| Author: | | Inactive Account Registered: January, 2011 Posts: 440
1 user found this helpful
| | Review Date: August 18, 2011 | Recommended | Price: $30.00
| Rating: 9 |
| Pros: | sharp, compact and unobstrusive | | Cons: | | |
When I picked this off eBay some years ago, I didn't know what I was getting.. i.e., it's really sharp, with a good lens in front, it's hard to notice much difference, and it works well without calling attention to itself.
As a bonus it has the "PZ" contacts (from the 90s), which Pentax later re-used for their SDM focusing, so it's worth quite a bit more mostly because of this "feature" (and as Pentax have not come out with their own SDM TC yet!)
If you can pick this up for a good price, you won't be dissapointed!
| | | | | | | Site Supporter Registered: November, 2010 Location: California Posts: 2,223 | | Review Date: April 22, 2011 | Recommended | Price: $250.00
| Rating: 10 |
| Pros: | The best 1.4x TC no doubt about it. Sharp and neat | | Cons: | None - hard to get and expensive | |
This is a great 1.4x TC. It does what it is designed to do.
| | | | | Veteran Member Registered: May, 2009 Location: Vancouver, B.C. Posts: 6,513 | | Review Date: October 28, 2010 | Recommended | Price: None indicated
| Rating: 8 |
| Pros: | overall IQ retention, SDM works (probably HSM as well), affordable | | Cons: | discontinued and hard to find, CA, slow AF, not good for mediocre lenses | |
finally got myself a copy after several attempts to get one for a good price. I use this primarily with my short tele and medium tele lenses and as well as macros. the Tamron is able to retain most of the essential IQ aspects of the lens, but it is only as good as your lens is. meaning, your lens need to have excellent IQ inorder to show very minimal loss in IQ. the Tamron is able to retain mostly the sharpness and contrast of the image and very minimal degradation. my complaint about it is the CA caused by the TC which is a minus for me. the AF is useful but is slow, so another minus here. all in all, I score it fairly an "8".
| | | | | Senior Member Registered: November, 2007 Location: Isle of Skye, Scotland Posts: 262
1 user found this helpful
| | Review Date: August 12, 2010 | Recommended | Price: None indicated
| Rating: 9 |
| Pros: | Decent quality, works with SDM | | Cons: | Not currently available in UK | |
Cost £90
Not quite the same build/image quality as the Sigma 1.4, but better value as it is (was) considerably cheaper and is a'Universal' teleconverter - no list of lenses it will/won't work with/fit, unlike the Sigma, as the front element is deeply recessed. This includes Pentax SDM lenses (has the extra two electical contacts) and goes well with the DA* 50-135mm. Pity Pentax can't provide something similar... It you find one, snap it up - belongs in everyones kit bag.
| | | | | | | Forum Member Registered: April, 2010 Posts: 68 | | Review Date: June 14, 2010 | Recommended | Price: $185.00
| Rating: 10 |
|
Works very well with the new DA*200/2.8 and the new DA*300/4.
Hunts a little bit in AF on the DA*300 (act like a 630mm lens on FF).
Still fast autofocus.
T | | | | | Veteran Member Registered: July, 2007 Location: Florida Gulfer Posts: 3,054 | | Review Date: March 18, 2010 | Recommended | Price: $125.00
| Rating: 9 |
| Pros: | IQ, Very Sharp, Full AF, | | Cons: | Small decrease in contrast | |
I would definitely recomend this lens to anyone thats looking for a TC.
I use it on my Sigma 100-300 f4 and it is a little slow focusing but nothing I'm not used to with Pentax gear.
| | | | | Loyal Site Supporter Registered: March, 2007 Location: Toowoomba, Queensland Posts: 23,920 | | Review Date: September 29, 2009 | Recommended | Price: $110.00
| Rating: 9 |
| Pros: | Sharp, accurate, fast AF on most non-SDM/HSM lenses | | Cons: | Not as widely compatible with new SDM/HSM lenses | |
A brilliant performer.
Buddied with a Tamron 70-200/2.8, this TC provides fast and accurate AF with minimal loss in speed, both in locking AF as well as brightness in the viewfinder.
