[OldChE]

I've been adding to my 645 lenses to use with my Pentax 645n. I now have the A 35, A 45, A 120 macro, FA 75, FA 45-85, FA 80-160, and the FA 200. Rather than getting the FA 300mm F5.6 (the F4 version is way out of my price range), I've been considering getting the 1.4X rear converter to use on the FA 200. I figure with the 1 stop change the 200mm F4 would then behave as a 280mm F5.6 lens, but this would be much lighter to carry in my pack. I don't anticipate using the longer length all that often (if I want to crawl through the bushes after bird pictures, I'll use one of my Pentax 35mm film or digital SLRs), but sometimes a little extra length may be handy to have on hand. Does the 1.4X converter work well with the FA 200mm? I know it will be manual focus. Is the 2X converter just as good to have as the 1.4X? I realize that the 2X converter has a two stop reduction. Please let me know your comments. Thanks!

[TDvN57]

I've been adding to my 645 lenses to use with my Pentax 645n. I now have the A 35, A 45, A 120 macro, FA 75, FA 45-85, FA 80-160, and the FA 200. Rather than getting the FA 300mm F5.6 (the F4 version is way out of my price range), I've been considering getting the 1.4X rear converter to use on the FA 200. I figure with the 1 stop change the 200mm F4 would then behave as a 280mm F5.6 lens, but this would be much lighter to carry in my pack. I don't anticipate using the longer length all that often (if I want to crawl through the bushes after bird pictures, I'll use one of my Pentax 35mm film or digital SLRs), but sometimes a little extra length may be handy to have on hand. Does the 1.4X converter work well with the FA 200mm? I know it will be manual focus. Is the 2X converter just as good to have as the 1.4X? I realize that the 2X converter has a two stop reduction. Please let me know your comments. Thanks!

My initial impression was that the FA200 does not pair very well with the TC1.4. I did some more tests recently and I have to retract that. It is not a perfect match for pixel peeping, but with a little tweaking in post production you can recover the sharpness to a high level. Thus I would recommend the pairing of the FA200 and the 1.4TC. I also recommend that you test for the ideal aperture with the combo, because the combo drops sharpness fairly quickly once you stop down the lens. I find it to be sharpest at wide open, 5.6 and Bokeh very pleasing.

I don't like the 2.0TC on any of the lenses as the loss of quality is too much, in my opinion.

On a side note, you can always consider some longer 6x7 lenses, that will be manual focus (same as with the 1.4TC) and if you do some research on the reviews, you may find some pleasant surprises.

[RICHARD L.]

I surmise with what Theuns says : while it is possible to use the 1.4X TC with the FA 200 mm f/4 with some success, they are not "the best of friends" in my experience. Check the "Lens Reviews" section for the FA 200 mm as well as for the Teleconverters.

I would suggest you check for a "like-new" used 645 FA 150-300 mm f/5.6 zoom lens instead. This is a "sweet lens" when used starting at f/8. It sells for peanuts on eBay (probably because people don't realize what a treasure it is). Two examples below at 150 mm and 300 mm :






As for the 645 2X TC, my experience with the one I have has been "dismal", the beast does not perform acceptably with any lenses I tried it with. The 1.4X is not too bad but the 2X is to be avoided IMO.

[OldChE]

My initial impression was that the FA200 does not pair very well with the TC1.4. I did some more tests recently and I have to retract that. It is not a perfect match for pixel peeping, but with a little tweaking in post production you can recover the sharpness to a high level. Thus I would recommend the pairing of the FA200 and the 1.4TC. I also recommend that you test for the ideal aperture with the combo, because the combo drops sharpness fairly quickly once you stop down the lens. I find it to be sharpest at wide open, 5.6 and Bokeh very pleasing.

I don't like the 2.0TC on any of the lenses as the loss of quality is too much, in my opinion.

On a side note, you can always consider some longer 6x7 lenses, that will be manual focus (same as with the 1.4TC) and if you do some research on the reviews, you may find some pleasant surprises.

Thanks very much for your advice. I'm not sure why the optical quality would degrade as you stopped down the lens, but I've read that from several sources. I guess that keeping the FA200/F4 wide open at F4 would give an equivalent F5.6 with the 1.4X, so you'd have a reasonable depth of field for distant subjects anyway.

