Tele converters for nikon (Page 3): I have the 1.4 converter and am using it with the Nikkor 200-500 5.6 which turns into an F8 lens, it works really well as long as there is enough...

vandy

dyximan wrote:

I have a nikon D 500 and the nikon 18 to 300 lens ... (show quote)

I have the 1.4 converter and am using it with the Nikkor 200-500 5.6 which turns into an F8 lens, it works really well as long as there is enough light but when it gets a little dim it struggles to focus. There are always trade offs when using a teleconverter but when you can get away with it they work pretty good. The alternative for me is to buy a $16,000 prime lens which I just can not justify at this time, maybe you can and if so go for it.

RRS Loc: Not sure

DaveO wrote:

Here's a radical thought. Next time you see a distant wolf out in Lamar, get out of your car and walk!

I'll take a not so perfect shot in lieu of none at all and have no qualms about using manual focus.

BTW, I'll be testing a 1.4, 1.7 and 2X very soon!

Great idea, Dave, until Ranger Rick tells you to get back in your car. I wish Canon made a 1.7. As for a radical thought, some things are just too far to photograph anyway. If it's a grizzly bear I'd prefer just to stay in the car.

DaveO Loc: Northeast CT

RRS wrote:

Great idea, Dave, until Ranger Rick tells you to get back in your car. I wish Canon made a 1.7. As for a radical thought, some things are just too far to photograph anyway. If it's a grizzly bear I'd prefer just to stay in the car.

LOL! Ranger Rick is busy this year with all of the bear activity, but I'm sure you're aware!

RRS Loc: Not sure

amfoto1 wrote:

Here's a radical thought...

Get out of your car and get closer to your subjects, rather than using a teleconverter on an already extremely long telephoto lens. Your images will be FAR better!

If you already have a 150-600mm, it makes no sense to put a teleconverter on an 18-300mm.... plus that type of zoom is a very poor candidate to use with any TC.

A Tamron 150-600mm f/5-f/6.3 with a 1.4X on it "becomes" an effective 210-840mm f/7.1-f/9. The same lens with a 2X would "become" an absurd 300-1200mm f/10-f/14.

At best, due to the light lost with the teleconverters installed autofocus will struggle to work. Your viewfinder will also be dimmer, making manual focusing more difficult, too. In addition, using a teleconverter and shooting subjects from farther away means shooting through more atmosphere, which can degrade images quite noticeably too. The longer effective focal length of lens + TC will also be more difficult to hold steady for a sharp shot, even with the help of image stabilization.

Finally, you'll find that teleconverters magnify any short-comings of the lens they're used upon. Inevitably, there is some loss of image quality. How much depends upon the specific lens and teleconverter. But, in general teleconverters work far better with primes than they do with most zooms.

See for yourself:

https://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=1079&Camera=979&Sample=0&FLI=6&API=1&LensComp=1220&CameraComp=1210&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=1&APIComp=0

Above compares Tamron 150-600mm G2 (you didn't specify, but that's the better of the two Tamron versions) against a Nikkor 600mm f/4 VR "FL" prime, both fitted with a 1.4X. If you wish, you can use the little pull down menus to see test shots done using 2X on both lenses too. It's also possible to change the aperture on both, to see how IQ improves when stopped down. Note: the tests of the Tamron lens were done with a 50MP Canon 5Ds R, while the Nikkor test shots were done with 46MP D850. Not the same camera, but both full frame models with similar resolution. Your APS-C/DX camera has fairly similar pixel density on it's smaller sensor, so you can have reasonable confidence in the "center" and "midframe" examples, but the DX camera would crop off the "corner" examples shown in those test shots. For more info about the standardized optical test target used, see: https://www.the-digital-picture.com/Help/ISO-12233.aspx

Personally I use Canon gear, including 1.4X and 2X on select lenses. I've been almost exclusively using them on primes. Most often 1.4X on 300mm f/4, 300mm f/2.8 and 500mm f/4. I less frequently use the 2X on 300mm f/2.8 and 500mm f/4. I have to admit, though, that some recent experiments using 1.4X on Canon 100-400mm "II" zoom have impressed me. It's one of the relatively rare exceptions I've found, where a zoom works quite well with a TC.

