Is a 3x TC of any use?

[f/16]

I got a real good deal on some Minolta MD stuff on Ebay. Extension tubes which I will find very useful even though they're not meter coupled, Minolta Celtic 28 2.8 which is what I wanted the most, and a lens case that holds a 135 or 200 f/4. Also I got a Cosmos 3xTC. Now with a slow telephoto that's going to put the max aperture around f/11-16. And image quality will probably degrade alot. Should I keep it or take out the glass and have a long meter coupled extension tube?

 

[Wade D]

I have a 3X TC that I bought in a similar way with other things I wanted. I only tried it once to see what the image quality was like. It wasn't very good. Also it was hard to focus. Dim image in the viewfinder. It is serving as a paper weight on my desk.

 

[AgX]

I never used one, but reports on these are negative.

But with extention tubes so cheap in rummage boxes I might refrain from dissecting it just for the tube.
Get yourself two high-quality 2x or 1.5x converters, stack them and compare with your 3x sample.

 

[thuggins]

I've used a 2X Zuiko TC, which I would trust as being about the best optics in that area that you can find. The impact on image quality is noticeable and the reduction in speed is inconvenient.

The best solution for increasing the reach of a lens is the T-CON's that Olympus made for their IS series "ZLR"'s. These screw onto the front of the lens and give you a larger objective, so there is little to no loss in light. Your f4 lens stays an f4. The optical quality is excellent and there is no degradation in the image. They are available in several powers from 1.5X to 1.9X.

 

[nyoung]

In my experience, TCs not made by a major lens manufacturer=paperweights. Even the good ones - and the best are the 1.4x sold with name brand 300/2.8s - degrade the image quality of the prime lens some what.

 

[Fixcinater]

I suppose a 35mm lens on a 3x teleconverter would make a good portrait lens for photographing women.

It's still killing a lot of light...

I tried one with a 500mm mirror lens. It was fun for about 10 seconds and then I got motion sick from the moving viewfinder image, even mounted on a tripod that holds a Speed Graphic and Pentax 6x7 very solidly. It was given away.

 

[f/16]

I suppose a 35mm lens on a 3x teleconverter would make a good portrait lens for photographing women.

At f/8? That's what the max aperture will be with a 35mm f/2.8 lens.

 

[f/16]

It's still killing a lot of light...

I tried one with a 500mm mirror lens. It was fun for about 10 seconds and then I got motion sick from the moving viewfinder image, even mounted on a tripod that holds a Speed Graphic and Pentax 6x7 very solidly. It was given away.

I can imagine. With a 500mm lens and 3x TC you could probably make the image jump but stomping your foot 15 feet away from the tripod.

 

[dynachrome]

Panagor sold a 3X model called the Macronet. It s handy when the subject can't be approached too closely, like when it's behind glass. I think I have two of them. Any combination of a lens and a teleconverter is something you have to test out. This is true even when a teleconverter is made for a specific lens. I don't agree with the comment that all non-OEM teleconverters are bad. Some are quite good. Examples which come to mind are the Vivitar 2X Macro Focusing Teleconverter, the Panagor Auto Macro Converter (for close range shooting only), the Tokina 2X Doubler, the Kiron seven element 2X, the Komura seven element 2X and the Sigma six element 2X with the removable tube containing the lens elements.