2x apo extender and sell 250 telyt f5 vers 1

[Hanson Leatherby]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Should I swap my 250 tely version one for a 2x apo extender?

 

Here is the background:

 

I would like to use a lens for speeches and headshots.

 

I have taken the version 1 250 telyt f4 out on a run hand held and the results are ok, but nothing like as good as from my 135 f2.8. I had great difficulty focusing and holding the camera steady due to the weight. However I did get steady shots and some in focus but to me they lacked detail. I dont mind a lens that needs a monopod or tripod but I want to understand if it can shine or not.

 

I did try tripod shots before with this lens on a digital back at iso 800 and they lacked detail I thought.

 

I have been thinking of swapping the 250 telyt for a 2x apo extender which would broaden my lens range.

 

I have the 28 2.8 135 2.8 and 250 4

 

I was thinking to sell the 250 f4 and use the extender on the 135, and then I have the bonus of a 56 mm focal length lens once I put it on my 28 mm as well as the 270mm

 

I am aware that the 2x apo extender means you loose 2 stops and that you lose contrast. Is that correct?

 

Also Using an apo extender on non apo lenses I have been told that it will improve contrast and sharpnes. What do people think of that?

 

I will post my Flickr link to an album of test shots all hand held. Most are in afternoon and early evening light iso 400 so some of the time im down a little on shutter speed and at f4 much of the time

 

250 telyt test shots only - a set on Flickr

[jaapv]

Well, an extender will never give extra contrast, you will always lose some quality, but with the Leica APO ones the loss will be so small as to be irrelevant. I have even stacked extenders with good results.

In general the 1.4x extender is the better choice, as it will lose only one stop and give a marginally better result than the 2x.

It will, however, not fit all lenses as it protrudes inside the lens. I am not quite sure, but I think the 135/2.8 can be used.

Avoid the non-APO 2x extender. It is rather good compared to other brands, but considerably inferior to the APO.

[adan]

As jaap says, a teleconverter cannot "improve" on the original lens, or even equal it. At best it degrades the image less than a non-APO converter.

 

Oddly, I just yesterday tried out a V.1 250mm f/4 Telyt against a different teleconverter combo - a decent, but non-APO, 1.4x converter (Kenko 5-element) with the 180 f/3.4 APO-Telyt-R. That combination edged out the native 250 in contrast, sharpness, and color aberrations.

 

However, that was starting with an APO image. I don't think the 135 f/2.8 (most recent optical redesign - 1968) is in that league, and magnified 2x, it will likely not even match your current 250 - even with an APO converter.

 

As for using a 2x converter (even APO) on a 28mm lens to get a 56mm f/5.6 - I think you would be building a painful wall against which to beat your head. A 50mm f/2 Summicron would be cheaper, faster, smaller, lighter and sharper.

 

Unfortunately my solution depends on a 1.4x converter that isn't available directly in R-mount, so it only works because I am using a Canon digital SLR.

 

A Leica 1.4x APO converter, along with a Leica APO 180, would work and no doubt be excellent - but would be psychotically expensive. Again unfortunately, the Leica APO 1.4x converter won't work with the relatively cheap APO-Telyt 180 f/3.4 (collides with rear element). Leaving only the $3,000+ APO-Elmarit 180 (and only in some versions) as compatible.

[jaapv]

To be fair, the 1.4x is not really meant to be used with shorter lenses like 135 or 180.

It was built for 280 and 400 APO lenses. It is brilliant on my Vario-Elmar 105-280., and used to be a standard fixture on my 280/4.0 APO.

These extenders are definitely not recommended for use on short focal lengths. The 1.4x won't fit and the 2x will degrade the image quite a bit. It cannot cope with the exit angle of the lens, being built for near-parallel light rays. 90 mm is about the lowest you can go.

[Hanson Leatherby]

Thanks for the info. It seems clear that the 2x apo extender isnt a solution for me right now.

 

I am really thinking about ditching my 250 tely f4 and getting a 180, but my budget will at present only stretch to a verison one or two 180 2.8, or maybe version two 250 telyt.

 

From the version one 250 telyt f4 to the version two, maybe there is slight image improment and handling improvement as the version two is lighter and therefore easier to focus.

 

I have has some great results from the 135 2.8 in the past

[wildlightphoto]

From the version one 250 telyt f4 to the version two, maybe there is slight image improment and handling improvement as the version two is lighter and therefore easier to focus.

 

I haven't used the 250mm Telyt version 1 aside from handling it in the store, but the image quality I got from version 2 didn't thrill me. To much chromatic abberation. It controls flare very well though. Its handling is a big improvement over version 1 IMHO.

[jaapv]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

You could use a Telyt 280-V version III with an adapter (sold by Novoflex and probably Cameraquest) . The only thing you would lose is the automatic stopdown, but on tele lenses that is not a great loss.

[wildlightphoto]

You could use a Telyt 280-V version III with an adapter (sold by Novoflex and probably Cameraquest) . The only thing you would lose is the automatic stopdown, but on tele lenses that is not a great loss.

 

The two samples of this lens I've used varied in image quality. One sample flared badly, the other not at all Aside from this the image quality it produces is quite good, though the color saturation isn't quite as rich as the R lenses I've used. Handling is somewhere between the two versions of the 250mm f/4 Telyt, having a rotating tripod collar (good) and a long-ish minimum focus distance (meh...)

[wizard]

... and getting a 180, but my budget will at present only stretch to a verison one or two 180 2.8, ...

 

My 180/2.8 version 2 is remarkably good, so you may give that one a try. I also own the apo 180/3.4 and it is only marginally better than the version 2.

 

Andy

[Hanson Leatherby]

Hi thanks for that info. Maybe i should go for a 180 2.8 version two. Need to sell the 250 f4 version one first or part ex it in a camera shop.

[Larcomb]

Should I swap my 250 tely version one for a 2x apo extender?

 

Here is the background:

 

I would like to use a lens for speeches and headshots.

 

I have taken the version 1 250 telyt f4 out on a run hand held and the results are ok, but nothing like as good as from my 135 f2.8. I had great difficulty focusing and holding the camera steady due to the weight. However I did get steady shots and some in focus but to me they lacked detail. I dont mind a lens that needs a monopod or tripod but I want to understand if it can shine or not.

 

I did try tripod shots before with this lens on a digital back at iso 800 and they lacked detail I thought.

 

I have been thinking of swapping the 250 telyt for a 2x apo extender which would broaden my lens range.

 

I have the 28 2.8 135 2.8 and 250 4

 

I was thinking to sell the 250 f4 and use the extender on the 135, and then I have the bonus of a 56 mm focal length lens once I put it on my 28 mm as well as the 270mm

 

I am aware that the 2x apo extender means you loose 2 stops and that you lose contrast. Is that correct?

 

Also Using an apo extender on non apo lenses I have been told that it will improve contrast and sharpnes. What do people think of that?

 

I will post my Flickr link to an album of test shots all hand held. Most are in afternoon and early evening light iso 400 so some of the time im down a little on shutter speed and at f4 much of the time

 

250 telyt test shots only - a set on Flickr

 

Longer lenses suffer from chromatic aberration. It is unrealistic to expect a 250mm lens that is not apochromatically corrected to match a 50mm lens in overall quality. I have used both of the 250mm lenses and they don't seem all that much different optically, but the new one is lighter.