Wide and tele adapters - DPChallenge Forums

Tamron 16-300mm Di II VC PZD MACRO w/Canon Nikon mount

09/18/2009 09:44:01 PM · #1

I'm thinking of buying one of those cheap wide adapter lens (and also a telephoto one) from ebay. Could anybody please tell me the pros and cons... I mean, will they decrease sharpness, lighting, etc?

Of course I know real wide and tele lenses would be better, but I cannot afford it, at least not in the next 23134313 months... It was almost a magic buying my first DSLR with the kit lens, so I'm wondering what I can get with very low cost.

Thanks in advance!
Marcus.

JulietNN

Canon EOS R7

09/18/2009 09:48:36 PM · #2

Tamron AF 18-270mm F/3,5-6,3 Di II VC LD Aspherical [IF] macro for Canon~~~~~~~~` is to die for, an amazing lens. When I got it, I was told this would replace my tele and normal kit lens. It did and produced so much more than I expected. I have not taken it off my camera since I got it. Just looked it up and the photos I have taken with this lens are 9 times out of 10

Canon EF-S 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5 USM~~ Another totally awesome lens, hardly any barrel distortion, unless right up close.

I know you said you wanted cheap, and these are in teh 800 range. But I have to say, that Tamron is worth every single penny I have

Message edited by author 2009-09-18 21:50:36.

Tamron 16-300mm Di II VC PZD MACRO w/Canon Nikon mount

09/18/2009 09:58:41 PM · #3

Originally posted by JulietNN:

Thanks, JulietNN! But $800 is far far away from my available budget... I will save those lenses names for further dreaming about...

Those adapters that I'm mentioning are like a filter that you put on your existing lens and it will kind of multiply your current widest angle by 0.45 (in my case, 18mm would turn into amazing and almost unbelievable 8.1mm) and the other one will double and make my 55mm mutates to 110mm... This is something preety cool if it really works, but I suppose it must have many cons, otherwise nobody would spend $800 on a lens...
I just wanted to know what are those cons and if I can get at least an acceptable quality using those adapters that I expect to buy.

Sad for me, but with limited budget, I can only dream of preety cool wide angles with those cheap wide lens adapters.

JulietNN

Canon EOS R7

09/18/2009 10:03:02 PM · #4

If I had one of these filters lying around, I would send it to you.

Message edited by author 2009-09-18 22:12:07.

09/18/2009 11:00:49 PM · #5

Look at this.

Message edited by author 2009-09-18 23:04:53.

09/18/2009 11:56:43 PM · #6

Originally posted by JulietNN:

If I had one of these filters lying around, I would send it to you.

Thanks!

see

Canon PowerShot S95

09/19/2009 12:01:31 AM · #7

Marcus, I have never used or considered using one of these. I seriously doubt they would work well. IMO.

Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM

09/19/2009 12:11:34 AM · #8

Originally posted by alans_world:

Marcus, I have never used or considered using one of these. I seriously doubt they would work well. IMO.

I'm wondering if somebody had the opportunity to test it. I guess it's kind of poor quality optics, but maybe could be usable to limited sort of photographs.
My thinkink for now is that it is better than nothing (but I may be wrong)

Photologist

Apple iPhone 16 Pro Max

09/19/2009 12:12:13 AM · #9

I've never used nor seen any of these, but I would be careful that they don't introduce unwanted vignetting into your image.

Message edited by author 2009-09-19 13:38:14.

Bugzeye

Fisher Price Kid-Tough Digital

09/19/2009 03:55:45 AM · #10

The closest I have come to using something like this on a still camera is the zoom adaptor for my Canon G10 which is only good for full out zoom anything less and it has vignetting. It does have good quality on the long end however.

Those wide angle adaptors work much better in a video format, however that obviously isn't going to help you in this case. My suggestion is to be on the look out for a good used lens or save your money until you can afford a new lens, something like Juliet mentioned.

MikeO

Fujifilm x100

09/19/2009 05:01:09 AM · #11

I used tele and wide angle adaptors years ago on a Mamiya 528TL 35mm SLR (with a fixed lens). To be honest they were pretty poor and not worth the money.

spiritualspatula

Panasonic LUMIX DMC-LX100

Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 24-70mm f/2.8G ED

09/19/2009 06:58:07 AM · #12

I've used something somewhat similar to the wide angle one, but not a tele. Specifically, I used a different manufacturer's (Hoya's 72mm) macro diopters. They aren't TERRIBLE but they aren't great. There was a loss in sharpness, but the most annoying thing was the reflections. The coatings were just not cutting it what with that many layers. I've had zero problems with other Hoya filters regarding reflections.
Couple examples I've uploaded:

The focus behaves sorta weird too... the out of focus areas got a weird bit of ghosting that wasn't like the normal drop off I've seen. You can see it a little bit in the first one I posted.
Honestly, for macro work, I found a cheap and used manual focus 50mm 1.8 with extension rings FAR superior and for little bit more (I got the Kenko AFS compatible ones, but there are far cheaper options out there if you're only using MF. My E series 50mm 1.8 was $30 on craigslist in absolutely mint condition) the product was well worth it.
Can't personally speak for the tele, but I have read enough horror stories about crappy teleconverters (same principle) to want to stay away from them.

Message edited by author 2009-09-19 07:00:01.

bobonacus

Canon EOS-7D

Canon EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM

09/19/2009 07:02:34 AM · #13

I bought a 58mm threaded wide angle adaptor for my lx3 and I've been pretty impressed with the quality for Â£30 off ebay. You do need to find one that does not have any vignetting, they should say if they will or not, if they don't mention it then stay away! It is fairly sharp and you can't go too far wrong for Â£30!

I bought one from ebay user max-dcxcess and would recommend them