Samuli Vahonen wrote:
Canon extenders protrude to lens ~10mm, so lenses like 80-200 are definitely out of the question.
I don't think there's anything in the mount of the Telyt-R 400/5.6 that would preclude using either of the Canon extenders. The combination would be slow, but it's a well-respected lens in your price range. I don't think either version of the 250/4s or the 350/4.8 will allow for the extenders, but they can be found for $900 or less. The rest that will work will more than double your budget.
If you really like the idea of getting a Leica tele, then why not consider either the 250/4 or 350/4.8 and then picking up a 2x APO extender later? It's a vast improvement over the original 2x.
cyra wrote:
does any of you know how the fringing is for the 105-280? Is it as good? I need a lens to use on a large Videocamera (JVC GY HD 101) for shooting birds. Now we use Nikon 80-200 ED, and it has very bad fringing at times agaings the sky (often the case with birds). The lens was ok on a Canon XL-1 on PAL but with HD now it often produces very bad results. The 105-280 would be maybe a better choice.
Have not tried the 280/4 yet which I recently aquired, but we do need the Zoom to find the bird, since this is 1400 to 2000mm (1,4 converter) on a heavy crop (7x!) - pretty much on the limit alltogether.
I would have bought a 105-280 already if I could find one. In the bay there are very few showing up, and those are considerabely more expensive than the 280/4, which is odd. ...Show more →
Haven't used it, but, man, that would be quite the stress test for any lens.
freaklikeme wrote:
I know we've talked about the bokeh smoothing out when you use the 1.4x on the 280, but do you find you pick up a little contrast and, while the color transitions are slightly less subtle, it gives a more pleasing balance overall?
I find that photos made with the 280/4 + 1.4x APO-Extender-R to be very slightly less contrasty than photos made with the 280/4 alone.
Seems your almost Leica is looking very much like Leica with tiny bit of Minolta. Beautiful. I like second photo most.
Btw. if its made in Germany then it is real Leica. They used Minolta design, but own coatings and their manufacturing tolerances, which makes it Leica (maybe even glass selection later, but who knows).
cyra wrote:
Video has a rather low resolution. It is vastly cropped though, so the center of the lens better be sharp. I guess we need to try.
Has anyone some experience with the 105-280?
I have the 105-280. IQ is great, similar to 70-180 but I think its too heavy for video.
davidrwilliams,
Yes, the 100 APO is very special. I took this shot @ f/11 and found it was not affected by diffraction. I'm kind of like still life photography these days...
f/8 maximum effective aperture means it's pretty much restricted to full sunlight for me, and the bokeh means I'll use this combination where backgrounds aren't too busy.
Well, at least you're putting it to good use. My experience with the 2x on the 280/2.8 is about the same, and the extra stop really doesn't get me much of anything, since the combination is not spectacular with the lens wide open. I used to use it on the 100 quite a bit for panos, but the 180/3.4 fills that need now.
Seems your almost Leica is looking very much like Leica with tiny bit of Minolta. Beautiful. I like second photo most.
Btw. if its made in Germany then it is real Leica. They used Minolta design, but own coatings and their manufacturing tolerances, which makes it Leica (maybe even glass selection later, but who knows).
Thanks Mescalamba!
It was made in Japan, but I love it all the same
michael49 wrote:
I swear the 5d has some of the best tonality of any dSLR ever made. Nice shots, btw.
analogg wrote:
Thanks Mescalamba!
It was made in Japan, but I love it all the same
Still nice photos. I kinda thought its Minolta, cause it slightly resembles rendering of lens I own. Maybe I will try to get this one day too. Keep shooting.
I guess we need to try. 
Beautiful. I like second photo most.