Teleconverter and Adapter club

**onlineflyer** · 12-13-2018, 09:18 PM

The odd couple, Sigma 135/2.8 Pantel + K T6-2X converter on a K-5iis

Attached Images

View Picture EXIF

Last edited by onlineflyer; 12-14-2018 at 09:00 AM. Reason: correction of lens brand

**onlineflyer** · 12-18-2018, 06:03 PM - **1 Like**

K-5iis+ A*300/4 + F 1.7x AF

**onlineflyer** · 02-04-2019, 02:41 PM - **1 Like**

Tried to capture a cardinal in the bird bath but it flew off before I could activate the shutter and all I could get was the droplets in the air.

K-5iis + A* 300 w/ F 1.7x AF

**onlineflyer** · 05-08-2019, 07:50 AM - **1 Like**

Who say 200mm is too long for portrait? Well, what about 400MM? I snuck into a photo shoot at the local botanical garden from a distance. Shot with a K-5iis + K 200/2.5 coupled to a K T6-2X converter.

Attached Images

View Picture EXIF

**luftfluss** · 05-08-2019, 07:56 AM - **3 Likes**

I keep forgetting about this thread, and I shoot a lot with various TC's...

AFA 1.7x TC + Tamron Adaptall 52BB 90/2.5 Macro... I'm pleasantly surprised at how well this combo works.

And some TC stacking fun - 1.7x AFA TC + A 1.4x-S + Tamron Adaptall 360B 300/2.8.

**onlineflyer** · 05-08-2019, 08:30 AM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by luftfluss

I keep forgetting about this thread, and I shoot a lot with various TC's...

If we keep on posting, we might get others to join in.

Same combo.

**luftfluss** · 05-08-2019, 09:11 PM - **5 Likes**

Yes, it would be especially nice if maybe folks who don't have the DA 1.4x (since it has its own thread) would feel comfortable making this their home for their TC shots.

I, too, have the K T6-2X TC. While not quite as good as the A 2x-L and 2x-S, it's decent in its own right, IMO...

... coupled with the Tamron 360B (300/2.8) wide open

...360B again, f/5.6, monopod

... this time with the Takumar 200/4 & K-01, and cropped over 50%. Easily the best pic I've ever managed of a kingfisher.

**luftfluss** · 05-11-2019, 10:02 PM - **3 Likes**

The Pentax Rear Converter-A 2x-L gets some run, mated to the mighty Tamron Adaptall-2 SP 400mm f/4 LD IF - 65B

This is not a crop... @25 feet distant, even a robin barely fits in the frame when shooting at 800mm

**stihlmania** · 05-12-2019, 02:37 PM - **1 Like**

I own the 1.4XL, 2.0XL, DA 1.4x and the AF1.7. Since I love my A star 400 f2.8 so much it is usually attached to the AF 1.7. Even though the lens manually focuses smooth as butter, it is a long butter! The auto focus assist has brought a new life to this lens, Only the 2.0 XL is to me not sharp enough but it also might just be my copy.....the 1.4 XL and the DA 1.4x, both are sharp as the 1.7 but the 1.7 also shortens my minimum focus distance by about 1 foot. Doesn't sound like much until you do close ups with a 400 mm+ lens...

**onlineflyer** · 05-12-2019, 04:00 PM

It's interesting you find the 2XL the least sharp of the group. I've been toying with the idea of buying one and modifying it to fit my K 200/2.5. Perhaps I should just use my AF 1.7x on that lens, also. I currently only use it on my A* 300/4.

**stihlmania** · 05-12-2019, 06:11 PM

I do not think you can modify the 1.4XL or the 2.0XL to fit the K200 f2.5. The front element sticks out, look them up in the PF Lens Reviews... the DA 1.4 x and the AF 1.7 should work fine.... This image is using the 1.4 XL and the AF 1.7 on my A400 f2.8

**onlineflyer** · 05-12-2019, 06:55 PM

The K 200/2.5 has a deep, recessed back lens much like the A* 200/4 macro. There is an individual in the lens review section that describes carefully filing an A 2x-L to make it fit.. This converter was not made for the 200/2.5 but it can be made to work.

**luftfluss** · 05-12-2019, 07:25 PM

I concur with @stihlmania. There is more of a negative difference in per-pixel sharpness going from the AFA 1.7x to the 2x-L than there is going from the 1.4x-L to the AFA 1.7x.

**monochrome** · 05-12-2019, 08:07 PM

Originally posted by onlineflyer

The K 200/2.5 has a deep, recessed back lens much like the A* 200/4 macro. There is an individual in the lens review section that describes carefully filing an A 2x-L to make it fit.. This converter was not made for the 200/2.5 but it can be made to work.

