Would a tele converter work on a Nikon 28 to 300 lens? What is a good one
kcj wrote:
Would a tele converter work on a Nikon 28 to 300 lens? What is a good one
This lens: no.
And if you listen to anyone trying to get you to try a 3rd party version, they're just purposefully wasting your money. If you want a longer lens, get a longer lens. This zoom is not one to be extended.
billnikon
Loc: Pennsylvania/Ohio/Florida/Maui/Oregon/Vermont
kcj wrote:
Would a tele converter work on a Nikon 28 to 300 lens? What is a good one
Sadly, it will not work on that lens, and even if it did work, you would not like the result.
Thanks for the info I guess I save for a longer lens . It doesn’t have to be Nikon but has to be full frame
billnikon
Loc: Pennsylvania/Ohio/Florida/Maui/Oregon/Vermont
kcj wrote:
Thanks for the info I guess I save for a longer lens . It doesn’t have to be Nikon but has to be full frame
Look for a used Nikon 200-500 mm lens. Great lens.
kcj wrote:
Would a tele converter work on a Nikon 28 to 300 lens? What is a good one
I have a Nikon 1.4 teleconverter to use with my 200-500 Nikon lens. I regret spending big bucks for it. It significantly degrades the quality of photos. I agree with those who have advised to buy a longer lens if you can afford it. The 200 - 500 is a great lens.
old poet wrote:
I have a Nikon 1.4 teleconverter to use with my 200-500 Nikon lens. I regret spending big bucks for it. It significantly degrades the quality of photos. I agree with those who have advised to buy a longer lens if you can afford it. The 200 - 500 is a great lens.
Which Nikon 1.4 teleconverter, because I have the AF-S TELECONVERTER TC-14E III and it works great with my Nikon 200-500. Not sure about the AF-S TELECONVERTER TC-14E II.
cedymock wrote:
Which Nikon 1.4 teleconverter, because I have the AF-S TELECONVERTER TC-14E III and it works great with my Nikon 200-500. Not sure about the AF-S TELECONVERTER TC-14E II.
I also have the AF-S TC-24 EIII. Maybe I should not be too quick to judge. I've only used it a few times as I have not needed the extra reach. I would be interested in the experience of others. You give me hope that I've not wasted money.
old poet wrote:
I also have the AF-S TC-24 EIII. Maybe I should not be too quick to judge. I've only used it a few times as I have not needed the extra reach. I would be interested in the experience of others. You give me hope that I've not wasted money.
I tried it and found you could still get an acceptable image but it really affected the focus speed and accuracy. I found it was better just to crop in post.
kcj wrote:
Thanks for the info I guess I save for a longer lens . It doesn’t have to be Nikon but has to be full frame
Look for a 300-800f5.6 Sigma. It will work with a teleconverter also but you lose auto focus. I love mine. I use a teleconverter on my 300f2.8 and my 70-200 f2.8 on my D-500
old poet wrote:
I also have the AF-S TC-24 EIII. Maybe I should not be too quick to judge. I've only used it a few times as I have not needed the extra reach. I would be interested in the experience of others. You give me hope that I've not wasted money.
Manuel focus or mirror less the teleconverter works well. My d500 will supposedly auto focus at f8. It does but not very well for fast moving objects.
kcj I have an AF 300mm f/4 IF ED Nikkor (1987-2000) Nikon Lens Number: 1946NAS
Which works exceptionally well with a rather cost effective Kenko 1.4 Teleplus PRO 300 DGX Teleconverter
This yields an effective 420mm focal length.
btw, the acuity of this prime is well above what your AF-S 28-300mm f/3.5-5.6G ED can achieve at 300mm... Until you actually compare the 28-300mm Super Zoom to a Prime you have no idea how well primes preform.
Yes your 28-300mm is a Swiss Army Knife, is there anyway you could get closer with the 28-300mm?
Best advice? In your search for focal length please put credence in those who actually post validation imagery to collaborate their claims. Hope this makes sense.
While we're not allowed to sell on the main forum you might want to review the specs I posted several weeks ago for my AF 300mm f/4 IF ED Nikkor.
https://www.uglyhedgehog.com/t-757842-1.htmlThis was Nikon's top AF f/4 300mm prime for 13 years *1987-2000! And for very good reason.
It was replaced by the AF-S version, although neither have VR. Both require a monopod for field sports and hand-holding isn't a viable option (they weigh twice as much as your 28-300mm). Note: There is a PF version of the 300mm which weighs the same as your 28-300mm although it is sadly rather expensive.
Oh, if a "Prime" scares you... I'll sell you my AF-S 200-500mm f/5.6E ED VR at a competitive price. lol
I'll be listing the 200-500mm soon here on UHH since recent health issues now limit me to studio only. Location assignments are no longer an option.
Hope this helps kcj... Wishing you much success on your photographic journey.
Also much Joy & Happiness over this Holiday Season.
White Pine Taken with the AF 300mm f/4 IF ED on a Nikon D810 @ 1/2 sec; f/11; ISO:80; using a Kenko 1.4 Teleplus PRO 300 DGX Teleconverter (420mm focal length) Please Download and check acuity
(
Download)
If you want to reply, then
register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.