Keep in mind while reading my comments that I shoot slides 800f the time. The
reason I have used Telextenders is when I am backpacking or cycling. For
example a 135 plus 2X extender (270) or a 200 + 1.5x extender (300) is a lot
lighter and more compact than carrying my 300. Also for someone on a budget a
Telextender can usually get them into super tele range w/o breaking the bank.
Particularly useful if you only use the long focal lengths occasionally. This,
of course, is not always the case with the Zuiko 2xa which can sell for close
to what a bargain 300 does.
Yes there is some fuss with dealing with the extender, but it is better than
not having the lens at all. Two summers ago we were cycling in Colorado, I
missed a wonderful shot of a soaring Hawk because in an effort to reduce weight
and bulk I had nothing longer than a 135, and no extender. There was plenty of
time in this case to get the photo, but I did not have the gear. I shot anyway,
but as you can imagine the hawk was but a small speck, way to small to enlarge
to any degree without severe loss of image quality.
dreammoose wrote:
SNIP
> 3) One less thing to carry around and fuss with when actually taking
> pictures. Sometimes the eagle flies in the time it takes to put on the
> extender.
> 4) The 7 element extender is about the size of the 28mm f2.0 and almost
> as heavy and larger and heavier than the 24/2.8, 21/3.5 and 18/3.5.
>
> I haven't shot slides in years except to make slides for my friend the
> art professor's lectures. I can't remember for sure the last time I used
> a telextender...Hmmmm, maybe I need to rethink my 'light kit', to be
> lighter or to have more perspective!?
>
> Moose
>
< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >
|