Results 1 to 5 of 5

Thread: Canon Tele-Converter on Nizo

  1. #1
    Inactive Member etimh's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 16th, 2005
    Posts
    71
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quoted
    0 Post(s)

    Post

    If I use the Canon 1.4x67 C-8 Tele-Converter lens, with a step-up ring, on the Nizo 801m, what telephoto length do I end up with? Can anyone explain the formula for how this is calculated?

    The Nizo lens is a 7-80mm and Nyberg says on his site that the 1.4 C-8 Tele-Converter increases the 814XL-S (which is 56mm) to 78.4mm in length. Difference being 22.4. Would I just add this number to the Nizo's 80mm and would the resulting telephoto length be 102.4?

    I already put the lens on and it seems okay except for super-vignetting at the wide end (and being very heavy). Has anybody else done this? Did it work out okay for telephoto shots?

    Tim

  2. #2
    HB Forum Moderator Alex's Avatar
    Join Date
    December 29th, 2000
    Posts
    11,383
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quoted
    0 Post(s)

    Arrow

    I used mine on my Eumig. It too is has a 56mm telephoto on it and it too goes to approximately 78.4mm as Mr. Nyberg states.

    The calculation goes as follows....

    56 x 1.4 = 78.4

    Or 56 x .4 = 22.4 = 56 = 78.4

    So on an 80mm lens you would get an additional 80 x 1.4 = 112. Not too shabby.

    Spectra film & video has a Canon 1.6 but I think it is a 52mm ring size so it won't fit on my Eumig which is 55mm ring size. The 1.6 would have been sweet.

    I need to check eBay to see if the current line of video doublers might work on a Super-8 camera, assuming one can find one with a bigger lens ring size.

  3. #3
    HB Forum Moderator Alex's Avatar
    Join Date
    December 29th, 2000
    Posts
    11,383
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quoted
    0 Post(s)

    Post

    I recently tried one and I was satisfied with the results. I think it cuts down light transmission a bit, don't know how much though.

  4. #4
    Inactive Member etimh's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 16th, 2005
    Posts
    71
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quoted
    0 Post(s)

    Post

    Thanks Alex. 112mm--yeah, that's pretty cool. Awfully heavy on the front end though! [img]wink.gif[/img]

    Tim

  5. #5
    HB Forum Moderator Alex's Avatar
    Join Date
    December 29th, 2000
    Posts
    11,383
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quoted
    0 Post(s)

    Post

    I have a 1.4 and think it is useful for "street level" stuff, but for moon shots I need more of a telephoto than 78.

    I'll be looking into 2x extenders, maybe even a three times extender as well. Although once I do that a very steady tripod becomes a must.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •