Kmgw9v Loc: Miami, Florida

Need some reach on the 70-200 2.8 for Grandkids' soccer games. I am undecided between the TC 14, the TC 17, or the TC 20. I have read the reviews, but am looking for firsthand experienced opinions.

CHG_CANON Loc: the Windy City

I've used the TC 14 with the older Nikon 70-200 f/2.8. My assessment is you cannot tell from the image a TC has been used.

SteveR Loc: Michigan

I'm thinking of doing the same. Also, using it on the 24-70mm will make it 34-98.

Apaflo Loc: Anchorage, Alaska

I've used all three on a 70-200mm f/2.8 VRII. I would assume the same results would be true for the initial VR version, and while I've used them with FX bodies they should only be even better of a DX body.

Any good 1.4x TC will be fantastic. The 70-200mm is so sharp that adding a 1.4x TC just doesn't change the quality.

The 1.7 TC for whatever reason seems to have the least quality of the three, but that might be more of a difference in expectations than reality. You can notice that it isn't as sharp, but it is sharp enough.

A 2x TC (true for Kenko PRO 300 or Nikkor TC20 II and III models) will knock your socks off, just because you won't believe you've got a TC on and it is still that good.

If you want to boggle your mind... Just on a lark one day I put both the 1.4x and 2x TC's on a D3S. I was not expecting good results, and just wanted to see how bad it was. Hence I didn't make a lot of effort at fully taking advantage of it.

This is cropped to 100%, using both TC's. Judge for yourself!

joer Loc: Colorado/Illinois

I routinely use the TC 14E II with the 300 f/2.8 VR II. Very happy with it.

Tried to TC20E II and returned. No experience with the 1.7.

Gene51 Loc: Yonkers, NY, now in LSD (LowerSlowerDelaware)

I think it works like this in terms of sharpness reduction:

1.4 = 5%
1.7 = 17%
2.0 = 26%

https://photographylife.com/image-degradation-with-nikon-teleconverters

I have no issues with the 1.4 II on a 70-200 F2.8 VR, not sure how it would work on a VRII or how the others work.

DaveHam Loc: Reading UK

I've used all three Nikon TC's. The TC1.7 - don't even consider it as it is so soft.

The new 1.4 'mark 3' is superb, the 'mark 2' is still pretty good. The 2.0 'mark 3' is the best 2.0 on the market but you will loose 2 stops and even with the 2.8 lens it has an occasional tendency to seek when using autofocus unless the light is very good. AF can also be easily confused by a contrasty background, such as a hedge in strong light.

You will loose about 5% sharpness with the 1.4 which you can reduce if you are able to AF fine tune your camera body for the lens. With the TC 2.0 lll you will loose at least 15% sharpness - again AF fine tune can reduce this but you will generally always have lower image quality with this TC.

Against the non Nikon manufacturers the Nikon TC's are distinctly crisper, especially the 'mark 3' versions.

Gene51 Loc: Yonkers, NY, now in LSD (LowerSlowerDelaware)

Dave, I don't think you can fine tune the softness caused by a TC - you are magnifying the center of the image, and any faults will be similarly magnified. However, if the lens is not optimally set up for a specific camera, adding a TC will only make things worse. So in a sense, you can dial away some image quality loss - but the 5%, 17% and 25% average sharpness loss are pretty realistic, with some super sharp lenses just looking better than other less sharp alternatives when used with a TC. By super sharp I am thinking Nikon's 200mm F2, 300mm F2.8, 400mm F2.8.

This is a great article on the differences between the Nikon TCs - with imatest data:

http://photographylife.com/nikon-tc-14e-iii-vs-tc-14e-ii-performance-comparison

http://photographylife.com/reviews/nikon-tc-20e-iii

And it is always good to check a specific TC with a specific lens - some lenses mate up better than others.

DaveHam Loc: Reading UK

I agree that you can't adjust out the effect of the TC magnification; I phrased the post poorly. The AF fine tune with the TC attached does produce a different result when compared to without the TC which I believe is the result of dealing with the manufacturing variations that exist between lens and tc.

With the 600 F4 / TC2 lll for example the difference in sharpness between not fine tuning the lens/TC combination and fine tuning is fairly clear, probably as much as 5%. When asked Nikon indicated that the differences were due to the permitted variances with manufacture and that it is wise to check each lens with or without TC, particularly on high pixel count sensor bodies. And the greater the lens size the greater the effect of the variance.

I can't for example get an acceptable image with the 600 F4 / TC2 lll on any of our D800's and yet it works well with the D4, D3X and D3S (with varying degrees of benefit). It has been suggested that there is an optimum sensor pixel density for each teleconverter size; though what this may be I don't know.

Of course the solution is for Nikon to produce a 1200mm F4 for under £1000 weighing in at under 2 kilos..... and even then we would want more reach ...

Gene51 Loc: Yonkers, NY, now in LSD (LowerSlowerDelaware)

I think Sigma will beat Nikon to the punch on that one. :)

jerryc41 Loc: Catskill Mts of NY

Have you considered Kenko converters?

Db7423 Loc: Pittsburgh, PA

I use a Nikon 1.7 teleconverter with a 70-200 VRII with great results. Might have a good matchup of camera (D610), teleconverter and lens? I have a D7200 on order and am anxious to see how the 1.7 and 70-200 do on it. Comparing results with the Tamron and Sigma 150-600 lenses my 70-200 with the teleconverter is doing well but obviously not what you would expect form a comparable focal length prime lens. ;)

mborn Loc: Massachusetts

I use the 1.4, 1.7 and 2x VIII with my 70-200

common merganser with the 2x converter

gvarner Loc: Central Oregon Coast

I don't have a Nikon converter but my experience with my 2x wouldn't make a converter a good considate for a dynamic subject like soccer action. Slow auto focus at 200mm, or it just doesn't reach focus at all. Have to go manual at the long end. Also hope for a bright day in order to get faster shutter speeds without jacking up the ISO. I'd think a few well cropped shots at 200 would give some pretty good results and being REALLY GOOD at anticipating where the action is going and looking for that stop action spot would also be a plus.

joer Loc: Colorado/Illinois

I had the Kenko and paired it up with the Sigma 300mm f/2.8.

Thought it was pretty good until I tried the sigma version.