jerryc41 Loc: Catskill Mts of NY

I use a less expensive Kenko 1.4. Works fine.

Steve Perry Loc: Sylvania, Ohio

Wasn't me - the Nikon TC won't work and 3rd party TCs may result in sketchy AF.

jeryh Loc: Oxfordshire UK

What ever you get, it is better if you stay with the F1.4 converter!

markinvictoria Loc: Victoria TX

I was wondering the same...guess it's all relative. Compare it to my D50 of several years back...it probably is.

trinhqthuan Loc: gaithersburg

To use tele converter on Nikon, one must know most modern Nikon cameras support AF at a minimum f/8.
If your lens max f stop is f/5.6, you can ONLY use tele 1.4X (5.6x 1.4 = 7.84). 1.7x, 2x will not allow your camera to AF.
If your lens max f is 4 (why Nikon makes constant f/4 for advance lenses) you can use tele 2x.
So the 18-300mm, the new DX version has f/4.5 to 6.3. Cannot use with any tele converter,

RRS Loc: Not sure

Before I'd buy an 800mm f/5.6 prime I'd buy a 600mm f/4.0 and a 1.4 extender and I speak from experience. I use a 2X at times and the 1.4 most of the time on the 600mm f/4.0 and use a tripod or bean bag when shooting from a vehicle.

amfoto1 Loc: San Jose, Calif. USA

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.

dyximan

Thank you

dyximan

dyximan

DaveO Loc: Northeast CT

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!

dyximan

If you would open your eyes and get off your condescending horse you would see that I did Specify G2, And I will lower myself to your stsndsrd And make assumptions as you do. I walk on average 4.5 miles A-day and on any given weekend day walk as much as 10 miles or more. And unlike you I get out of my car, and mind And try to limit my assumptions , And do my best to keep an open mind and a closed mouth Or in this case text, And do my best to keep my snarky comments to myself, Send you have no idea what I shoot why I shoot or where I shoot how would you know how close I need to get or how close I can get before the wildlife I shoot leaves. Like I wish the snarky people like you on this site would do.

DaveO Loc: Northeast CT

To whom are you addressing your comment??

amfoto1 Loc: San Jose, Calif. USA

Not many wolves around here... How about a coyote (135mm lens)?



However, gotta admit, sometimes I do use my car as a "blind", of sorts (300mm lens)...







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

DaveO Loc: Northeast CT

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.