451 Original Poster	If it protrudes then that will be the issue. Sad. My dream of using the 1.4 TC to fill the gap between 105 and my DA*200, without additional gear looks like it's not going to happen. The approximately 150mm FL would have been perfect.

12-07-2016, 09:24 AM	#4
boriscleto Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Dec 2009 Location: North Syracuse, NY Photos: Gallery Posts: 16,477	Originally posted by normhead If it protrudes then that will be the issue. Sad. My dream of using the 1.4 TC to fill the gap between 105 and my DA*200, without additional gear looks like it's not going to happen. The approximately 150mm FL would have been perfect. I think he means the Sigma protrudes too much... The Sigma can only be used with lenses that have a recessed rear element...

12-07-2016, 11:08 AM	#5
normhead Pentaxian Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Near Algonquin Park Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 40,451 Original Poster	Originally posted by boriscleto I think he means the Sigma protrudes too much... The Sigma can only be used with lenses that have a recessed rear element... That is one skinny TC that Sigma.

12-07-2016, 11:43 AM	#6
boriscleto Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Dec 2009 Location: North Syracuse, NY Photos: Gallery Posts: 16,477	Originally posted by normhead That is one skinny TC that Sigma. And a long list of lenses it doesn't work with...

12-07-2016, 12:15 PM	#7
surfar Pentaxian Join Date: Jan 2015 Location: mid nth coast,nsw Photos: Gallery Posts: 6,147	If you look on the Sigma website, theres a list of lenses that the mentioned TC does work with.Mostly top end glass. ---------- Post added 12-08-16 at 06:17 AM ---------- Originally posted by normhead Just wondering what kind of results it might produce. About 147mm plus a stop less(but that's just a guess).

12-07-2016, 12:38 PM	#8
normhead Pentaxian Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Near Algonquin Park Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 40,451 Original Poster	Originally posted by surfar If you look on the Sigma website, theres a list of lenses that the mentioned TC does work with.Mostly top end glass. ---------- Post added 12-08-16 at 06:17 AM ---------- About 147mm plus a stop less(but that's just a guess). I'm pretty much guessing too.. I guess others don't treat their lenses like I do. I sit down and put everything that might work together together and see what happens. If I had a 28-105 it would have been on there by now.

12-07-2016, 01:03 PM	#9
surfar Pentaxian Join Date: Jan 2015 Location: mid nth coast,nsw Photos: Gallery Posts: 6,147	Originally posted by normhead If I had a 28-105 it would have been on there by now. I don't own one yet, its a toss up between 55-300plm and 28-105?....next year( k1 was this years outlay)

12-07-2016, 02:54 PM	#10
normhead Pentaxian Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Near Algonquin Park Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 40,451 Original Poster	Originally posted by surfar I don't own one yet, its a toss up between 55-300plm and 28-105?....next year( k1 was this years outlay) Maybe I can keep this thread alive long enough someone who actually owns both will come home and clue us in. But, I'm running out of things to say. I should mention how good older glass has been on my K-1. But on APS-c I'm a DA 18-135 kind of guy. So to match my 18-135 APS-c on the K-1, I need 28-200. That will be the 28-105 and my 60-250. But using the 18-135, the K-3 has a heck of a weight advantage over that combo. And the 28-200 I bought is so bad for IQ and purple fringing, I'm going to have to eat it. I couldn't in good conscience sell a lens like that. It came with a film body, and I'm sure it was an acceptable low end zoom on film, but on digital it's atrocious.

12-07-2016, 02:57 PM	#11
boriscleto Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Dec 2009 Location: North Syracuse, NY Photos: Gallery Posts: 16,477	Originally posted by normhead It came with a film body, and I'm sure it was an acceptable low end zoom on film, but on digital it's atrocious. It was atrocious on film too...

12-07-2016, 02:59 PM	#12
normhead Pentaxian Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Near Algonquin Park Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 40,451 Original Poster	Originally posted by boriscleto It was atrocious on film too... Ya, I thought I'd pull another 18-135, buy the lens everyone else said was awful and come away with a winner. I guess I was defying the odds. It just couldn't happen twice.

12-07-2016, 08:00 PM	#13
MikeD Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: traverse city MI Posts: 346	Originally posted by normhead Ya, I thought I'd pull another 18-135, buy the lens everyone else said was awful and come away with a winner. I guess I was defying the odds. It just couldn't happen twice. Norm the 1.4 TC works great with the 60-250 why wouldn't the 28-105, isn't the size the same where lens meets camera.

12-08-2016, 06:17 AM	#14
normhead Pentaxian Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Near Algonquin Park Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 40,451 Original Poster	Originally posted by MikeD Norm the 1.4 TC works great with the 60-250 why wouldn't the 28-105, isn't the size the same where lens meets camera. The 1.4 works on my DA*200, and Tamron 300 on the K-1 without vignetting, but not my A-400 or the 150-0450. The design of the lens seems o be a factor. I haven't tried the 1.4 and 60-250 on the K-1 bu focus creating seriously limits the value of that lens as a candidate for a TC. The two other telephoto I own are awesome withe he TC. I'd be wasting my time putting it on the K-1 even if it worked.

12-08-2016, 08:10 AM	#15
GeneV Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2008 Location: Albuquerque NM Photos: Albums Posts: 9,830	It fits and it focuses. I post some quick pics in a few minutes. ---------- Post added 12-08-16 at 08:21 AM ---------- This is about a quick and dirty as it gets because I need to get to the office, Jpegs out of the K1, no PP, starting with 28mm and ending at 105, all with HD 1.4x. Sorry, but I did not see that the ISO was set to 800, but it gives an idea.

Anyone tried the 1.4 TC on the long end of the 28-105?

Win a Pentax Limited Lens: Raffle Now Live!