answers: 28

  1. Dmitriy
    07.03.2014

    Kind time of the day. Interesting articles, much can be learned, thanks for being there and writing actively for others. The question may not be the topic, but I will ask. I am interested in the difference between the color of the picture in the OVI and in the finished photograph, why the manufacturers do not make the OVI lens completely transparent so that you can see all the nuances of shades and the difference in light between the object being shot in the OVI and in reality. Sometimes it is very inconvenient to shoot, especially at dusk. And I'm also interested - I shoot at night from a tripod, in M ​​mode, a kenon 600d carcass, a FIXED 50 kenon lens, I focus through the LV, and so, if you don't raise the flash, you can't see a damn thing on the camera screen, but you should press turning on the flash - the image immediately appears, how can I do it so that without using the flash (for example, shutter speed 2-7 seconds), and at the same time get into the desired focus, which because of the blackness in the screen absolutely does not work ... .. in any other mode, the picture is visible and there are no problems with focusing ... I changed the settings, set different ISO, different image settings, it does not help ...

    Reply

    • Denis
      07.03.2014

      Hue does not appear due to the transparency of the glass, but because of the antireflection coating. Old coatings selectively reflected / did not reflect light, which gives a colored image.
      Regarding mode M, for something to be visible in the LP, you need to set a slower shutter speed, because The camera shows what is supposed to happen in the photo. When raising the flash, the camera does not know what will turn out, so it sets the shutter speed of the image output automatically (long).

      Reply

    • Denis
      07.03.2014

      And if the question is about the difference in color of the final image and the image in the JVI itself, then the reasons are different - JVI is really completely transparent (it does not distort colors), and the difference lies in the color rendering of the matrix.

      Reply

  2. Eugene
    07.03.2014

    Some kind of dry review came out, in no case I do not want to offend, but earlier you would have written how to increase the FR more qualitatively, by what magnitude the minimum and maximum converters are, and whether any of them should be bother, well, from personal experience it would be interesting to hear The device is quite specific in my opinion.

    Reply

    • Arkady Shapoval
      07.03.2014

      In the review there is a link to a general article about teleconverters, it does not make sense to repeat each time.

      Reply

  3. Oleg
    07.03.2014

    Just yesterday I trained using a converter. I have an inexplicable situation. I used Volna-3 lens with KP-6 / N adapter on Nikon D7100. Without a converter, the lens is aimed at infinity. With the converter, I stopped aiming at infinity. When twisting and moving away from the camera mount, I noticed that sharpness appears. I decided to install the narrowest ring that I had in my arsenal between the camera and the converter. At random. And surprisingly, infinity has appeared! Please explain what's the matter? After testing with Wave-3, I switched to testing with Tairo-11A. There is a lens in the system - the converter is working properly.

    Reply

    • Novel
      08.03.2014

      Oleg, and you definitely didn’t have infinity? Adding a macro ring reduces MDF and just removes infinity. If the lens focuses on infinity with a macro ring, then without it all the more it should do it.

      Reply

      • Oleg
        08.03.2014

        Roman, I myself am surprised at this circumstance. I know about macro rings, I have them, I photograph. Maybe the difference in the operation of the lens for medium format optics and the converter for 35mm film somehow plays here. I didn't write in the last post, but I tried to rearrange the teleconverter and the macro ring. The lens - macro ring - teleconverter is in order, there was no sharpness at all! It's a mystery to me. Maybe Arkady will be able to explain, but so far he is silent ...

        Reply

    • Ibrahim
      09.03.2014

      The problem is rather that the converter needs to be attached to the lens itself, and in this case, when attaching a medium format lens, the adapter goes first, and the converter is already the converter, as a result, such shortcomings drop out)

      Reply

      • Oleg
        11.03.2014

        Ibrahim, my previous post, there I described the location of the LENS - CONVERTER - MACRORING - Camera. There is infinity. But simply a lens - a converter - a camera, there is no infinity. Unclear…

        Reply

  4. Alexander
    08.03.2014

    Hello, is it suitable for Nikon autofocus lenses with a motor? 18-200 for example

    Reply

    • Arkady Shapoval
      08.03.2014

      No, he doesn’t have CPU contacts.

