Nikon Teleconverter and Nikon 105mm micro lens

santoshrautsantoshraut Posts: 1Member
Hello,

I am beginner in photography. I need help in below doubts :

1) Which teleconverter (14EII, 14EIII, 17EII, 20EII or 20EIII) will be best / suitable for Nikon Micro 105mm Lens ?

2) If i connect Nikon Teleconverter 14e-iii (magnification is 1.4x), to my Nikon 105mm micro lens which having native magnification of 1x, then how much total / final magnification will i get ?
«1

Comments

  • WestEndFotoWestEndFoto Posts: 2,355Member
    You will get 1.4. I assume that you are talking about the reproduction ratio. This is one of the often overlooked benefits of a teleconverter.

    More magnification is a tradeoff against image quality. Only you can assess that tradeoff.

    I would go with the newest model.
  • WestEndFotoWestEndFoto Posts: 2,355Member
    But since you are a beginner, I would not buy the teleconverter until you are sufficiently experienced in the use of a macro lens.
  • PB_PMPB_PM Posts: 3,552Member
    The TC14E or TC14-E II (the 14E III is not compatible) are the only ones that will work with the 105mm VR macro, the others won't mount without damaging the rear element.

    I use the 14E with the 105 and it works well enough, since the lens is very sharp. Just be prepared for weaker AF. Not a big deal for macro which would be manually focused most of the time anyway.
    If I take a good photo it's not my camera's fault.
  • WestEndFotoWestEndFoto Posts: 2,355Member
    edited October 12
    The III is incompatible? I would not have thought that. That means you are looking on the used market for a II. Thanks for catching that.
    Post edited by WestEndFoto on
  • PB_PMPB_PM Posts: 3,552Member
    edited October 12
    Just double checked Nikon's site. The III will mount, but AF is not functional. Some stores I checked still list the II as avaliable new, BTW.
    Post edited by PB_PM on
    If I take a good photo it's not my camera's fault.
  • spraynprayspraynpray Posts: 5,351Moderator
    @santoshraut: What are you photographing? What lighting are you using?
    Always learning.
  • DJBee49DJBee49 Posts: 128Member
    PB_PM said- The TC14E or TC14-E II (the 14E III is not compatible) are the only ones that will work with the 105mm VR macro, the others won't mount without damaging the rear element.

    For the record, this is not correct, although I cannot speak for the TC1.4 III. All three of the TCs (1.4II, 1.7II and 2.0III) mount without conflict onto the AF-S Micro Nikkor 105mmm 2.8G ED (I presume that this is the lens in discussion). On the D500 and D810, they also allow full AF. Nikon's data sheet for the TC II series and the TC2.0 III says that AF will not function but I presume that this is out of date when using the later bodies because AF works fine with all of them!

    I have used the 105 f2.8 with 1.7 and 2.0 TCs in an 'emergency' at a concert where no other long lens was available and was not impressed with the result. It works well with the 1.4 though and helpfully gets you a little further away from nervous subjects while retaining good sharpness.
  • PB_PMPB_PM Posts: 3,552Member
    edited October 12
    The data sheet for the 105 macro predates F8 focus that the modern bodies support, since it is one of the early AF-S lenses (released in 2006) so that data being out of date seems likely.
    Post edited by PB_PM on
    If I take a good photo it's not my camera's fault.
  • DJBee49DJBee49 Posts: 128Member
    I am sure that is true but of course the data sheet clearly also says that each of the TCs is suitable for the 105 Micro (as Nikon insists on calling it!). Even the 2.0TC will not get to f8 as its maximum aperture though (this would be f5.6), so this should not be an impediment anyway.
    I will try the TCs and 105 on a couple of older bodies and see how they do in terms of AF but there is certainly not a physical problem in terms of fitting any of the TCs to the lens, even if the optical performance of the 1.7 and 2.0 leaves something to be desired!
  • Vipmediastar_JZVipmediastar_JZ Posts: 1,653Member
    edited October 12
    This is something new I learned. I thought extension tubes was the way to go but if you can use TC for this and have a telephoto lens and plan on using a TC this would be the better deal.
    Post edited by Vipmediastar_JZ on
  • PB_PMPB_PM Posts: 3,552Member

    This is something new I learned. I thought extension tubes was the way to go but if you can use TC for this and have a telephoto lens and plan on using a TC this would be the better deal.

