fritz_liedtke Posted September 11, 1997 Share Posted September 11, 1997 I'm considering purchasing a RB67 system (used), and in order to save money, may purchase a 2xteleconverter, so that my 90mm lens can also be my 180mm lens. What are your experiences withteleconverters? Which are best in quality in terms of both image quality and durability? What other powers (1.4x, 1.7x, etc.) are available other than the 2x? <p> I'd like to know if anyone can tell me the quality of various 2x teleconverters (such as the Mamiya, Rokinar, Vivitar, Pentax, Kenko, etc.): which gives the best performance (meaning least loss of resolution, fuzziness in corners, etc.)? Are there any which have NO drawbacks? Can anyone refer me to specific test results on teleconverters? I don't want to save $400 by buying a teleconverter rather than a lens, only to compromise in image quality, and go kicking myself over ruined images. <p> Can anyone tell me what the pros and cons of working with a bellows (on the RB67) as opposed toscrew-on close-up lenses (say on another camera like the Pentax 67) for close-up work? Is therebetter image quality, depth of field, less distortion...? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paul_lasiter1 Posted September 12, 1997 Share Posted September 12, 1997 Before you purchase a used RB67 make sure you check out the seals around the film back. These tend to get tarry (disintergrate into a sticky mess) after a while and need to be replaced. <p> The 180 is a great lens, I would not recommend the teleconverter route. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
frank_sheeeran Posted September 12, 1997 Share Posted September 12, 1997 Hi Fritz, <p> I wrote up a tutorial of macro photography, that has the clearest chart I know of showing all of the close-up pros and cons. It uses Canon EOS as examples, but you'll have no problem with it at <a href="http://speedcore.com/usr/fs/photo"> http://speedcore.com/usr/fs/photo</a>. <p> On SLR cameras, whether 35mm or MF, the sharpest, "cheapest" (considering their power) lenses are the range of normal to about 3x normal focal length. Wide-angles, zooms, super-telephotos, etc., all will be poor in comparison. I'd expect that you'd get better images with a 35mm prime short tele than an MF normal+TC, especially if you shoot with superlow grain film like Velvia (where the lens resolution, not the film grain, is the bottleneck to huge enlargements). <p> Frank Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steven_rea Posted May 10, 1999 Share Posted May 10, 1999 There is a 140 macro lens made by Mamiya for close up work. I would try some test shots with this before you buy anything. The depth of field may or may not be good enough for you, but it will difinatly be sharper than a teleconverter or extention tube. It also comes very close to the 180mm for portrait work. You can get a used 140 macro in decent shape off of ebay or something for less than $600. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now