NR Blog NR Forum ebay Finds Nikon Deals Nikon Buying Guide Leica Rumors Pentax Rumors Photo Rumors Contact NR
›

Teleconverters...Good or Bad?

1246

Comments

  • CoastalconnCoastalconn Posts: 527Member
    I had a bunch of time with a young Great Horned Owl, so I did an impromptu test. I took several shots and picked the sharpest ones. 300 F4, 420 F5.6 and 600 F8. I cropped the 300mm shot to about 100%, 1558 wide I think, I then roughly matched the image size to the other images. With my particular lens the 2 stop penalty seems to be worth it... direct download.. http://www.mediafire.com/download/qbasms899txjqb8/owl_NO_TC_1558_1321-vert.jpg

    Simple, Free Image and File Hosting at MediaFire
    Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
  • manhattanboymanhattanboy Posts: 1,003Member
    I had a bunch of time with a young Great Horned Owl, so I did an impromptu test. I took several shots and picked the sharpest ones. 300 F4, 420 F5.6 and 600 F8. I cropped the 300mm shot to about 100%, 1558 wide I think, I then roughly matched the image size to the other images. With my particular lens the 2 stop penalty seems to be worth it... direct download.. http://www.mediafire.com/download/qbasms899txjqb8/owl_NO_TC_1558_1321-vert.jpg

    Simple, Free Image and File Hosting at MediaFire
    It's close. I think based off the images I would say 2x tele > no tele >1.4 tele
    But really they are all very close, and the advantage of the f4 over the 2x is less distracting background. Your 2x copy is a good one though, thus I can see why you shoot with a 2X all the time.
    Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
  • CoastalconnCoastalconn Posts: 527Member
    edited April 2014
    @manhattenboy, I was actually pretty surprised myself. Although I always thought the 1.4x was the weakest link. The 2x well leaves me 2x the resolution lol. Could make a big difference in print size.. i think the change in the BG was because the wind was blowing and the branches were in different locations....
    Post edited by Coastalconn on
    Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
  • PB_PMPB_PM Posts: 4,494Member
    edited April 2014
    My own experience with the Sigma 120-300mm F2.8 (non-OS) with the 2X TC (EX DG version) mixed. Images beyond 500mm are just smudgy. I don't have a 1.4x TC that works with the lens, so I cannot compare, but I'm sure the results would be better. Without the TC the lens is sharp at 300mm, so it doesn't seem to be an optical problem with the lens itself. I suppose it is possible that the TC/lens combo could need AF adjustments, but up to 500mm it is fine.
    Post edited by PB_PM on
    If I take a good photo it's not my camera's fault.
    Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
  • CoastalconnCoastalconn Posts: 527Member
    @PM_PM, I think they changed the optical formula when they introduced the OS version. I have seen the smudgy 2x teleconverter effect on many lens I have tried in the past. Have you ever tried tuning it at 600? Occasionally I accidentally zoom down to 550mm and It seems even sharper, but I tend to forget I have a zoom and keep it parked at 600, lol...
    Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
  • PB_PMPB_PM Posts: 4,494Member
    edited April 2014
    Testing seems to be fine, but real world use is smudgy on subjects beyond 20m. I might have to do more testing on more distant subjects. Otherwise the lens is excellent for the price (got it for $1500).
    Post edited by PB_PM on
    If I take a good photo it's not my camera's fault.
    Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
  • sevencrossingsevencrossing Posts: 2,800Member
    edited May 2014
    I realize no one will have this yet
    but I would be keen some samples of the new AF-S teleconverter TC-14E III taken with the amazing 80-400mm f/4.5-5.6G ED vr
    my gut feeling is, you might see an improvement, over cropping , on a D4 but not on a D800E

    Post edited by sevencrossing on
    Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
  • MsmotoMsmoto Posts: 5,398Moderator
    edited May 2014
    If this TC-14EIII is a lot better than the previous one, it may make a relatively inexpensive 560mm f/8. Good for a lot of sports stuff and at no where near the price of the "high price spread".

    As to the IQ, I would guess one would see a difference on both bodies, D4 and D800E. But, this will have to be seen.
    Post edited by Msmoto on
    Msmoto, mod
    Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
  • framerframer Posts: 491Member
    The old TC-14E any version are fantastic with almost all pro lenses. I would really like to see the comparisons between the two.

    framer
    Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
  • NSXTypeRNSXTypeR Posts: 2,293Member
    Interesting- according to the post on the main page, the TC 1.4 III is compatible with the 105mm Macro but not with AF.

    I'm not sure why they would make it incompatible... but c'est la vie!
    Nikon D7000/ Nikon D40/ Nikon FM2/ 18-135 AF-S/ 35mm 1.8 AF-S/ 105mm Macro AF-S/ 50mm 1.2 AI-S
    Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
  • haroldpharoldp Posts: 984Member
    On my 80-400G on a D800e, the current tce-14II is better than cropping to same FOV. Down 1/2 stop, it is clearly better.