The SDM/HSM compatibility is there but is not cut out with the Sigma 70-200/2.8 II HSM for example due to focus hunting and inability to lock focus at longer FLs. This is a shame, as this would be where one would use such a TC. I have not tried it on any other SDM lens so I cannot comment on any other SDM/HSM lens compatibility issues (other than the DA* 16-50, on which it works perfectly, but why would one want to use the TC on that lens?!?).
Nevertheless, for the lens I use it with, this TC is excellent. Imperceptible IQ degradation, small, lightweight, good quality, decent AF - all big pluses for this TC compared to many others.
A highly regarded and recommended TC for screw-drive AF lenses.
| | | | | Forum Member Registered: March, 2009 Location: Montana, USA Posts: 75 | | Review Date: March 16, 2009 | Recommended | Price: $74.00
| Rating: 9 |
| Pros: | VERY SHARP. Full auto focus, auto exposure compatability. | | Cons: | Very slight red shift. Very minor decrease in contrast. | |
Excellent test shot results. A+ performance. 
I purchased this tele-converter primarily for use on my SMC Pentax-F 1:4.5 300mm ED(IF) lens (one of Pentax's sharpest) and that is what I did most of the testing with. Using my K10D shooting DNG raw files at ISO 200, comparison shots of a highly detailed, multi-textured, relatively flat field subject were taken with lens tripod mounted, aperture wide open at F/4.5, with and without the Tamron tele-converter mounted, same field of view (tripod was moved forward from 300 + tele-converter position for same field of view with 300mm lens only). Shots, when compared side by side on Viewsonic Graphics Series G90fB CRT monitor at 1280 x 1024 screen resolution, at 100% and 200% image resolution, showed no discernible sharpness or detail degradation, on center or at the edges of the image. The only discernible difference was a VERY slight red shift, indicated by just a few points increase in the red channel, and a very minor decrease in contrast.
To see any degradation in detail and sharpness I had to shoot with my K20D (DNG raw, 4672 x 3104 pixels, ISO 200). Only then, at 100% side by side comparison viewing of the images could I begin to detect any difference, looking hard. It was only at 200% that an untrained eye, looking for differences, would likely see any, and those very minor. Without direct side by side comparison the incremental red shift and tiny decrease in contrast would not be apparent.
This is exceptional performance.
Lighting for these shots was indoor, primarily domestic tungsten, with some fluorescent and daylight mix. The 300mm lens, wide open at F/4.5, seemed to auto focus just as quickly with the TC on as without it. While there was some hunting, there was also hunting with the 300 lens without the TC, to be expected in relatively low domestic indoor lighting. Auto metering was just as accurate with the TC on as off. All available auto functions worked just as well with the TC on as off the lens. I also did some test shots with other lenses, including a fully auto, current Pentax DA zoom lens, manual Pentax-M series prime lens, a manual P/K mount non-Pentax prime macro lens, and a couple Vivitar Series 1 P/K-A mount macro zoom lenses. All functions available with each lens mounted by itself on the K20D were also available with the Tamron TC mounted. Optical performance comparable to the testing with the Pentax 300mm lens.
One cautionary note, if you like to depend on in-camera shake reduction for hand holding of telephoto lenses, with the Tamron tele-extender mounted the camera sees the lens focal length as the lens only length, not the combined lens with tele-extender length, i.e., it sees a 300mm lens with the 1.4X tele-extender as a 300mm lens, not the actual 420mm effective focal length, and it shake compensates commensurately. So, be sure to keep your shutter speed as close to the true effective lens focal length reciprocal as possible, for best handheld results. A good policy anyway. For what it is worth, I rarely shoot with a lens longer than 200mm handheld. That is what tripods are for.
Based on the performance of this one example (who knows, maybe I got an exceptionally good specimen), I highly recommend the Tamron-F 1.4X Pz-AF MC4 tele-converter, if you can find it. I was lucky. I stumbled on it at my local used camera store, and got it for just $74.00. A steal, given the quality and apparent scarcity of this tele-converter.
| | | | | Veteran Member Registered: June, 2015 Location: Ontario, Canada Posts: 791 | | Review Date: September 6, 2018 | Not Recommended | Price: $150.00
| Rating: 3 |
| Pros: | increases reach a little | | Cons: | IQ degradation | | Camera Used: Pentax K-50
| |
As Pentax users, we have limited options for longer lenses. One of them is this teleconverter. I've probably shot around 10K shots with the FA* 300 f/4.5 without the converter, mostly of wildlife, so this will be a real-world review based on my gut feeling with this teleconverter.