    The TC won't turn a telephoto into a macro. Also unlike extension tubes you cannot stack TCs.
    If I take a good photo it's not my camera's fault.
  • Vipmediastar_JZVipmediastar_JZ Posts: 1,653Member
    I meant if you want to use a TC for macro with the 105 2.8 you can and if you want to use the same TC for your telephoto you can as well. So the best decision is to buy the TC. Unless you want to stack then get the extension tubes.
  • NSXTypeRNSXTypeR Posts: 1,796Member
    Could you possibly stack extension tubes and a TC?
    Nikon D7000/ Nikon D40/ Nikon FM2/ 18-135 AF-S/ 35mm 1.8 AF-S/ 105mm Macro AF-S/ 50mm 1.2 AI-S
  • spraynprayspraynpray Posts: 5,351Moderator
    I would think you would have to put the tubes on the body and the TC on the lens, but then I can't see why not. IQ may be badly affected, but otherwise, I'd guess yes.
    Always learning.
  • DJBee49DJBee49 Posts: 128Member
    edited October 15
    There is no reason that you cannot put extension tubes and a TC on this or any other compatible lens. Several times I have shot a 300mm f2.8 with an extension tube and a TC 1.4 or TC2.0. I believe that you can stack TCs but the IQ would be terrible I would imagine.

    I am not sure if there is a misunderstanding about the distinction between TCs and extension tubes but........ the TCs will increase the effective focal length of the lens whilst the extension tube will merely allow the lens to focus more closely.

    For instance, a 300mm lens with a 2.0TC attached will produce a lens with an effective focal length (and the accompanying angle of view) of a 600mm lens. Attaching an extension tube (or tubes) merely allows the combination to focus closer. Both the TC and the extension tube have a brightness hit but if using in camera metering, the meter will measure this for you. For example, with the 2.0 TC, that effectively doubles the focal length, you will need to increase the exposure by two stops.The further away the lens is from the sensor (which is what an extension tube, or bellows do), the lower the brightness of the image at the sensor.

    Apologies if everyone already knew all that!
    Post edited by DJBee49 on
  • PB_PMPB_PM Posts: 3,552Member
    DJBee49 said:

    I believe that you can stack TCs but the IQ would be terrible I would imagine.

    Yeah, you can stack them, but it's kind of crazy. Depending on the lens, or the TC's themselves, AF may not function.
    If I take a good photo it's not my camera's fault.
  • HankBHankB Posts: 28Member
    Here is the ultimate stacked TC experiment. https://petapixel.com/2015/02/05/stacking-five-2x-teleconverters-create-ridiculous-9600mm-lens/

    At the end of the article, note the comparison between the IQ from a stack of five converters at an effective 9600mm and the equivalent crop from a 300mm shot. The crop wins hands down.

    The above "experiment" is somewhat tongue in cheek. But in all seriousness, a SINGLE, high quality teleconverter under "ideal teleconverter conditions" is not likely to give noticeably better image quality than cropping, and will often give inferior IQ to cropping. Hardly worth putting up with all the disadvantages. Teleconverters were useful in the film days when cropping slides wasn't possible/practical.
  • WestEndFotoWestEndFoto Posts: 2,355Member
    HankB, I intend to experiment with my newly acquired D850, 400 2.8E and set of three Nikon teleconverters to explore this very issue. However, to your point, a 400 2.8 is ideal a situation as one can get for teleconverters.

    Until my MB-D18 and RRS L-Bracket arrives, that is the only way I can get my D850 onto a tripod to see what it can really do.
  • DJBee49DJBee49 Posts: 128Member
    edited October 20
    HankB
    I have a slightly different view of TCs- Nikons anyway. It very much depends on the lens I think and I agree that the zooms do not produce great results with TCs, although I have had some good results with the TC1.4 in particular on my 70-200 f2.8.

    A few years back, the problem was that many camera's AF was seriously compromised below f5.6 and inoperative at f8. That is no longer true with bodies such as the D800, D810 and D850 that are able to focus even at f8 max. apertures.

    I have had excellent results with the all three TCs on my 300mm f2.8, especially with the TC1.4 and have even had very good results from the 300mm f4 with the TC1.4. However, I was not impressed by the performance of the 500mm f4, even with the TC1.4 and as a consequence, sold it. I did not really get on well with that lens, even without TCs fitted.