Why wouldn’t you use an A 2x-S?

**onlineflyer** · 05-13-2019, 05:41 AM

Originally posted by luftfluss

I concur with @stihlmania. There is more of a negative difference in per-pixel sharpness going from the AFA 1.7x to the 2x-L than there is going from the 1.4x-L to the AFA 1.7x.

Interesting, guess I can end my search and save funds for another toy. Thanks, both you and stihlmania.

12-18-2018, 06:03 PM - 1 Like	#17
onlineflyer Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Jul 2010 Location: NW Ohio Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 2,023 Original Poster	K-5iis+ A*300/4 + F 1.7x AF Attached Images

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Q-to-K Adapter and HD Teleconverter on Q. Is it possible?	januko	Pentax Q	8	12-08-2014 07:25 PM
Difference.. Auto Teleconverter/Teleconverter?	peter oconnor	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	6	04-28-2013 03:11 PM
tamron 1.4x and kenko 1.5x teleconverter club	jon pafford	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	3	09-25-2011 09:59 AM
For Sale - Sold: Tamron 1.4x Pz-AF MC4 Teleconverter & Quantaray 2x Teleconverter	DaveInPA	Sold Items	15	09-24-2009 06:28 AM

05-08-2019, 07:56 AM - 3 Likes	#20
luftfluss Site Supporter Join Date: Jun 2011 Location: NJ Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 10,673	I keep forgetting about this thread, and I shoot a lot with various TC's... AFA 1.7x TC + Tamron Adaptall 52BB 90/2.5 Macro... I'm pleasantly surprised at how well this combo works. And some TC stacking fun - 1.7x AFA TC + A 1.4x-S + Tamron Adaptall 360B 300/2.8.

05-08-2019, 09:11 PM - 5 Likes	#22
luftfluss Site Supporter Join Date: Jun 2011 Location: NJ Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 10,673	Yes, it would be especially nice if maybe folks who don't have the DA 1.4x (since it has its own thread) would feel comfortable making this their home for their TC shots. I, too, have the K T6-2X TC. While not quite as good as the A 2x-L and 2x-S, it's decent in its own right, IMO... ... coupled with the Tamron 360B (300/2.8) wide open ...360B again, f/5.6, monopod ... this time with the Takumar 200/4 & K-01, and cropped over 50%. Easily the best pic I've ever managed of a kingfisher.

05-11-2019, 10:02 PM - 3 Likes	#23
luftfluss Site Supporter Join Date: Jun 2011 Location: NJ Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 10,673	The Pentax Rear Converter-A 2x-L gets some run, mated to the mighty Tamron Adaptall-2 SP 400mm f/4 LD IF - 65B This is not a crop... @25 feet distant, even a robin barely fits in the frame when shooting at 800mm

05-12-2019, 04:00 PM	#25
onlineflyer Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Jul 2010 Location: NW Ohio Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 2,023 Original Poster	It's interesting you find the 2XL the least sharp of the group. I've been toying with the idea of buying one and modifying it to fit my K 200/2.5. Perhaps I should just use my AF 1.7x on that lens, also. I currently only use it on my A* 300/4.

05-12-2019, 06:55 PM	#27
onlineflyer Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Jul 2010 Location: NW Ohio Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 2,023 Original Poster	The K 200/2.5 has a deep, recessed back lens much like the A* 200/4 macro. There is an individual in the lens review section that describes carefully filing an A 2x-L to make it fit.. This converter was not made for the 200/2.5 but it can be made to work.

05-12-2019, 07:25 PM	#28
luftfluss Site Supporter Join Date: Jun 2011 Location: NJ Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 10,673	I concur with @stihlmania. There is more of a negative difference in per-pixel sharpness going from the AFA 1.7x to the 2x-L than there is going from the 1.4x-L to the AFA 1.7x.

05-12-2019, 08:07 PM	#29
monochrome Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: Working From Home Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 26,276	Originally posted by onlineflyer The K 200/2.5 has a deep, recessed back lens much like the A* 200/4 macro. There is an individual in the lens review section that describes carefully filing an A 2x-L to make it fit.. This converter was not made for the 200/2.5 but it can be made to work. Why wouldn’t you use an A 2x-S?

05-13-2019, 05:41 AM	#30
onlineflyer Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Jul 2010 Location: NW Ohio Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 2,023 Original Poster	Originally posted by luftfluss I concur with @stihlmania. There is more of a negative difference in per-pixel sharpness going from the AFA 1.7x to the 2x-L than there is going from the 1.4x-L to the AFA 1.7x. Interesting, guess I can end my search and save funds for another toy. Thanks, both you and stihlmania.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
	Search this Thread: Advanced Search