2.2 converter for SEL55210?

[Skinny Dennis]

Anyone tried this one out?

 

http://digital-nc.com/product.php?sq=&p=16

 

It was recommended by the retailer when I tried to order the Sony 1.7 VCL-DH1758, which is still listed as available on Digital NC's site - yeah, not available but I gave it a shot anyway.

[Guest Peter Kelly]

To be honest, given that the SEL55210 is not the best lens anyway, I would have serious reservations about adding this. I'd imagine you'd likely get as good results by simply cropping.

If you look at the samples on the link you gave, they are very poor, although that does depend upon to what principal lens it was attached.

 

I'm amazed the retailer would 'recommend' such an item. The price itself is even more extraordinary, being almost the cost of the SEL55210!

However, don't take my word as gospel, because I can't know your expectations. You might be delighted with the results, although in my experience most people tend to be disappointed that they don't achieve the improvements they hoped for using such methods.

[Skinny Dennis]

I have similar reservations. 

 

The retailer is probably looking out for his best interests first, as far as recommendations go. I wouldn't consider this at all except that they offered this at a deep discount, $85. Which says a lot about what it's really worth.

 

I may give it a shot, the worst it would cost me is return shipping charges.

[Phatman]

I wouldn't touch it, converters magnify any aberrations and would also make the 55-210 even slower than it is.

 

I've always found my 55-210 to be pretty sharp even wide open, something of a bargain at £145.

[Skinny Dennis]

Aaaand as some predicted, it's crap!

 

Soft at any focal length. And not pleasantly so. Looks trick, but no points for appearance. Cropping the 55-210 to the same size is much better than with the converter attached.

 

Back it goes.

[Golem]

That thing is not a teleconverter.

 

It is a front element adapter ... huge difference.

 

It doesn't "magnify any aberrations", which WOULD

happen with a TC and is often not so bad depending

on how good the principal lens performs. This thing

just brings it's own set of aberrations to the table

and piles them on. IOW, even if it were mounted to

some flawless lens [if such existed] it would still pile

on its own flaws ... unlike a true TC which would

only magnify the inherent flaws, of which there are

none to magnify in our hypothetical flawless lens.

 

IIRC the only positive aspect of some front element

converters is that they do not cost as much light

as a true TC cuz they provide increased gathering

of light via their own front glass. Acoarst quality

of that "brighter" image is so poor until stopped

down to f/16 that, in practice, these things reduce

USEABLE lens speed more than a true TC does.

 

`