The 6x7 lenses would be larger and heavier in general than the 645 lenses, no? If I had a Pentax 67 body it would be different (maybe someday!), but for now I think I'd stick to the 645 lenses. If I didn't do the 1.4X converter, I might go for the FA300/5.6 some day - but I just don't relish the idea of carrying that around in my backpack.
Thanks - Richard.

---------- Post added 02-15-22 at 08:42 PM ----------

I surmise with what Theuns says : while it is possible to use the 1.4X TC with the FA 200 mm f/4 with some success, they are not "the best of friends" in my experience. Check the "Lens Reviews" section for the FA 200 mm as well as for the Teleconverters.

I would suggest you check for a "like-new" used 645 FA 150-300 mm f/5.6 zoom lens instead. This is a "sweet lens" when used starting at f/8. It sells for peanuts on eBay (probably because people don't realize what a treasure it is). Two examples below at 150 mm and 300 mm :






As for the 645 2X TC, my experience with the one I have has been "dismal", the beast does not perform acceptably with any lenses I tried it with. The 1.4X is not too bad but the 2X is to be avoided IMO.

Thanks very much for your comments. I did read the review sections before posting (I usually do), but if I still have some uncertainty then I go ahead and ask. On the FA150-300, your picture examples look great. My idea, though, was that I would carry the FA200 in my bag, and the small 1.4X converter, and this would be lighter than carrying both the FA200 and the FA300/5.6 (I don't have the FA300, I'd have to buy it). However, perhaps you are advising to leave the FA200 at home and just carry the FA150-300? That's an idea. On the other hand, the FA200 is rather compact, as is the converter, so size and weight might be an advantage for that combination.

[TDvN57]

Thanks very much for your advice. I'm not sure why the optical quality would degrade as you stopped down the lens, but I've read that from several sources. I guess that keeping the FA200/F4 wide open at F4 would give an equivalent F5.6 with the 1.4X, so you'd have a reasonable depth of field for distant subjects anyway.

The 6x7 lenses would be larger and heavier in general than the 645 lenses, no? If I had a Pentax 67 body it would be different (maybe someday!), but for now I think I'd stick to the 645 lenses. If I didn't do the 1.4X converter, I might go for the FA300/5.6 some day - but I just don't relish the idea of carrying that around in my backpack.
Thanks - Richard.

---------- Post added 02-15-22 at 08:42 PM ----------



Thanks very much for your comments. I did read the review sections before posting (I usually do), but if I still have some uncertainty then I go ahead and ask. On the FA150-300, your picture examples look great. My idea, though, was that I would carry the FA200 in my bag, and the small 1.4X converter, and this would be lighter than carrying both the FA200 and the FA300/5.6 (I don't have the FA300, I'd have to buy it). However, perhaps you are advising to leave the FA200 at home and just carry the FA150-300? That's an idea. On the other hand, the FA200 is rather compact, as is the converter, so size and weight might be an advantage for that combination.

Just to be clear, the FA200 plus 1.4TC is not bad, if you are prepared to do some tweaking in post editing. See also some pics with the FA200 and 1.4TC in the thread about Bokeh.
Finding the best Bokeh lens combination with the 645z - PentaxForums.com

But again you will have to do your own test shots to find the sweet spot. You will also find that people (especially me) on the forum have high and sometimes picky standards for what is acceptable quality, and I am a self proclaimed pixel peeper.

[OldChE]

Just to be clear, the FA200 plus 1.4TC is not bad, if you are prepared to do some tweaking in post editing. See also some pics with the FA200 and 1.4TC in the thread about Bokeh.
Finding the best Bokeh lens combination with the 645z - PentaxForums.com

But again you will have to do your own test shots to find the sweet spot. You will also find that people (especially me) on the forum have high and sometimes picky standards for what is acceptable quality, and I am a self proclaimed pixel peeper.

Thanks again for the comments. I read your linked post on bokeh with interest. I am not a pixel peeper, as I probably give a lot more emphasis to ease of use and less to absolute sharpness. I'd probably be quite happy with the FA200 + 1.4X. I saw in your linked article some good comments again about the 150-300 lens. I'll have to think about that. By the way, I haven't considered getting the FA150mm, I guess I didn't realize it was that fast (F2.8), and I thought I had the FA80-160 now and the FA200, so maybe the FA150 would be redundant. But the FA150 at F2.8 is a lot faster than the FA200/F4. How do you find yourself using the different lenses? Should I reconsider on the FA150/2.8? Is that mostly a portrait lens? I haven't looked at the size and weight specs, is it fairly compact? Thanks again!

