Nikon Teleconverter and Nikon 105mm micro lens

santoshraut

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 ?

WestEndFoto

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.

WestEndFoto

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_PM

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.

WestEndFoto

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.

PB_PM

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.

spraynpray

@santoshraut: What are you photographing? What lighting are you using?

DJBee49

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 Nikon's data sheet for the TC II series and the TC2.0 III says that AF will not function but I presume that this is out of date when using the later bodies because AF works fine with all of them!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_PM

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.

DJBee49

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_JZ

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.

PB_PM

Vipmediastar_JZ said:

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.

Vipmediastar_JZ

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.

NSXTypeR

Could you possibly stack extension tubes and a TC?

spraynpray

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.

DJBee49

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!

PB_PM

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.

HankB

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.

WestEndFoto

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.

DJBee49

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!

LatoshaStr

DJBee49 said:

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 jelqing 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.

I am a little confused now.. could an owner of the III confirm that it is compatible/non? That would be greatly appreciated!

DJBee49

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!

PB_PM

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

HankB

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.

DJBee49

"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_PM

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.