[pentaxfall]

These are from safari in Nagara Hole forest in KR, India. These are shot over 3 days(two sessions of 3hrs each, per day). Highlight was sighting of 2 Elephants and one Tiger (for 2-3minutes). Shots are tight because I was using 500mm prime and subject were close to jeep. In fact I had to use FULL focus range on my lens. Tiger sighting happened at 6pm. Light was very poor. My settings were 1/125sec F5.6. AutoISO went up to 6400. I was using monopod. Open jeep safari vehicles are allowed only in Tourist zone where density of animals is less compared to core-zone where only Forest dept vehicles are allowed. Time being close to monsoon, chances of sightings are low because water is everywhere. Animals move a lot during summer in search of water, that increases chances of sighting. But in summer background is brown, not the green of monsoon.


Nikon Z7 and Nikon 500mm F5.6 PF

uncropped


uncropped


side uncropped (territory marking related activity)


sides cropped


sides cropped

[womble]

SMC Takumar 400 f/5.6, Pentax ES, Ilford FP4 film, commercial dev and low res scan.


St Albans Abbey par Kris Lockyear, on ipernity

[riseform]

Red-breasted nuthatch
K1, DA 560

[Canada_Rockies]

Red-breasted nuthatch
K1, DA 560

Great shot!

[scc]

I finally ended up with a A 1.4 L rear converter for my SMC-Pentax A 300 mm f/2.8 ED IF. No way to get a AF 1.7L, but the 1.4L is of better quality.
Some samples taken with my new KP :

A robin, tree leaves in fall, squirrel.

[scc]

And here are some sample with my old K7 with the DA 65-250 with the HD Pentax DA-AF1.4x converter:

Robin, chickadee and Red-Breasted Nuthatch.

[MossyRocks]

the 1.4L is of better quality.

Now that I have a big lens that would use that converter are the images just as sharp with the converter in the mix than with out it but a tighter crop on the pixel dense KP? Having a 560mm f/4 would be useful for some astro shots without the expense of getting the DA 560 f/5.6 or a 600 f/4. I would probably have to run that setup at f/5.6 (converted) but still that isn't too bad since I had to run my 300 f/4 at f/5.6 anyway.

[scc]

Now that I have a big lens that would use that converter are the images just as sharp with the converter in the mix than with out it but a tighter crop on the pixel dense KP? Having a 560mm f/4 would be useful for some astro shots without the expense of getting the DA 560 f/5.6 or a 600 f/4. I would probably have to run that setup at f/5.6 (converted) but still that isn't too bad since I had to run my 300 f/4 at f/5.6 anyway.

The A 1.4 L converter has been specifically developed for the A* big lenses. Look in the lens review for the converters section, this converter does not affect the IQ or at least very little.
I cannot myself judge as I have too little experience in using both the A*300 mm f/2.8 and this converter, but I certainly can say that the results with the HDA 1.4 L that I also tried with this lens are not as satisfying.
Astrophotography is however very demanding and I suspect that both the A*300 and 400 f/2.8 will give some distorsion in the corners. The quality of these lenses would not require to stop down too much to correct the issue.

[luftfluss]

Red-breasted nuthatch
K1, DA 560

Wow, that is nice work!

[luftfluss]

The A 1.4 L converter has been specifically developed for the A* big lenses. Look in the lens review for the converters section, this converter does not affect the IQ or at least very little.
I cannot myself judge as I have too little experience in using both the A*300 mm f/2.8 and this converter, but I certainly can say that the results with the HDA 1.4 L that I also tried with this lens are not as satisfying.
Astrophotography is however very demanding and I suspect that both the A*300 and 400 f/2.8 will give some distorsion in the corners. The quality of these lenses would not require to stop down too much to correct the issue.

The HD 1.4x is neither A (Aperture) nor L (Long). It's official appellation is HD Pentax-DA AF Rear Converter 1.4x AW.

[scc]

Red-breasted nuthatch
K1, DA

Wow.
Could you share the picture data’s?

---------- Post added 10-08-19 at 09:02 PM ----------

The HD 1.4x is neither A (Aperture) nor L (Long). It's official appellation is HD Pentax-DA AF Rear Converter 1.4x AW.