[TDvN57]

Thanks again for the comments. I read your linked post on bokeh with interest. I am not a pixel peeper, as I probably give a lot more emphasis to ease of use and less to absolute sharpness. I'd probably be quite happy with the FA200 + 1.4X. I saw in your linked article some good comments again about the 150-300 lens. I'll have to think about that. By the way, I haven't considered getting the FA150mm, I guess I didn't realize it was that fast (F2.8), and I thought I had the FA80-160 now and the FA200, so maybe the FA150 would be redundant. But the FA150 at F2.8 is a lot faster than the FA200/F4. How do you find yourself using the different lenses? Should I reconsider on the FA150/2.8? Is that mostly a portrait lens? I haven't looked at the size and weight specs, is it fairly compact? Thanks again!

I am sure there are others with much more experience with the FA150mm f/2.8 lens, that would be better to advise you on this. If you already have the 80-160 then I would say the 150 is less of a "need". The 80-160 is a fantastic lens in my opinion, and I have managed to get pictures with incredible detail. It can produce a nice bokeh as well, as long as you create a bit of distance between the subject and the background.

Personally I liked the FA150 2.8 a lot, but I could not discipline myself to not shoot at f2.8 at close distances. Every time I shot wide open and as close as possible, the shallow dof penalized me.

The most important part of all this is to get out and use the stuff, and have fun while doing so. No matter which kit you have it can still be great fun. For picture quality I would say content is more important than pixels and IQ. Many years ago I saw pictures taken by a researcher in a desert area of Africa, taken with an old Instamatic. The images were mouth droopingly great.

[RICHARD L.]

On the other hand, the FA200 is rather compact, as is the converter, so size and weight might be an advantage for that combination.

The 645 FA 200 mm f/4 is one of my most loved and used lenses. I call it "the detail extractor". It is extremely sharp starting at f/8 and can isolate the subject against a blurry background. When I want to "travel light" (traveling light with a 645Z is almost a joke in itself ... lol), I carry my new DFA 55 mm f/2.8 and my FA 200 mm f/4. But instead of using the FA 200 mm with a 1.4X converter, I would rather use the FA 150-300 mm f/5.6 zoom. I hope I expressed my idea more clearly.

Best Regards


Two images with the FA 200 mm f/4 below :

Two images with the FA 150-300 mm f/5.6 zoom below :

[OldChE]

Thanks everyone for the good advice and beautiful picture examples. You've given me a lot to think about! I'm anxious for our snow to melt in Chicagoland and spring to be here, so I can go out and shoot with my 645n kit (and other cameras too).

[OldChE]

Ah, I saw a couple 150-300 F5.6 zooms come and go on sales sites for less than $300. Now I'm thinking I should have gotten them. Should I wait for one with a hood? It seems to be a normal straight hood, so perhaps I could get one without a hood and use an after-market generic hood?

[RICHARD L.]

Totally. You will love this lens but be choosy on eBay : no fungus, no dents, mechanics working perfectly, like-new condition. Take your time and if you fall on a perfect copy, you will appreciate its remarkable performance.

Regards

[OldChE]

Totally. You will love this lens but be choosy on eBay : no fungus, no dents, mechanics working perfectly, like-new condition. Take your time and if you fall on a perfect copy, you will appreciate its remarkable performance.

Regards

Thanks for the reply! What are your thoughts on the original hood vs. an after-market straight hood, for this lens?

[RICHARD L.]

The 67 mm hood on this lens is just round, so any hood that is 2 or 3 inches long would do. Personally, I almost never use a sunshade other than my hat when absolutely necessary. These lenses have a tremendous resistance to flaring and veiling in backlighting anyway.

Regards

[OldChE]

The 67 mm hood on this lens is just round, so any hood that is 2 or 3 inches long would do. Personally, I almost never use a sunshade other than my hat when absolutely necessary. These lenses have a tremendous resistance to flaring and veiling in backlighting anyway.

Regards

That's what I thought, thanks for confirming it. Speaking of hats - tip of my hat to you - thanks!