[dadipentak]

I agree 1) that the correct entry is 500mm and 2) that the DA*300mm & 1.7x TC is a great combo. And, yes, Lee, the 1.7x is great with the A*400mm, too and, while I say the same thing about the AF not being a big deal, I have to admit it's kinda nice (and very accurate.)

[jpzk]

The object of putting the focal length into the SR system when the camera does not recognize the focal length of the lens is to tell the camera the amount of angular velocity to expect when compensating. However you get to 500mm +/-, you need to tell the camera that the effective focal length for SR is 500. eg. 250+2x, 300+1.7x, 360mm + 1.4x, whatever you are using.

That is what I did and found that the resulting images were more in focus than letting the camera decide for itself.
Went out again this morning but the weather was not cooperating ... might go out again later when the tide is up by a good 18.5 feet.

JP

[jpzk]

I can do a few tests once the weather clears up here.

I have the A* 300mm f2.8 with 1.4x and 2x-L converters as well as the 1,7x.
Can't help with the Tamron 1.4x as I sold it last week, just didn't rate it against the 1.7x.

Just remembered that I have this Tamron 1.4X, and I have used it a few times with the DA*300/4 but was not impressed. It's a good "savior" though.
I just might try some tests, comparing the 1.7x vs. this 1.4x, but I am not sure about what sort of testing one should actually do.
Let us know when you do your tests.

JP

[jpzk]

You're right. I just know I shouldn't spend anymore right now. At least until I know if its a step up, down or just sideways from the 3 converters I own.

I try not to look at ebay listings. I only bought the A*400/2.8 from ebay because a Forum member started a thread about the listing. I will save my $$ and wait for yours.

I think that this 1.7X AF adapter is worth its price (reasonable one, that is).
I wonder who gave you that clue about the A*400/2.8 ... I recall having been criticized because of having just done that!

So, testing will be done and reported back here, as well as from another fellow member of the forum.

JP

[zinj]

Hi JP,

I've got a K20, not a K7, but I think the principles are all the same. My memory is that the camera only asks you to input a focal length if the SR is turned on, since its mostly looking for that info to accurately compute the amount of shake reduction to use (No idea about EXIF). When you turn the SR off, and then the camera off and on again, it forgets the previous input focal length and doesn't care to get a new one. When you are using SR, you want to input the adjusted focal length as other posters mentioned (1.7*300, or 500mm). Also, it shouldn't really matter what your lens is set to (MF or AF), since it is cut off from the camera by the TC. Although it's not supposed to make a difference with the SDM motors, I always turn the lens to MF on the off chance it saves some wear and tear.

Cheers,

Andrew

[jpzk]

Hi JP,

I've got a K20, not a K7, but I think the principles are all the same. My memory is that the camera only asks you to input a focal length if the SR is turned on, since its mostly looking for that info to accurately compute the amount of shake reduction to use (No idea about EXIF). When you turn the SR off, and then the camera off and on again, it forgets the previous input focal length and doesn't care to get a new one. When you are using SR, you want to input the adjusted focal length as other posters mentioned (1.7*300, or 500mm). Also, it shouldn't really matter what your lens is set to (MF or AF), since it is cut off from the camera by the TC. Although it's not supposed to make a difference with the SDM motors, I always turn the lens to MF on the off chance it saves some wear and tear.

Cheers,

Andrew

Yes, the setup for the K20D is the same, I tried the TC on both cameras and it works the same.
As for the input for the focal length, I tried with both SR-off and SR-ON and the SR-ON works better for me.
As for leaving the lens on MF ... I think you are right: no use to go AF because the TC will catch on after proper pre-focusing anyway. From then on, it is very speedy.

JP

[imtheguy]

I wonder who gave you that clue about the A*400/2.8 ... I recall having been criticized because of having just done that!
JP

Yeah, I wonder who. I recall also that I was criticized for bidding since I wasn't serious enough. Again though, I must thank the unknown person that tipped me off. Its a whole new world.

