Teleconverter or Zoom Lens: Hello all, I am debating whether to purchase a Nikkor AF-S Teleconverter 20Elll for my 70-200mm F/2.8. Or purchase the 80-400mm Zoom F/4.5-5.6 D ED AF VR.

Ugly Hedgehog - Photography Forum

Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register ☰

Teleconverter or Zoom Lens

Page 1 of 3 next> last>>

Mar 1, 2013 15:20:31 #

jmunny Loc: Buena Park, CA

Hello all, I am debating whether to purchase a Nikkor AF-S Teleconverter 20Elll for my 70-200mm F/2.8. Or purchase the 80-400mm Zoom F/4.5-5.6 D ED AF VR.

Any thoughts aside from the huge price difference??

Thanks for any advice.

Mar 1, 2013 15:44:37 #

Bret Loc: Dayton Ohio

I think you'll be better off with the new lens. Think of it like this....take the price of the AF-S tc....and subtract that from the price of the 80-400 lens.

Mar 1, 2013 16:05:43 #

bull drink water Loc: pontiac mi.

if you have a well stocked camera store withen 2 hrs of you,then go and try it out. you can get af a bigger apature, and more reach.getting advice hhere is nice,but don't cheat yourself of trying things on a whim.

Mar 1, 2013 16:09:02 #

Pepper Loc: Planet Earth Country USA

The lens will out perform the lens/teleconverter combination.

Mar 1, 2013 16:54:41 #

MT Shooter Loc: Montana

Get the converter. Nikons 80-400mm is WAY overdue for an update and is currently Nikons slowest focusing lens.

Mar 1, 2013 17:01:22 #

Pepper Loc: Planet Earth Country USA

MT Shooter wrote:

Get the converter. Nikons 80-400mm is WAY overdue for an update and is currently Nikons slowest focusing lens.

I have that lens and to show you how much I respect your opinion I just went out to B&H and ordered the 1.4 converter. I am looking forward to giving this a go, I'll let you know.

PS: I have the Sigma 2X (not so impressed) hoping the 1.4 from Nikon will be considerably better.

Mar 1, 2013 17:08:01 #

MT Shooter Loc: Montana

Pepper wrote:

MT Shooter wrote:

Get the converter. Nikons 80-400mm is WAY overdue for an update and is currently Nikons slowest focusing lens.

I use the Sigma 1.4X on my 70-200mm F2.8 regularly with wonderful results. I don't like the 2X as it steals just too much light most of the time.

Mar 1, 2013 17:25:45 #

Pepper Loc: Planet Earth Country USA

MT Shooter wrote:

quote=Pepper quote=MT Shooter Get the converter.... (show quote)

Yepper that's the problem. I wonder if the Nikon 2X would be as problematic?

Mar 1, 2013 19:01:59 #

jmunny Loc: Buena Park, CA

Thank you all for your valuable suggestions......................I think I'll go with the converter for now.........It should be interesting to see if Nikon puts new life into it's 80-400, perhaps even something newer.

Mar 2, 2013 05:49:16 #

DaveHam Loc: Reading UK

What sort of photography do you do? What camera body would you use?

The fast lens will loose minimum two stops with the TC added and depending on the autofocus capability of the camera focus speed and capability may be affected particularly in low light when fast aperture may be needed.

The addition of a teleconverter also softens the image. Nikon lent us a 20Elll to try for a couple of weeks. On lenses such as the 300mm f2.8 and the 600mm f4 it was very good BUT when comparing like for like images with/without the teleconverter there was a clear loss of definition using the TC.

Testing on the 70-200 F2.8 on a D4 and a D800 we found autofocus worked in good light well beyond the advertised F8 limit. In low light autofocus was slow and erratic. This was also the worst lens of the five tested for loosing definition with the teleconverter attached. On the D3S autofocus was no where near as good in low light.

Hope this helps.

Mar 2, 2013 07:05:22 #

BboH Loc: s of 2/21, Ellicott City, MD

I've used Kenko's 2x with the D3 and the 80-400. Up to about 3:30 - 4:00 in the afternoon auto focus worked OK, not as fast at the D3 can, but it was OK. As the afternoon got darker, could only manual focus - auto focus lost.

Mar 2, 2013 07:22:23 #

Julian Loc: Sarasota, FL

In a pinch, teleconverters might have a useful purpose but my experience with both the 1.4E and the 2.0E on the 70-200mm VR Nikon left a lot to be desired.

Mar 2, 2013 07:54:58 #

DaveHam Loc: Reading UK

The original teleconverters from Nikon were not particularly good, with poor light and auto focus performance and a lack of sharpness. The 2.0 lll in test was significantly better, according to Nikon thanks to some new lens technology. While not rendering a fully sharp image the quality was a lot better with both static and moving subjects. Also autofocus seemed to be better when compared to the old version on the same body.

However there is no comparison to the results achieved using a good prime lens; the difficulty here is cost!

Mar 2, 2013 08:04:21 #

Db7423 Loc: Pittsburgh, PA

I use Nikon's 1.7 on my Nikon 70-200 and really like it. The new 2X is reported to be very good. The previous 2X was not as good which is why I went with the 1.7. If you decide to go with the 2X would like to hear how it works for you. Good luck with whatever you decide.

Mar 2, 2013 08:14:02 #

MT Shooter Loc: Montana

DaveHam wrote:

Testing on the 70-200 F2.8 on a D4 and a D800 we found autofocus worked in good light well beyond the advertised F8 limit.

A 2X converter will take the F2.8 max aperture to F5.6. How did you test at F8 max aperture? Did you use 2 teleconverters stacked? This statement makes no sense.

Page 1 of 3 next> last>>

If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.

Main Photography Discussion

Home | Latest Digest | Back to Top | All Sections

UglyHedgehog.com - Forum