    The other point that is worth considering, is that when you radically crop an image to get to the equivalent FOV that you would have had with a TC fitted, it is not just the 'sharpness' of the image that you are concerned with, it is the enlargement of the noise on the image as well. In other words, with the TC you are not magnifying the noise on the image, only the optical image itself. When you combine this with the reality that wildlife images are frequently shot in poor light, using high ISOs, this becomes very significant in my experience.

    All in my opinion of course but in the real world, I can use a 300mm f2.8 on a D500, with a TC1.4 and have a lens set up that has an equivalent 630mm FX focal length. This set up achieves a relatively affordable way to get to a 600mm lens producing very good IQ (if I get everything right) wildlife images. I cannot afford a 600mm prime lens and even if I could, would hardly be able to carry the thing around anyway. I am only little!
    Post edited by DJBee49 on
  • DJBee49DJBee49 Posts: 128Member
    edited October 20
    I am not surprised that you are a little confused!

    As far as I can gather, the TC1.4 III is compatible with the 105mm Micro but Nikon's compatibility chart is not clear. It says that the TC1.4 III IS compatible but puts a little '1' reference as an indicator that there is some limitation on this. There is then no reference as to what this means! I suspect that there may be some focussing limitation with some older lenses but am not sure. Their chart for this lens and all the TCs states that AF is not available. This, as has been said, is totally untrue, on the later bodies at least.

    My advice would be to get a TC1.4 II that is known to work, has identical optical performance to the TC1.4 III, according to all the reviews that I have read and is half the price. A no brainer I would have thought!
    Post edited by DJBee49 on
  • PB_PMPB_PM Posts: 3,552Member
    edited October 21
    Yes there is a note for the *1 which reads "AF not possible."

    From Nikon's site

    Compatible lenses:

    AF-S VR Micro-Nikkor 105mm f/2.8G IF ED*1
    AF-S NIKKOR 200mm f/2G ED VR II
    AF-S VR Nikkor 200mm f/2G IF-ED
    AF-S NIKKOR 300mm f/2.8G ED V II
    AF-S VR Nikkor 300mm f/2.8G IF-ED
    AF-S NIKKOR 400mm f/2.8E FL ED VR
    AF-S NIKKOR 400mm f/2.8G ED VR
    AF-S NIKKOR 500mm f/4G ED VR
    AF-S NIKKOR 600mm f/4G ED VR
    AF-S NIKKOR 70-200mm f/2.8G ED VR II
    AF-S VR Zoom-Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8G IF-ED
    AF-S NIKKOR 70-200mm f/4G ED VR
    AF-S NIKKOR 200-400mm f/4G ED VR II
    AF-S VR Zoom-Nikkor 200-400mm f/4G IF-ED
    AF-S NIKKOR 800mm f/5.6E FL ED VR*2
    AF-S NIKKOR 80-400mm f/4.5-5.6G ED VR*2

    *1: AF not possible
    *2: Can be used when attached to f/8-compatible camera body
    Post edited by PB_PM on
    If I take a good photo it's not my camera's fault.
  • HankBHankB Posts: 28Member
    edited October 21
    My experience with the 70-200mm f/2.8G ED VR II with the TC1.4 III on a D7200 is that it is not worth the trouble, expense, and loss of stops when compared with just cropping the image instead. And if you are tracking a moving subject, AF as well as your own tracking has got to be harder with the dimmer, narrower angle and probably slower shutter.

    I can't speak for other lens/TC combinations. Perhaps IQ holds up better with prime lenses and/or maybe stronger TC's don't degrade IQ quite as much as do their correspondingly heavier crops — I don't know. But regardless, the loss of stops — especially if you factor in an additional stop loss because you avoid using a lens wide open with a TC — has got to impact telephoto photography anyway.
    Post edited by HankB on
  • DJBee49DJBee49 Posts: 128Member
    "Yes there is a note for the *1 which reads "AF not possible."

    Ah, well found! It does not appear on the list when I view it for some reason. It might be worth mentioning again that Nikon say that none of the other TCs allow AF with this lens either and this is absolutely not correct, so who knows?

    I have also just tried the TCs with this lens on a D7100 and a D300 body and again, the AF works with all three TCs, albeit rather slowly, especially on the D300. I have not tried to follow a moving subject on the older bodies, so there might be a limitation there.

    I would still just get the TC1.4 if I were in Santoshraut's position.
  • PB_PMPB_PM Posts: 3,552Member
    edited October 21
    DJBee49 said:

    "Yes there is a note for the *1 which reads "AF not possible."