    This lens (possibly my copy) works much better with the TC than my 70-200/2.8 or my 200-400/4.

    The 400/2.8 is better than all of them with or without TC's, and is very sharp with the 1.7 even wide open, it is nearly perfect down 1/2 stop.

    Based on msmoto's and some others posted here, I am eager to try the tce20-eIII.

    ... H
    D810, D3x, 14-24/2.8, 50/1.4D, 24-70/2.8, 24-120/4 VR, 70-200/2.8 VR1, 80-400 G, 200-400/4 VR1, 400/2.8 ED VR G, 105/2 DC, 17-55/2.8.
    Nikon N90s, F100, F, lots of Leica M digital and film stuff.

    Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
  • sevencrossingsevencrossing Posts: 2,800Member
    edited May 2014

    Based on msmoto's and some others posted here, I am eager to try the tce20-eIII.

    ... H
    @ 400mm the 80-400mm f/4.5-5.6G ED vr is only f11, so auto focus does not work and manual focus is challenging. Last time I tested this combination, I was better off cropping , but the weather is very good today so I did another test, and got better results, but I was still better off cropping

    Post edited by sevencrossing on
    Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
  • haroldpharoldp Posts: 984Member

    Based on msmoto's and some others posted here, I am eager to try the tce20-eIII.

    ... H
    @ 400mm the 80-400mm f/4.5-5.6G ED vr is only f11, so auto focus does not work and manual focus is challenging. Last time I tested this combination, I was better off cropping , but the weather is very good today so I did another test, and got better results, but I was still better off cropping

    I would only use it on the 400/2.8 . I have seen quite god results on this forum with that combination.

    Anything more than the 1.4 is suboptimal (ne horrible) on the 80-400 or the 200-400/4.

    H
    D810, D3x, 14-24/2.8, 50/1.4D, 24-70/2.8, 24-120/4 VR, 70-200/2.8 VR1, 80-400 G, 200-400/4 VR1, 400/2.8 ED VR G, 105/2 DC, 17-55/2.8.
    Nikon N90s, F100, F, lots of Leica M digital and film stuff.

    Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
  • sevencrossingsevencrossing Posts: 2,800Member
    edited May 2014
    haroldp I would only use it on the 400/2.8 . I have seen quite god results on this

    I think God would agree
    TCs and primes work pretty well
    but TC's are not so good with Zooms



    Post edited by sevencrossing on
    Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
  • Vipmediastar_JZVipmediastar_JZ Posts: 1,708Member
    edited May 2014
    Nikon 70-200 2.8+TC-1E III 1.4 or TC-20E III I'm interested in this for sports, my current BIF attemps and flowers too for the reach Instead of buying yet another lens this would be probably cheaper for now.

    How does this work for macro? Im not looking for 1:1 just wondering if I should consider this for temp use as macro until the 105 or 60 macro makes into my bag?
    Post edited by Vipmediastar_JZ on
    Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
  • Golf007sdGolf007sd Posts: 2,840Moderator
    The 1.7TC works great on my 70-200 & 105 2.8 macro.
    D4 & D7000 | Nikon Holy Trinity Set + 105 2.8 Mico + 200 F2 VR II | 300 2.8G VR II, 10.5 Fish-eye, 24 & 50 1.4G, 35 & 85 1.8G, 18-200 3.5-5.6 VR I SB-400 & 700 | TC 1.4E III, 1.7 & 2.0E III, 1.7 | Sigma 35 & 50 1.4 DG HSM | RRS Ballhead & Tripods Gear | Gitzo Monopod | Lowepro Gear | HDR via Promote Control System |
    Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
  • haroldpharoldp Posts: 984Member
    It seems that this is sample dependent, my 1.7 is mediocre on my 70-200, awful on my 200-400, and spectacularly good on my 400/2.8 .

    Its a good thing that the 400/2.8 is where I need it .

    Regards ... H
    D810, D3x, 14-24/2.8, 50/1.4D, 24-70/2.8, 24-120/4 VR, 70-200/2.8 VR1, 80-400 G, 200-400/4 VR1, 400/2.8 ED VR G, 105/2 DC, 17-55/2.8.
    Nikon N90s, F100, F, lots of Leica M digital and film stuff.

    Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
  • PhotobugPhotobug Posts: 5,751Member
    Like Golf, my 1.7TC also works great with my 70-200 2.8. Have never used it on the macro lens.

