Z camera with teleconverters.

PistnbrokePistnbroke Posts: 2,190Member
We all know that some DSLRs with teleconverters and certain lenses hunt to the point of being unusable.
Rockwell (spit vomit) found that he could put two teleconverters 1.4 and 2 on a mirrorless Canon (vomit vomit) and still get great autofocus.
So if you have an FTZ/1.4/long lens can you give an opinion on how it compares.

PS |I intend to use my Tamron 100-400 with the FTZ (yes it works) but the 1.4 teleconverter for it gives rubbish AF on a D850 so an improvement makes a Z more viable.

Comments

  • wcubewcube Posts: 2Member
    edited November 15
    I have tried my Z6ii with a 1.7x on my 300mm F2.8 VR. I found very little difference in focusing speed or accuracy compared with my D500.

    Post edited by wcube on
  • PistnbrokePistnbroke Posts: 2,190Member
    Thanks W and welcome. Lets hope someone out there who had poor performance and can see an improvement or not.
  • photobunnyphotobunny Posts: 274Member
    edited November 16
    I did try a D500 quite recently to see if it was a good complement to the Z6. What I didn't like with the 1.4X converter was that I could only really use some points in the centre instead of the points right out to the corner.

    And I would want to try a 2x converter with the D500 if I had one, I suspect it can't focus a f/11.

    That Tamron will likely give you the same result on a Z camera, more AF points that all work instead of just some in the middle of the frame. The Z also gives you better confirmation, what you see is what it it taking.

    Downsides with the Z6 (not ii) is that I have to pre manual focus on f lenses if the subject moves from infinity to MFD without tracking it. In the viewfinder the subject was so close it looked like mist.

    Edit: Just for some extra info to add. On the D500 I tried you get 15 AF points in the middle of the frame at f/11. With a Z6/Z6ii you can use 273 AF points at f/8 and f/11 all equally well. With the Z7/Z7ii you'll get all 493 AF points.

    There is also a bright viewfinder waiting for you with the TC's. It is just as bright with a f/1.8 lens as it is with a f/8 lens.
    Post edited by photobunny on
  • PistnbrokePistnbroke Posts: 2,190Member
    Posting on a forum is a bit like marking exam papers...half the candidates dont read the question .....Z not D500
  • photobunnyphotobunny Posts: 274Member
    edited November 16

    Posting on a forum is a bit like marking exam papers...half the candidates dont read the question .....Z not D500

    Read what the D500 was compared with, you where given D500 as context to a Z. Since you missed it somehow, I have a Z and gave you a run down of where the DSLR fell apart compared to a Z.
    Post edited by photobunny on
  • PistnbrokePistnbroke Posts: 2,190Member
    Canon have bought out 2 f11 fixed lenses for use on mirrorless. Rockwell has been adding two teleconverters together to photograph the moon. Non of these would work with a DSLR which is why I am asking about experiments with the Z6 ii
  • photobunnyphotobunny Posts: 274Member

    Canon have bought out 2 f11 fixed lenses for use on mirrorless. Rockwell has been adding two teleconverters together to photograph the moon. Non of these would work with a DSLR which is why I am asking about experiments with the Z6 ii

    We don't have f/11 Z lenses to compare, what exactly are you looking for here. The Z6ii is a better Z6, the Z6 with a 500mm PF can use all AF points with the TC's which a DSLR can't, and it doesn't hunt, or darken the view finder. A Tamron 100-400 may or may not hunt, that isn't a Nikon prime.

    Are you specifically wanting to know if the mark ii can do daft things like f/22 AF? There isn't a way of testing that unless Nikon comes out with a slow lens.
  • PistnbrokePistnbroke Posts: 2,190Member
    edited November 18
    what exactly are you looking for here

    someone who has taken say a N 200-500 and put a couple of teleconverters on it who can let us know how the focus performs on a Z 6ii or 7ii.
    What I am trying to do by research is to avoid another D800 experience.. I bought one of those when they were new and £2500...I thought Nikon could only produce good cameras but this thing was a dog .Noisy, LPF, with horrible menus......never again. It looks like the Z6 and 7 have proved to be similar dogs.
    Post edited by Pistnbroke on
  • photobunnyphotobunny Posts: 274Member
    Well until I get a mark ii, which I might skip as the Z6 already does everything for wildlife. All I can say is that with a N 200-500 which I have tried on a Z6 which will be better on a Z6ii you can use the 1.4x and 2x converter with 90% of the viewfinder covered for AF and it isn't any faster or slower by a noticeable margin.

    When I get hold of one again I'll make a wee video. From what I gather with the mark ii Z6 you get the same accuracy but it is faster to lock, doesn't get confused in the centre, you can have exposure preview on, you can use more of the AI modes, and the lens AF doesn't make a clicky sound as if It is alway active.

    I plan on renting a Z6ii myself to see if it is really worth the upgrade, but I am looking at it for a grip. When I do I'll throw the 500pf on it and maybe get a 200-500 on it and see how they compare. But I can only compare with the Z6 and record that, I don't have your camera to use as a reference. Like I could rent a D500 again, but I didn't like that with a 1.4x I lost most of the AF points and it is £200 to rent it.

    Hopefully some more folks can chime in here, I canny be the only person with a Z and long lenses. Have you tried Tom Mason's YouTube, he has been using the Z6 ii and will likely soon have a proper review up.
Sign In or Register to comment.