In a message dated 5/13/2004 3:48:32 PM Eastern Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> What I find really funny, is that while all three of you (Gary, Rober > and Tom) all praised the Kenko Pro/Tamron SP TCs highly (Are they by > the same manufacturing process, or are they just similar in > quality?) > you all went with Canon TCs when you had the chance :) > > -/\/ Hi , Well let me add my view on this. I also do have Kenko Pro TCs - both 1.4 and 2x. And don't plan on uprgading to Canon. I just don't see the point. First - they are not always on my lens - far from it, actually. But when they are - they offer a very good quality. Second, in my experience - unlike someone here said - I think they seal as well as at least older Canon TCs, so sal in not an issue for me and I do get drenched sometimes shooting equestrian competitions. So, overall, I prefer not to use TCs - Canon or Kenko, or any other. But when I have to - Kenko does the job. And I'm yet to see anyone who could tell a difference just by looking at the image. On the other hand, Kenko is cheaper, and fits EVERY lens. Not every lens need one, but what if? So, I always wondered, why people go by brand and not quality. Canon is not always the best choice. Often, - yes, but not always. And this has been proven time and time again. I just find what works and use it. And not wonder about re-sale value either - if it's a keeper - why sell? Plus speaking of re-sale - I can't understand why such a great camera body as Canon EOS 3, that everyone bought for $1000 not too long ago, sells at $400 or so on Ebay? And old trusty 1N can bring $450-500? So much for newer technology and re-sale. George * **** ******* *********************************************************** * For list instructions, including unsubscribe, see: * http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/eos_list.htm ***********************************************************
