[luftfluss]

Yes. I used that combo almost exclusively to photograph the nesting woodpeckers, and I do have scans of several of the chromes. I took many 36 exposure rolls over the weeks between nest building and disappearance of the surviving fledglings. I've posted most of the best scans, but I'll dig out a couple to post here. RE: the scans are never as good as the original chromes, both color and resolution suffer significantly in translation.

I do recall scans you've posted in the 300mm+ club... and a quick search turned up the photo of the pileated woodpecker with his babies - I love that photo.

[monochrome]

@luftluss The manual for the A Rear Converters says the 1.4x-S is not suitable for the A 400/5.6 and additional lenses due to vignetting at each corner. The other exceptions are because coupling is impossible due to the protruding front element.

http://www.pentax-manuals.com/manuals/accessories/converter_a_s.pdf

* For some reason the quote text does not appear.

[Lowell Goudge]

Does anyone here (if you're still monitoring this thread!) know whether the 1.4X-L will work well or at all with the Sigma 400mm f/5.6 AF lens, which is reviewed here: Sigma / Carl Zeiss Jena (AF and MF) 400mm F5.6 IF MC multicoated Lens Reviews - Sigma Lenses - Pentax Lens Review Database

I'm wondering if the protruding lens on the converter will fit inside the Sigma lens' back, because there is room inside the back of the lens for such a portrusion. Just wondering it it's big enough for the converter.

Also wondering if the quality of photos would likely be good or not using the 1.4X-L / Sigma lens combination....

Thanks,

Mike

To figure this out, look at an older sigma teleconverter sheet. The issue with the 1.4X-L converter is the same as that of the sigma 1.4x and 2X APO teleconverter s. The element protrudes inside the lens barrel.

Any lens that the Pentax X-L converter works on, the Sigma works on also, but the X-L converter sticks even further inside the barrel than the sigma converter

[WPRESTO]

I do recall scans you've posted in the 300mm+ club... and a quick search turned up the photo of the pileated woodpecker with his babies - I love that photo.

Here are a few more of the Pileated woodpecker nest, taken with a 500mm f4 Nikon P with 2X Nikon TC using a Nikon FA. I also used projected flash, a Sunpak 444 with a Fresnel lens about 5~6 inches ahead of the flash tube because I photographing primarily in the early morning before crowds of photographers appeared, and consequently the sun was fully behind the bird (camera facing almost due east).The first four of these are uncropped - the last image is a crop from the one that precedes it.

BTW: I discovered this nest while it was still under construction. A starling tried to occupy the incomplete hole while the woodpeckers were away. When they returned, they'd pull out the grass brought by the starling and toss it out. There were originally four hatchlings, one of which disappeared very early and a second did not make it to fledging. I have a few images of the two survivors after they left the nest hole and were still in the vicinity, but one of those was clearly much weaker than the other and I suspect that only one of the young ultimately survived.

Attached Images

View Picture EXIF

File Date

 

View Picture EXIF

File Date

 

View Picture EXIF

File Date

 

View Picture EXIF

File Date

 

View Picture EXIF

File Date

 

---

Last edited by WPRESTO; 03-15-2020 at 01:05 PM.

[WPRESTO]

A starling squatter bringing in nesting material, and the hole-builder throwing it out in disgust (head flip much too fast to avoid blur).