    Ah, well found! It does not appear on the list when I view it for some reason. It might be worth mentioning again that Nikon say that none of the other TCs allow AF with this lens either and this is absolutely not correct, so who knows?

    They do, where? According to Nikon's site, only the following lenses are not compatible with the TC14E and TC14EII, AF function is not mentioned: (Not listed, are 'E' lenses which are known to not work)
    Compatible with AF-S and AF-I NIKKOR lenses except AF-S 17-35mm f/2.8D IF-ED, 24-85mm f/3.5-4.5G IF-ED, VR 24-120mm f/3.5-5.6G IF-ED, 28-70mm f/2.8D IF-ED and DX NIKKOR lenses.

    Of course we know the list is longer than that, so it must be somewhat out of date.

    Edit: It does say no AF with TCs in the English manual, but I cannot find any reference to this in the online database. Could be a printing error, that they never bothered to correct. One things for sure, at 1:2 and 1:1 AF basically doesn't work. The motor might spin, but focus rarely works.
    Post edited by PB_PM on
    If I take a good photo it's not my camera's fault.
  • DJBee49DJBee49 Posts: 128Member
    PB-PM.

    This is getting confusing! There seems to be different and incomplete information on this subject from Nikon. Here is the information on the European Nikon website about the TC1.4 III

    Compatible lenses: the AF-S Teleconverter TC-14E III is compatible with a wide range of Nikon’s AF-S NIKKOR lenses, including: AF-S VR Micro-NIKKOR 105mm f/2.8G IF ED¹, AF-S NIKKOR 200mm f/2G ED VRII, AF-S VR NIKKOR 200mm f/2G IF-ED, AF-S NIKKOR 300mm f/2.8G ED VR II, AF-S VR NIKKOR 300mm f/2.8G IF-ED, AF-S NIKKOR 400mm f/2.8E FL ED VR, AF-S NIKKOR 400mm f/2.8G ED VR, AF-S NIKKOR 500mm f/4G ED VR, AF-S NIKKOR 600mm f/4G ED VR, AF-S NIKKOR 70–200mm f/2.8G ED VR II, AF-S VR Zoom-NIKKOR 70–200mm f/2.8G IF-ED, AF-S NIKKOR 70–200mm f/4G ED VR, AF-S NIKKOR 200–400mm f/4G ED VR II, AF-S VR Zoom-NIKKOR 200–400mm f/4G IF-ED, AF-S NIKKOR 800mm f/5.6E FL ED VR², and the AF-S NIKKOR 80–400mm f/4.5–5.6G ED VR².

    Note the little *1 after the 105mm f2.8 entry. There is no reference on the page as to what this refers to- at least I cannot see it. However, you have stated that you did find it and that it refers to an inability to AF, so I am a little puzzled by your comment above.

    As I have said before, my manual (printed) for the TC1.4II, TC1.7II and TC2.0III clearly states that the TCs are compatible with the 105mm f2.8 but not with regard to AF, " AF cannot be used" (TC1.4II) and "Autofocus cannot be used with the AF_S Teleconverter TC-17 II and TC-20 II." Exactly the same is stated in the TC 2.0 III manual.

    Whilst I have only used the 105+TC1.4 for close-up work and not the other two, I have not found Nikon's information to be fully correct on the bodies I currently use (D810 and D500). A more accurate statement from Nikon might be that AF does not operate at very close distances with the 1.7 and 2.0. AF seems rather poor on this lens anyway at very close distances, even without the TC attached and is certainly not brilliant with the TC1.4.

    As always with macro work (as you indicated), focus is much better achieved manually anyway. I have found all three TCs to AF satisfactorily with this lens at non-macro distances but the IQ with the 1.7 and 2.0 is not brilliant in my limited experience.

    You are quite correct though in stating that the TC 1.7 and 2.0 do not allow the AF to work at true macro distances. I had not tried this before and this is certainly not properly functional. This no doubt explains Nikon's assertion that the AF does not function with the TCs but it does work at non-macro distances, for me anyway.

    In the end all the printed (mis?)information is secondary to what actually happens in practice, so I shall continue to occasionally use the TC 1.4 II that I own, with the 105 f2.8 at macro distances, mostly using manual focus, and were I to be pushed again, I would use any of them at non-macro distances, confident that the AF would work, even if the IQ on the 1.7 and 2.0 would not be impressive!
Sign In or Register to comment.