[dadipentak]

I wonder who gave you that clue about the A*400/2.8 ... I recall having been criticized because of having just done that!
JP

Well, it ruined Lee's chances of sniping it for $500 I can see how someone who had spotted it and was interested might not have welcomed the attention but it's hard to make the case that a lens like that would fly under the radar.

[imtheguy]

Well, it ruined Lee's chances of sniping it for $500 I can see how someone who had spotted it and was interested might not have welcomed the attention but it's hard to make the case that a lens like that would fly under the radar.

Correct, except for the $500 sniping since I didn't know it was there as I TRY not to monitor ebay. However it had 1,000 views already when the thread came out so, yes, it was not going under anyone's radar but mine.

[jpzk]

Well, it ruined Lee's chances of sniping it for $500 I can see how someone who had spotted it and was interested might not have welcomed the attention but it's hard to make the case that a lens like that would fly under the radar.

Lesson well learned in may case: no more pointing out on ongoing auctions from eBay to here.

JP

[imtheguy]

Lesson well learned in may case: no more pointing out on ongoing auctions from eBay to here.

JP

Ok, I will point out the next rare lens since i love arguments. Wait, I already said I don't monitor ebay. If JP will PM me the link, I will post the thread.
I already owe JP a coupon to borrow the lens i bought as his finder's fee.

[jpzk]

Ok, I will point out the next rare lens since i love arguments. Wait, I already said I don't monitor ebay. If JP will PM me the link, I will post the thread.
I already owe JP a coupon to borrow the lens i bought as his finder's fee.

Lee,
By the way, I will certainly look forward to seeing your photos taken with this 400/2.8 of yours.
Link to where? What link?
Coupon will be accepted though!

JP

[jpzk]

So, about this 1.7X TC ....

I've been doing some brain work, something unusual for me, and I thought: Hey! Wouldn't a Super Takumar 400/5.6 fit the bill in my quest for a longer lens? Then my memory bank replied that what I am looking for is a FA or FA*400.
That said: do I consider a Takumar 400/5.6, because it is MUCH cheaper than a FA*400/2.8, and couple it with the 1.7X adapter? Wow! This now gives me a much smaller aperture and how about the available light ... I would need full zenith sun as "available" light.
Or do I just be patient and wait for some extraordinary luck and find a "better" lens which will work great with this TC?
I am just talking nonsense here?
Got to go to bed ... this Canadian Gold win at the men's Olympics hockey final burned me out. :ugh:

JP

[imtheguy]

Lee,
By the way, I will certainly look forward to seeing your photos taken with this 400/2.8 of yours.
Link to where? What link?
Coupon will be accepted though!

JP

I have two pics up. The obligatory moon shot at 800mm in my Gallery. Another 800mm shot in my Album.

Link to next rare lens on ebay of course.

There are certainly applications for a 400/5.6 lens with a converter that adds 1-2 stops. Like shooting pics of the sun?
Will be happy to encourage you to max your credit with a big pricey lens. I am sure most of PF members will also help.

[jpzk]

I have two pics up. The obligatory moon shot at 800mm in my Gallery. Another 800mm shot in my Album.

Link to next rare lens on ebay of course.

There are certainly applications for a 400/5.6 lens with a converter that adds 1-2 stops. Like shooting pics of the sun?
Will be happy to encourage you to max your credit with a big pricey lens. I am sure most of PF members will also help.

Took a look at your photos taken with this 400/2.8 ... and ... well ... They are so incredibly sharp!!
I am really amazed at the details especially with a 2X TC attached to it!

I am now keeping my LBA under control (Really!!) and try to accumulate enough cash just in case such a rarity suddenly makes itself known to me.
Just curious: Is this large lens still carry-able on a two-three hour trek?

Gosh ... that lens sure is worth verything they say it is.
Cheers!

JP