You probably should ignore the squirrel composits. I'm not sure I knew what I was doing on them. Also distance makes a big difference. At closer distances, the teleconverter makes a lot less difference than it does at longer distances.
I am really curious how do you came up with such little difference in magnification between images with and without the teleconverter? it does not make sense, especially that other people did the test and got very different results..they did get an acceptable zoom implementation:
I am very puzzled on how you did your tests to get such a results?
Ralf
05-Sep-2002 09:21
Hello,
I am thinking of an A200 when I get my Minolta, but I needed some material to get my decision done. So thanks for the nice shots to get the comparison, especially on the 3rd side, where you compare the 200mm with and without lens. Not much difference, but, it is just 1.5x, isn't it....
Another Question: Where did you get the lens? You are in the US, i guess? I cannot find it anywhere in Europe. If you know by chance a store that has them, and mails international, maybe drop me a line.
