Nikon Teleconverters
Mar 15, 2015 11:58:52 #
Just go for the 1.4 Nikon. You will not regret it. It is the best alternative to a longer lens
Mar 15, 2015 16:50:24 #
Thanks to all. There are few negatives comments about the 1.4; and the 5% sharpness reduction of the 1.4 compared to 17% of the 1.7 is significant. I am convinced that I won't regret investing in the Nikon TC 1.4.
Mar 15, 2015 19:45:44 #
Jwshelton
Loc: Denver,CO
I have the same lens and have used all three TCs with it. Answer depends on your pocketbook and how much reach you want. Have fun!
Mar 15, 2015 20:51:53 #
Have used 1.4X and 2x on Nikon 70mm-200mm on D4. Do not have the 1.7x. The 1.4x is very sharp. I have had sharpness issues with the 2x in moderate to low light.
Mar 15, 2015 21:00:44 #
DavidPine
Loc: Fredericksburg, TX
I made this image this morning with a 70-200 and a TC20-EIII.
Kmgw9v wrote:
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.
Mar 15, 2015 21:25:48 #
Mar 15, 2015 23:09:59 #
Kmgw9v wrote:
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.
I have, and used, the 14 and 20 with the 70-200 f2.8. I would get the 20 before the 14 in your case due to the fact that you will have more noticeable reach than the 14. They are both good for you intended use.
The results will also depend on what body you are using it with. I have full frame, but if you are using cropped, then the 14 might work out for you.
I shoot natural history subjects, not sports, though many of the animals are moving as well.
Mar 15, 2015 23:22:36 #
Bozsik wrote:
I have, and used, the 14 and 20 with the 70-200 f2.8. I would get the 20 before the 14 in your case due to the fact that you will have more noticeable reach than the 14. They are both good for you intended use.
The results will also depend on what body you are using it with. I have full frame, but if you are using cropped, then the 14 might work out for you.
I shoot natural history subjects, not sports, though many of the animals are moving as well.
The results will also depend on what body you are using it with. I have full frame, but if you are using cropped, then the 14 might work out for you.
I shoot natural history subjects, not sports, though many of the animals are moving as well.
I should have said--shoot full frame, primarily 800E.
Mar 16, 2015 00:48:51 #
Get the TC14 first. Even with a D800E you will be hard pressed to see any reduction in IQ. If you pixel peep you will notice a slight degradation with the TC17 and a bit more with the TC2III. I use all three on my 300mm f2.8 and my 70-200 VR. With the 300mm f2.8 I cannot notice a difference using the TC14 or the TC2III, and I lose a bit of IQ with the TC17. The TC2III was developed in conjunction with the 300mm f2.8 and designed specifically to marry with that lens.
Mar 16, 2015 10:24:16 #
Kmgw9v wrote:
Thanks to all. There are few negatives comments about the 1.4; and the 5% sharpness reduction of the 1.4 compared to 17% of the 1.7 is significant. I am convinced that I won't regret investing in the Nikon TC 1.4.
I use the Nikon TC1.4ell on a fine tuned (AF ) Nikon 300 f4...
Hard to beat this combo...
Also have used it on 70-200 2.8 with great results ! No regrets
Mar 16, 2015 10:57:54 #
Kmgw9v wrote:
I should have said--shoot full frame, primarily 800E.
With the soccer, I would get the 200 first. My reasoning is that sometimes the action is very far away, unlike the excellent image of the heron someone posted, they kids will also be moving around. It is good to have the extra reach.
The images posted from the 300 with 1.4 are great, but you are beginning with 200mm shorter focal length. I'd go with the 20. I hope you also have a mono-pod to use with it.
Mar 16, 2015 12:07:07 #
Bozsik wrote:
With the soccer, I would get the 200 first. My reasoning is that sometimes the action is very far away, unlike the excellent image of the heron someone posted, they kids will also be moving around. It is good to have the extra reach.
The images posted from the 300 with 1.4 are great, but you are beginning with 200mm shorter focal length. I'd go with the 20. I hope you also have a mono-pod to use with it.
The images posted from the 300 with 1.4 are great, but you are beginning with 200mm shorter focal length. I'd go with the 20. I hope you also have a mono-pod to use with it.
Thanks. Yes, I do use a monopod---looks impressive to all the other parents and grandparents.
Mar 16, 2015 18:21:09 #
Kmgw9v wrote:
Thanks. Yes, I do use a monopod---looks impressive to all the other parents and grandparents.
:thumbup: I think you will be satisfied with either. The 2x will have the better reach. And of course you want to look impressive. LOL
Mar 16, 2015 18:36:48 #
Bozsik wrote:
:thumbup: I think you will be satisfied with either. The 2x will have the better reach. And of course you want to look impressive. LOL
:thumbup:
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.