Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
12-30-2017, 03:38 PM   #1
Forum Member




Join Date: Oct 2017
Posts: 76
645 teleconverter

Bismillah

Anyone have experience using a teleconverter on the 645D along with either the 150-300 SMC FA*, 300 SMC FA*, or the 400mm F5.6 ED and what has your experience been. I want to start using my 645D for wildlife, any recommendations? Thanks.

12-30-2017, 06:55 PM   #2
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
Alex645's Avatar

Join Date: May 2015
Location: Kaneohe, HI
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,526
I do not own a 645D, a 645TC, or any of the lenses you listed. I am only responding because no one else has, so take my opinion from someone from a 645N perspective:

Medium format is slow due to the bigger file, bigger mirror, larger focal plane shutter, etc.
Medium format also is inherently optimized for wider angles and shallow depth of field.
And then putting a TC on an f/4-5.6 telephoto and losing another EV or more means needing a brightly lit situation, which is fairly unusual unless you're on safari in Africa or shooting penguins in Antarctica. So to make that work, a minimum of ISO 800 and probably higher.

This could work fine for giraffe's grazing trees, flamingoes sleeping, herds of bison in the distance; no action shots. But there is a reason why most photojournalists, sports, and action photographers aren't wielding medium format for action or wildlife. When the big surf hits the North Shore of Oahu and world class surfers flock from all over to compete, you can see dozens to hundreds of photographers line up on the beach shoulder-to-shoulder. I've never seen a medium format camera out there.

With that said.....there are plenty of animals not moving that could make great shots. You'll just want to have a monopod or tripod.

What would be really interesting to see someone post is a comparison of two shots with a 645D or 645Z with a 400mm with a TC, and then a 400mm without the TC but cropped identical to the TC. For me, I'd rather have more light (larger aperture), and crop tighter, than to have less light and not crop. That would also allow me to use a lower ISO and/or faster shutter speed.
12-30-2017, 10:22 PM   #3
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter
UncleVanya's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2014
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 28,167
Speaking solely in theory myself, since I have very little medium format experience... It's my impression that the 645d doesn't have very good high iso performance. The combinations of lenses you mentioned with a teleconverter eating 1-2 stops more seems like a recipe for complex shooting limitations.
01-02-2018, 01:14 AM   #4
672
Veteran Member




Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: santa monica
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 486
tele

the teleconverter on the 400 5.6 can make great high res pix. in very very bright daylight . 5.6 and then 8 for the teleconverter and then stop down two stops to make it look acceptable. needs a lot of light. i only ever tested it for fun.

01-02-2018, 04:12 AM   #5
Forum Member




Join Date: Oct 2017
Posts: 76
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by 672 Quote
the teleconverter on the 400 5.6 can make great high res pix. in very very bright daylight . 5.6 and then 8 for the teleconverter and then stop down two stops to make it look acceptable. needs a lot of light. i only ever tested it for fun.
Bismillah

Thanks for the info!
01-02-2018, 06:12 AM   #6
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
Alex645's Avatar

Join Date: May 2015
Location: Kaneohe, HI
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,526
QuoteOriginally posted by Alex645 Quote
What would be really interesting to see someone post is a comparison of two shots with a 645D or 645Z with a 400mm with a TC, and then a 400mm without the TC but cropped identical to the TC.
QuoteOriginally posted by 672 Quote
the teleconverter on the 400 5.6 can make great high res pix. in very very bright daylight . 5.6 and then 8 for the teleconverter and then stop down two stops to make it look acceptable. needs a lot of light. i only ever tested it for fun.
Would @672 be willing to post an example of the TC+400mm as well as the same framing but 400mm alone, but then cropped like the TC version?
01-02-2018, 03:30 PM - 1 Like   #7
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
Ed Hurst's Avatar

Join Date: May 2010
Location: Sydney
Posts: 1,654
I have a 645D and a 645Z. I also have the 1.4x converter (and have tested a 2x converter). I do not have the specific lenses you mention, but have used the converters with other telephotos (6x7 300mm f4 EDIF, 6x7 400mm f4 EDIF and the 645 A 600mm lens).

Here are my observations:
1. The 2x converter is, in my view, not worth using because it degrades the image badly enough that a cropped image used without it is simply superior. I discounted it.
2. The 1.4x converter, used with a good lens and stopped down a couple of stops from wide open, does provide better quality than an equivalent cropped image. But you have to stop down to get that benefit. And of course make sure you eliminate vibration (obviously).
3. If you want the extra reach and can use a long enough exposure to stop the lens down without increasing ISO, you will deliver good quality. If you are trying to stop action, you will need to increase the ISO or avoid stopping the lens down and that will cost you more quality (wiping out the benefit of using the converter compared to cropping). The ISO issue is especially true of the 645D which rapidly deteriorates in quality when ISO is increased; the 645Z delivers good results at higher ISOs (but there is still some penalty).

