Extender for M?

[FlashGordonPhotography]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

"Same resolution as the M too" Now I am not doubting this sentence only trying to learn about the A6000, but how is this true? Thanks.

 

I mean the same megapixel count and file dimensions. The Sony A6000 is a 24MP camera just like the M. So I get consistent file sizes. I use the A6000 like a teleconverter for my longer M lenses (and Sony AF lenses too) but with none of the compromises of a teleconverter (loss of a stop, optical issues).

 

Gordon

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[FlashGordonPhotography]

Most people I know, including me, use telextenders mainly with fast telephoto lenses. Carrying a 1.4x is a lot more convenient than carrying a 300/2.8 and 400/4, or 600/4 and 800/5.6.

 

And I don't really see the point in using an APS-C camera where the pixel count/pitch is the same or nearly the same as a full-frame cropped to APS-C size.

 

I would agree that except the A6000 has the same resolution (24MP) as the M. So in effect it's more like using the extender except that with the Sony you get electronic first curtain shutter and you can set the manual focus in live view to anywhere on the sensor.

 

Disadvantages are carrying another battery system and needing to purchase an adaptor. Advantages include closer focusing (with the CV adaptor I have), an inbuilt flash for a spot of fill and the tilt screen the Sony has.

 

Gordon

[dkCambridgeshire]

I would agree that except the A6000 has the same resolution (24MP) as the M. So in effect it's more like using the extender except that with the Sony you get electronic first curtain shutter and you can set the manual focus in live view to anywhere on the sensor.

 

Disadvantages are carrying another battery system and needing to purchase an adaptor. Advantages include closer focusing (with the CV adaptor I have), an inbuilt flash for a spot of fill and the tilt screen the Sony has.

 

Gordon

 

Another disadvantage is that on a cropped format the DOF is greater for any given aperture compared to full frame at the same equivalent focal length … some might say this not a disadvantage but it is when trying to achieve differential focus with shallow DOF.

 

dunk

[FlashGordonPhotography]

Another disadvantage is that on a cropped format the DOF is greater for any given aperture compared to full frame at the same equivalent focal length … some might say this not a disadvantage but it is when trying to achieve differential focus with shallow DOF.

 

dunk

 

And an tele-converter also has this disadvantage plus a lower shutter speed.

 

Gordon

[bocaburger]

I would agree that except the A6000 has the same resolution (24MP) as the M.

 

Ok I get what you're saying. I have the Nex 6 which is only 16mp. (I tried the A6000 hoping it might be better in the corners with my Leica and CV wide angles than the 24mp Nex 7 a friend loaned me, but unfortunately it wasn't).

[gyoung]

No, with the Komura adapter you have RF coupling and you get an adjustable viewfinder. As you lose one stop in speed it is possible to get focus. Image quality is quite acceptable. Read the thread linked to above

Two stops loss I think jaap, seems my old komura is still giving satisfaction

[emoji3]

 

Gerry

[roydonian]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I tried a simple experiment today, using my 90 mm Elmarit and 135 mm Tele-Elmarit lenses to photograph a car parked not far from my house. These were taken with and without the Telemore 95 extender.

 

When Genuine Fractals picture-scaling software was used to digitally enlarge the 'lens only' frames to 200% of the original size, in both cases the digitally enlarged image was superior to that obtained when using the Telemore. It was sharper, and had more contrast.

[gyoung]

But of course when these things were designed it was not so likely to produce such results with film.

 

Gerry