Comments on: TC-16A http://seattlewireless.net/~mattw/2007/02/08/tc-16a/ // pictures and words Sat, 11 Oct 2008 22:36:30 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.5.1 By: mattw http://seattlewireless.net/~mattw/2007/02/08/tc-16a/#comment-2920 mattw Fri, 27 Jul 2007 19:20:45 +0000 http://seattlewireless.net/~mattw/2007/02/08/tc-16a/#comment-2920 I'd be a little worried about shorting pins 3 and 6 on my D50, but that's just because I'm not really sure what they do. It might work, it might do nothing. I do kind of doubt it would break the camera. Let me know if it works! I’d be a little worried about shorting pins 3 and 6 on my D50, but that’s just because I’m not really sure what they do. It might work, it might do nothing. I do kind of doubt it would break the camera. Let me know if it works!

]]> By: Jay http://seattlewireless.net/~mattw/2007/02/08/tc-16a/#comment-2919 Jay Fri, 27 Jul 2007 19:06:24 +0000 http://seattlewireless.net/~mattw/2007/02/08/tc-16a/#comment-2919 Hello Matt. I've also acquired recently a TC16a off the eBay and mounted between MF lenses and F4s ... auto-focus great. As I also have a D100 (not D80 or D200 yet, one day in future maybe) as well as F100 but not tried yet as I intended to use it for film bodies (mainly my F4) in the first place, of course it'd be very likely mounted on F100 some time for sure, so just curious after reading your article about modification of the TC as able to use with modern F/DSLRs (great!) ... what if connect both pin 6 and 3 together with an extra pin (from an abandoned lens or ask Nikon for a part) added on to the same point of the IC (original contact of the pin 3), then both old AF bodies like F4s/N8008/N90 series and most advanced F100/F5/F6 and D100/200/80 ... would all work in AF with manual lenses … 'cause I'm not sure if relocating pin 3 to 6 along would cause F4s not auto-focus mf lenses anymore?! Jay California Hello Matt. I’ve also acquired recently a TC16a off the eBay and mounted between MF lenses and F4s … auto-focus great. As I also have a D100 (not D80 or D200 yet, one day in future maybe) as well as F100 but not tried yet as I intended to use it for film bodies (mainly my F4) in the first place, of course it’d be very likely mounted on F100 some time for sure, so just curious after reading your article about modification of the TC as able to use with modern F/DSLRs (great!) … what if connect both pin 6 and 3 together with an extra pin (from an abandoned lens or ask Nikon for a part) added on to the same point of the IC (original contact of the pin 3), then both old AF bodies like F4s/N8008/N90 series and most advanced F100/F5/F6 and D100/200/80 … would all work in AF with manual lenses … ’cause I’m not sure if relocating pin 3 to 6 along would cause F4s not auto-focus mf lenses anymore?!

Jay
California

]]> By: mattw http://seattlewireless.net/~mattw/2007/02/08/tc-16a/#comment-2917 mattw Sat, 21 Jul 2007 21:44:15 +0000 http://seattlewireless.net/~mattw/2007/02/08/tc-16a/#comment-2917 I like it, but I rarely use my teleconverters now. I was out hiking and put it on my 300mm f/2.8, but it actually gave me too much reach, and instead found myself using an extension tube to cut down my focusing distance. I think if my AF was faster (I shoot with a D50) it might be more interesting, but I've found shooting in MF, either it's totally out of focus or sharp like a tack. With AF, I've gotten too much soft focus and it drives me crazy. If you need a little bit more reach (but not 2x), it's not a bad teleconverter, but if you can get a 1.4x at the right price, I've heard they're much better optically. I like it, but I rarely use my teleconverters now. I was out hiking and put it on my 300mm f/2.8, but it actually gave me too much reach, and instead found myself using an extension tube to cut down my focusing distance. I think if my AF was faster (I shoot with a D50) it might be more interesting, but I’ve found shooting in MF, either it’s totally out of focus or sharp like a tack. With AF, I’ve gotten too much soft focus and it drives me crazy. If you need a little bit more reach (but not 2x), it’s not a bad teleconverter, but if you can get a 1.4x at the right price, I’ve heard they’re much better optically.

]]> By: John http://seattlewireless.net/~mattw/2007/02/08/tc-16a/#comment-2918 John Sat, 21 Jul 2007 13:27:38 +0000 http://seattlewireless.net/~mattw/2007/02/08/tc-16a/#comment-2918 matt, i'm on the point off buying a convert, seen one on an auction site. curious if you are still happy with the converter. want to use it on a 80-200 2,8. john matt, i’m on the point off buying a convert,
seen one on an auction site.
curious if you are still happy with the converter.
want to use it on a 80-200 2,8.

john

]]>