Here's a radical thought... br br Get out of your... (show quote)

Well as for getting out of my car, as soon as I do too many of the subjects that I'm trying to photograph just fly off. Most of the birds that I shoot are small and I'm not shooting through a lot of atmosphere. When ever I do see ducks or shore birds I do leave the car "blind" and use cover to get closer and many times come back with some ticks for all my effort.

RRS Loc: Not sure

DaveO wrote:

LOL! Ranger Rick is busy this year with all of the bear activity, but I'm sure you're aware!

Ranger Rick retired according to "Yellowstone Reports.com", really! Latest report in today from friends, Raspberry, Snow, and a big boar are down south in the usual places. Tell Kathy that Lamar is showing a lot of promise for wolves. Looking forward to seeing what kind of results you get with your three TC's. The subjects may be so close that you will have to remover the TC.

DaveO Loc: Northeast CT

RRS wrote:

Ranger Rick retired according to "Yellowstone Reports.com", really! Latest report in today from friends, Raspberry, Snow, and a big boar are down south in the usual places. Tell Kathy that Lamar is showing a lot of promise for wolves. Looking forward to seeing what kind of results you get with your three TC's. The subjects may be so close that you will have to remover the TC.

We were shooting them near Sedge Bay with a ranger and closer than we wanted a couple years ago. We were on a mound and we were herded off when they started moving too much. Kathy gives me daily reports on the Junction Butte pack. Slough Creek has been pretty good. Barronette Peak is usually pretty good for the mountain goats and we'll be going through there a few times on the way to Silver Gate for a milkshake at Stop The Car Trading Post.

dyximan

DaveO wrote:

To whom are you addressing your comment??

Amfoto1

dyximan

amfoto1 wrote:

Holy cow! Somebody fell out of the wrong side of the bed this morning! Jeez! Lighten up! Can't you take a little kidding?

No I got on the right side get tired of a snarky remarks from people choose to post their opinion rather than answer the questions

dyximan

DaveO wrote:

Very nice! BTW, my comment was directed to RRS with whom I have shot long distance in areas where getting closer is not practical and not meant to denigrate anyone. He will appreciate my comment.

My Apologies but sometimes I get tired of the snarky remarks I find it rather difficult to speak up on hawks and tske good closeout photos especially in flight even my 18 to 300, And the 150 t0 600 Sometimes that's why I was asking about a teleconveter

DaveO Loc: Northeast CT

dyximan wrote:

My Apologies but sometimes I get tired of the snarky remarks I find it rather difficult to speak up on hawks and tske good closeout photos especially in flight even my 18 to 300, And the 150 t0 600 Sometimes that's why I was asking about a teleconveter

Sometimes I am very sarcastic and it's a fine line between snarky and sarcastic.

What's especially tough online is that we do not have the benefit of using facial expressions, voice intonations...general body language. Also, many of us are not experts in written communication skills and that does not help! I should have stayed in school!

RRS Loc: Not sure

dyximan wrote:

My Apologies but sometimes I get tired of the snarky remarks I find it rather difficult to speak up on hawks and tske good closeout photos especially in flight even my 18 to 300, And the 150 t0 600 Sometimes that's why I was asking about a teleconveter

Just a question, when using your 18-300 or the 150-600, how are you using your lens? I ask because with a prime 600mm with a 1.4 extender when jumping out of the car to catch a hawk in flight it's like looking through a straw to find the bird. I have tried using a 70-200 with a 2X and start out at 70 which is 140, finding the bird and then zooming to 200 which shows me 400. This has worked so well that I will soon buy the Canon 100-400 for grab shots from the car for BIF. Have fun and good luck with your endeavors.

joer Loc: Colorado/Illinois

dyximan wrote:

I have a nikon D 500 and the nikon 18 to 300 lens ... (show quote)

In my opinion which is shared by some, all things considered cropping is a better alternative, and costs nothing.

dyximan

DaveO wrote:

Sometimes I am very sarcastic and it's a fine line between snarky and sarcastic.

What's especially tough online is that we do not have the benefit of using facial expressions, voice intonations...general body language. Also, many of us are not experts in written communication skills and that does not help! I should have stayed in school!

What's school? My apologies no excuses when I'm in those moods I should just keep my mouth shut

billnikon Loc: Pennsylvania/Ohio/Florida/Maui/Oregon/Vermont

dyximan wrote:

What's school? My apologies no excuses when I'm in those moods I should just keep my mouth shut

No need to apologize, we have ALL gone there, some more times than others.