My mistake

[luftfluss]

Now that I have a big lens that would use that converter are the images just as sharp with the converter in the mix than with out it but a tighter crop on the pixel dense KP? Having a 560mm f/4 would be useful for some astro shots without the expense of getting the DA 560 f/5.6 or a 600 f/4. I would probably have to run that setup at f/5.6 (converted) but still that isn't too bad since I had to run my 300 f/4 at f/5.6 anyway.

Keep in mind that if using a TC requires you to increase the ISO in order to maintain shutter speed, the increase in imaging noise might negate the increase in magnification.

FWIW in the HD 1.4x review, testing found the A 1.4x-L to have slightly higher resolving power.

[str8talk83]

These are from safari in Nagara Hole forest in KR, India. These are shot over 3 days(two sessions of 3hrs each, per day). Highlight was sighting of 2 Elephants and one Tiger (for 2-3minutes). Shots are tight because I was using 500mm prime and subject were close to jeep. In fact I had to use FULL focus range on my lens. Tiger sighting happened at 6pm. Light was very poor. My settings were 1/125sec F5.6. AutoISO went up to 6400. I was using monopod. Open jeep safari vehicles are allowed only in Tourist zone where density of animals is less compared to core-zone where only Forest dept vehicles are allowed. Time being close to monsoon, chances of sightings are low because water is everywhere. Animals move a lot during summer in search of water, that increases chances of sighting. But in summer background is brown, not the green of monsoon.


Nikon Z7 and Nikon 500mm F5.6 PF

uncropped


uncropped


side uncropped (territory marking related activity)


sides cropped


sides cropped

Great set!

---------- Post added 10-08-2019 at 01:29 PM ----------

Red-breasted nuthatch
K1, DA 560

Nice BIF shot! Great detail, lighting, pose and background. It’s not easy to get all of this right.

[MossyRocks]

The A 1.4 L converter has been specifically developed for the A* big lenses. Look in the lens review for the converters section, this converter does not affect the IQ or at least very little.
I cannot myself judge as I have too little experience in using both the A*300 mm f/2.8 and this converter, but I certainly can say that the results with the HDA 1.4 L that I also tried with this lens are not as satisfying.
Astrophotography is however very demanding and I suspect that both the A*300 and 400 f/2.8 will give some distorsion in the corners. The quality of these lenses would not require to stop down too much to correct the issue.

They are supposedly fantastic and I have found the 400/2.8 to be astounding even wide open but throw a little, and I mean a little, f-stop at it and it is perfect. I did some extensive testing astro shooting last night with the A* 400/2.8 and the stars stop getting better once you stop down to f/3.5 or more so only 2/3 stops from wide open. I figured with a teleconverter in the mix I might have to throw a little bit more at to maintain that sharpeness as you are introducing some more elements into the equation so I figure instead of shooting at an effective f/4 wide open I would have to throw a whole stop at it and go to f/5.6 effective. The distortion that I was seeing was mostly bloated stars and some very very mild coma. Both of which cleared up once I hit f/3.5. So I currently get an extra stop and 1/3 of exposure over my 300mm f/4 which I had to run at f/5.6 to get nice stars and clean up the CA, not to mention the tighter field of view.

[MossyRocks]

Keep in mind that if using a TC requires you to increase the ISO in order to maintain shutter speed, the increase in imaging noise might negate the increase in magnification.

FWIW in the HD 1.4x review, testing found the A 1.4x-L to have slightly higher resolving power.

Well shutter speed isn't too big issue with astro shots which is what I would be doing with that setup so it isn't as big of a deal as it would be with other shots. Granted longer is better and a faster lens is better but one can do a lot with slow lenses and very short exposures if you know what you are doing. However astro shooters do lean on ISO a lot and are all too familiar with noise, but there are lots of ways to deal with it that one quickly learns. Basically you shoot more light frames (images of the thing you are trying to take a picture of), plus be sure to have a bunch of dark frames (same ISO, exposure length, and temp as your light frames), a ton of bias frames (shortest shutter speed possible at the same ISO as your light frames), and then a good sample size of flat frames (same f-stop and ISO as your light frames).

For my purposes I would take the increased resolving power understanding full well what I would be getting into. A 560mm f/4 isn't anything to sneeze at for astro shots even if one has to run it at f/5.6 which still isn't bad.