In short, the 2x can be discounted IMO. The 1.4x is worth using if you can stop down and use longer exposures (though, of course, getting an even longer lens so you don't need a converter delivers better quality). If you want to use the 1.4x to stop action, you will rapidly find a 35mm DSLR easier, better, lighter and cheaper.

Hope that helps.

Ed

01-02-2018, 04:49 PM   #8
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
bkpix's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Creswell, Oregon
Photos: Albums
Posts: 568
I used the 1.4x 645 converter for years on a 645 300 A* manual focus lens with an adapter on my K-5. Excellent quality, but slow to focus. I ended up happier using the (35mm format) 1.7x AFA converter, which adds autofocus and extends the 300 to 500mm equivalent.
01-03-2018, 02:30 AM   #9
672
Veteran Member




Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: santa monica
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 486
samples

i posted these shots a couple years ago. still working out how to locate all my past posts.
01-03-2018, 06:13 AM - 1 Like   #10
Loyal Site Supporter




Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: pontiac mi.
Posts: 392
I've used the 1.4 and 2.0x tc's on my 645D with the 200mm, 400mm, and the 300mm67 with adaptor. that it's strictly manual focus is a given., but on a bright day , no problem. my results with both tc's have been good to very good. I've even got good results when I've stacked two together. I use either a tripod or a monopod. i'll post a few samples when I can dig them up.
01-03-2018, 06:51 AM   #11
Loyal Site Supporter




Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: pontiac mi.
Posts: 392
ok I found a few samples of photoswith the 2.0 tc and the 2.o and 1.4 stacked together. 1 2 and3 are 200mm +2.0x tc. 4 and 5 are the 200mm+ 1.4x +2.0x tc's stacked.
Attached Images
View Picture EXIF
PENTAX 645D  Photo         
01-03-2018, 07:07 AM   #12
Forum Member




Join Date: Oct 2017
Posts: 76
Original Poster
Bismillah

Is it just me or does a CCD sensor have a unique Look especially on Medium Format.
01-07-2018, 01:43 PM   #13
Senior Member




Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Northants, England
Posts: 167
QuoteOriginally posted by bull drinkwater Quote
I've used the 1.4 and 2.0x tc's on my 645D with the 200mm, 400mm, and the 300mm67 with adaptor. that it's strictly manual focus is a given., but on a bright day , no problem. my results with both tc's have been good to very good. I've even got good results when I've stacked two together. I use either a tripod or a monopod. i'll post a few samples when I can dig them up.
Nice shots. Can you remember the ISO you used? I have a P645N so a film user. The top ISO in colour is quite limited compared to a digital 645 hence my worry that your ISO might well be higher than I can achieve with film, using even a 1.4 let alone a 2x.

Thanks

asahijock
01-07-2018, 02:05 PM   #14
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
Alex645's Avatar

Join Date: May 2015
Location: Kaneohe, HI
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,526
QuoteOriginally posted by asahijock Quote
Can you remember the ISO you used? I have a P645N so a film user. The top ISO in colour is quite limited compared to a digital 645 hence my worry that your ISO might well be higher than I can achieve with film, using even a 1.4 let alone a 2x.

asahijock
The exif indicated it was shot at 800 ISO. So Kodak Portra 800 would be your best bet with color, and I'd probably go with Ilford XP2+ at EI 1600 with monochrome.

IMO the first three shots with the single TC looks acceptable, but the double stacked TCs looks flat; loss of contrast and color.
01-08-2018, 02:04 PM   #15
Senior Member




Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Northants, England
Posts: 167
Thanks Alex. Good news that you did it at 800, thus Portra a superb colour film is available even at 2x converter. I had heard( maybe on this site) that the 1.4 was the better of the two converters in terms of resolution etc but your shots with 2x look pretty good to me.

I nearly added in my post that I have the luxury of Ilford D3200 wheregrain is hardly a problem with 645 format unless the enlargement is way beyond what I'd ever need to do. However you are the second person to recommend XP2+ at 1600.

Do you develop the XP2+ yourself and if so or if not what do you or the lab do about development time? I had heard that at a push of two stops such as 1600 the negatives may be a little thin at the standard 3 mins 15 secs. Once upon a time Ilford itself used to give the exposure latitude as up to 1600 but having just looked at the website it seems to suggest up to 800 with no process adjustment. I have done a bit of research but cannot find anything on pushing XP2.

asahijock
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
1.4x, 645d, 645z, camera, color, contrast, customer service, defects, experience, fa*, glass, m*300/4, medium format, ricoh imaging, shot, smc, suggestion, tc, tcs, teleconverter
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Difference.. Auto Teleconverter/Teleconverter? peter oconnor Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 6 04-28-2013 03:11 PM
For Sale - Sold: Tamron 1.4x Pz-AF MC4 Teleconverter & Quantaray 2x Teleconverter DaveInPA Sold Items 15 09-24-2009 06:28 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 07:31 AM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.com part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top