      Reply

  5. Basil
    08.03.2014

    Awesome Teleconverter

    Reply

  6. Oleg
    08.03.2014

    Arkady, be a friend! Regarding my ambiguous situation with the converter and Wave-3, would you comment something? This question pesters me very much. Thanks in advance.

    Reply

    • Arkady Shapoval
      09.03.2014

      No idea.

      Reply

    • Ibrahim
      09.03.2014

      The problem is rather that the converter needs to be attached to the lens itself, and in this case, when attaching a medium format lens, the adapter goes first, and the converter is already the converter, as a result, such shortcomings drop out)

      Reply

    • Artem
      11.06.2020

      I understand that the time for the question has passed, but suddenly someone needs it, he recently collided and googled, but did not find the answer, he had to teach physics:
      1. The converter does not need to be considered as an element of the lens, it is a kind of screen on which the lens projects and from which the matrix takes information, it should be more likely to be perceived as part of the camera.
      2. The converter does not have a strict working distance and should be placed between one or two tricks (somehow, I may be mistaken in the details, but the idea is that if you move it a little away from the matrix, the focus will not disappear).
      Thus, to achieve infinity or vice versa, the transition to macro mode requires manipulating the space between the converter and the lens.
      Specifically, according to k-6B - the tube with the lens block is easily unscrewed, a few millimeters are cut off with a file from the front and screwed back. The distance between the converter and the lens decreases, infinity is reached (flight is possible, but this is not critical).

      Reply

  7. Mark_KA
    09.03.2014

    Hello!
    Taking this opportunity - thanks for the articles, reviews, and in general for the site.
    In this review, I would like to see more details.
    How much deteriorates the quality (not counting the diaphragm) when using this converter?
    Roughly speaking, there are 18 megapixels (for example) and a 70-300 lens (for example such ..)
    The finished photo needs 1920 (or 2048 ...) on the long side.
    If you take this converter or some more authentic lens (such and such), then it will turn out like this (how?) And like this (how?) ... Provided the same scale of the object in the finished photo. That is, it is economically profitable (or not) to buy this converter (as opposed to that) than such and such a telephoto ... In this case, the chromatic aberrations will be such and such (examples), vignette, sharpness ...
    Eh-h ... So, I would like to ...

    Reply

    • Arkady Shapoval
      09.03.2014

      Want is not harmful. Personally, I just have an admixture of greenery, which the converter adds to the picture of MS K-2H 2x, completely repels me from any use. And about the scale, etc. described and commented in a general article about converters, I see no reason to repeat.

      Reply

    • Sergei
      10.03.2014

      What can you expect from a device from the time of film black and white photography? At that time, probably, it was relevant and in demand. Now other requirements and standards.

      Reply

    • Maksim
      10.03.2014

      People, you don’t know ... Lyudin writes a Svyaz blog, share your thoughts with you, admit it and try to do it like that, as you wish, if you want to (and it’s wonderful to be afraid of me!). And if you see the templates, insert that vimagate, write "recommendations" as if they wanted to bachiti those chi inshe. Є Tsikave food on the day? ask in the comments. Arkady can't write all his thoughts, call on the tse. Dyakuyu.

      Reply

  8. Alex
    12.03.2014

    To remove the lens block, you do not need to unscrew the spring! It is necessary to slightly push it in (against the action of the spring) and turn it.

    Reply

    • Arkady Shapoval
      24.03.2014

      Fixed

      Reply

  9. Alexander
    14.05.2015

    Arkady, I need your help, there is no one else to turn to.
    I have such a converter, but there’s no lens block problem,
    what to do? I don’t want to throw it away.

    Reply

  10. Eugene
    03.06.2015

    It gives a terrible picture as a converter, but it works like a macro ring.
    On my sample, the lens block had to be twisted for a long time, it is on the thread.

    Reply

  11. Sergei
    10.12.2015

    It just seems to me that all the old Soviet optical equipment is very different in the issued pictures. I can say only one thing about my copy, I’ve been photographing with this converter for many years, there is no green tint in the photo. The photos are quite nice, but only, as you know, in good daylight.

    Reply

  12. Dmitry E.
    08.06.2017

    Hello, where can I find such a teleconverter? And for about how much?

    Reply

    • Alexander
      25.10.2018

      I saw this for 1000 on the photosssr in VK, they are engaged in the sale and sending of various utensils for lovers of antiquities)

      Reply

Reply

 

 

Top
mobility. computer