    I have done some cropping with the 70-200 + 1.7 TC and have no issues with sharpness.
    D750 & D7100 | 24-70 F2.8 G AF-S ED, 70-200 F2.8 AF VR, TC-14E III, TC-1.7EII, 35 F2 AF D, 50mm F1.8G, 105mm G AF-S VR | Backup & Wife's Gear: D5500 & Sony HX50V | 18-140 AF-S ED VR DX, 55-300 AF-S G VR DX |
    |SB-800, Amaran Halo LED Ring light | MB-D16 grip| Gitzo GT3541 + RRS BH-55LR, Gitzo GM2942 + Sirui L-10 | RRS gear | Lowepro, ThinkTank, & Hoodman gear | BosStrap | Vello Freewave Plus wireless Remote, Leica Lens Cleaning Cloth |
    Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
  • Vipmediastar_JZVipmediastar_JZ Posts: 1,708Member
    What I was asking or referring to in the second part was actually extension tubes. I couldn't remember what they were called.

    I may decide on the 1.4 or 1.7
    Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
  • IronheartIronheart Posts: 3,017Moderator
    Off topic but the kenko extension tubes are a great value for the $. They don't have any optics, just a spacer with aperture and other controls. Golf007 and I are also fond of the raynox-250 snap on for quick and dirty.
    Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
  • Golf007sdGolf007sd Posts: 2,840Moderator
    edited June 2014
    Golf007 and I are also fond of the raynox-250 snap on for quick and dirty.
    +1

    ARN_6968.jpg

    ARN_6969.jpg

    Sample of the output used on:

    Nikon 50mm 1.4G
    ARN_6971.jpg

    Nikon 85mm 1.8G
    ARN_6973.jpg
    Post edited by Golf007sd on
    D4 & D7000 | Nikon Holy Trinity Set + 105 2.8 Mico + 200 F2 VR II | 300 2.8G VR II, 10.5 Fish-eye, 24 & 50 1.4G, 35 & 85 1.8G, 18-200 3.5-5.6 VR I SB-400 & 700 | TC 1.4E III, 1.7 & 2.0E III, 1.7 | Sigma 35 & 50 1.4 DG HSM | RRS Ballhead & Tripods Gear | Gitzo Monopod | Lowepro Gear | HDR via Promote Control System |
    Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
  • Vipmediastar_JZVipmediastar_JZ Posts: 1,708Member
    Cool something new to look into.

    I decided on the 1.7tc and this past weekend it would have been great to photograph black squirrels with brown tails but it didn't arrive before my road trip. I will use it this week for more BIM's possibly little league game and will try again for some BIF
    Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
  • Vipmediastar_JZVipmediastar_JZ Posts: 1,708Member
    edited June 2014
    TC noob here.

    I understand that you loose light reaching the sensor with a TC and the image may be softer/degraded.

    My questions is: does the TC physically change the f/stop diaphgram or does the camera change the f/stop electronically because thats how much less light is now reaching the sensor?


    My lens 70-200 2.8 v2 at f4 is sharper for sure but with the TC 17 it changes the f/stop to f4.8.
    At F4.8 is the lens physically wide open at 2.8 or should I Stop down to lets say 6.7/7.1 to be equally as sharp as it would be at f4 and beyond

    Or if I change it to f8 is the lens diaphram physically at 4.8?

    I hope that I explained my question correctly and if I didn't I hope that you can read my mind.

    on a side note Having fine tuned the lens previously I noticed that the images were not sharp I checked the menu for finetuning and with the TC it was reset to 0 so I set it back to the fine tune setting that I had with just the lens and the images look beter. I just thought I would add that info here and once I have a chance I will run the lens with tc calibration with the Lensalign.
    Post edited by Vipmediastar_JZ on
    Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
  • proudgeekproudgeek Posts: 1,422Member
    I think I understand. Basically, the camera knows. Say you use a TC14 on a lens with a max aperture of 2.8. Shooting in aperture priority, the largest aperture you can see when you spin that front wheel is f/4. You can keep clicking the wheel, but it won't matter. Since most of this (in the case of G lenses) is done electronically anyway rather than physically, you should just operate normally. If you want to set the aperture to f/8, it's going to shoot at f/8 and will account for the TC, assuming you're using lenses that are compatible with the TC in question.
    Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
  • Vipmediastar_JZVipmediastar_JZ Posts: 1,708Member
    Alright let me rephrase:
    at 2.8 my 70-200 2.8 v2 is sharp but if I want a sharper image and more DOF I stop down to 4.8 (for this example) as a starting point. If I'm happy at that fstop I keep it.

    Mounting the TC it auto goes to 4.8. Is my lens physically stopped down to 4.8 exactly like without the TC with the same DOF and the same sharpness or is the lens producing the DOF/sharpness of 2.8 but displaying 4.8 because the camera accounts for the loss of light?
    Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
Sign In or Register to comment.