So, the idea of a teleconverter is that it magnifies part of the image circle onto the sensor. Attaching a 1.4x to a 300mm lens gives an FOV of 420mm. In reality, the effective detail you get will be somewhere in between an idea 420mm lens and the bare 300mm lens.
The good news is that in ideal conditions, this teleconverter can resolve more detail than cropping the 300mm image, which I've tested using a sturdy tripod indoors. So is this teleconverter worth it? I'd say no (at least on the FA*) for a few reasons.
1) Increased ISO necessary. Because you lose a stop of light, you also double the ISO, at least. You might also have to increase the shutter speed (decrease shutter duration). Typically, where you used ISO 400 before, ISO 1000 might be necessary. This is less of an issue perhaps on newer bodies and on full-frame especially.
2) Decrease in IQ quality. All teleconverters do this to some extent. I feel like there is a little too much degradation with this one, especially compared to the Canon series III teleconverters.
3) Pentax IBIS on my K-50 seems to be fairly bad when it comes to longer lenses. That might not be true of newer bodies, though.
Let's see an example:
This was taken on a Pentax K-50 with the FA*300 f/4.5 @ f/5.6 (effective, f/8) at ISO 1000, 1/1000s. No denoise applied, and default Darktable sharpening. Here's the same picture, cropped for actual use:
At viewing size, this Blue Heron nearly fills the vertical part of the frame and the shot looks pretty good. Even in a fairly large print, this would look pretty good. I have compared this shot to one I took of the same heron without the teleconverter. While there is slightly more detail present in the tele shot, uncropped, the non-tele shot actually looks better because it is at a much lower ISO and has that smooth crispness that is somewhat lost with the tele shot.
The bottom line is that at typical distances for birds, the cropped bare lens has superior "overall image quality" compared to the lens with the teleconverter, despite the teleconverter in good light having a slight edge with additional resolved details.
So, I strongly recommend passing on this one. The only exception would be is if you just use straight-out-of-camera JPEGS, and only shoot in strong, good light. In this case, this TC will save you from cropping.
| | | | | Junior Member Registered: May, 2016 Posts: 33
2 users found this helpful
| | Review Date: June 1, 2016 | Not Recommended | Price: None indicated
| Rating: 5 |
| Pros: | tiny, well-built, fully compatible with FA lenses | | Cons: | IQ degradation | | Camera Used: K-3
| |
Actually, with the arrivel of digital photography I don't see the point in using teleconverters... Just crop the picture and you will have better IQ  Wild Mark perfectly demonstrates it in his review with the test pictures of electricity wires.
After reading too many positive comments here on pentax forums I actually bought this hailed Tamron converter a year ago. Mainly because I got it for a cheap 100 euros NOS. Tried it twice on my FA 2,8/135 (yeah, don't laugh  ) and sold it off on ebay for thrice the price. Loss in sharpness, contrast, f-stops, AF-speed, you name it... Cropping the picture to mimic a 200mm yielded way better results. If you still want full resolution AND picture degradation, just extrapolate the raw-file in advance in order to retain those 24 MP after cropping. Then you have the same without spending hundreds of bucks
Think this was the reason why Pentax was so reluctant to come out with any new TCs for years.
| | | | | Pentaxian Registered: July, 2011 Posts: 2,385
1 user found this helpful
| | Review Date: July 13, 2014 | Not Recommended | Price: $200.00
| Rating: 8 |
| Pros: | For a ong time the only TC with SDM support | | Cons: | Not really integrated in Pentax lineup | | Camera Used: K3
| |
For a long time Pentax did not offer ANY TC at all, not to say with SDM support. This TC supports SDM and regular AF, so for a long time it was much cooler than any Pentax TC. The TC is not integrated in Pentax lens lineup, so whenever you switch lenses, you need to punch in a different focus correction with the TC in place. With f/4 lenses SDM is not working that well - often there is not enough light to support focussing. Image quality is OK. Most cheaper TCs are just crap, so this one is on the better side, but I would not overrate it. Not sealed against moisture.
| | |
;)
;)
;)
;)
;)
;)
