70-200 VR with 1.7 converter

Joined
Jan 20, 2007
Messages
301
Location
Southern New England
I am using a Nikon 70-200VR with a Nikon 1.7 converter and my pics are blury, oh and I am also using a polarizer. I had the camera set to program figuring it was a setting issue. Any thought?
Kevin
 
Joined
Aug 13, 2006
Messages
3,235
Location
Berlin, Old Europe
Show us an example please, then we get a better idea of what the problem may be. It may be motion blur, using a polarizer results in longer exposure times, thus increasing the probability of motion blur, especially with high focal lengths.
 
Joined
May 3, 2005
Messages
2,288
Location
Wasilla, Alaska
that combo results in a 510mm lens (including DX crop). It can be hand held, but a tripod makes a very big difference. Aslo the polarizer causes you to lose a stop or more of light so your shutter was most likely long, resulting in movement blur.
 
Joined
Jan 16, 2007
Messages
93
Location
Cypress, TX
I have the same problem and have decided to sell my TC-17E II. With it, about 10% are keepers.

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)


A similar shot 2000 px wide (resized only, no other post-processing)
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v501/CAL764/blurlg.jpg
 
Joined
Dec 20, 2005
Messages
300
Location
Tampa Florida
that combo results in a 510mm lens (including DX crop). ....
I thought that lens focal length and DX crop were two different things. 200mm & 1.7tc = 340 focal length regerdless of camera and the "dx crop" simply meant that the field of view was narrower, which in the case of this photograph, reduces how much of the scene is visible to the right of the nose and to the left of the tail. The airplane would be the same size thru the lens of a film camera as it looks thru a dx camera.

Peace
Mark
 
Joined
May 3, 2005
Messages
2,288
Location
Wasilla, Alaska
I thought that lens focal length and DX crop were two different things. 200mm & 1.7tc = 340 focal length regerdless of camera and the "dx crop" simply meant that the field of view was narrower, which in the case of this photograph, reduces how much of the scene is visible to the right of the nose and to the left of the tail. The airplane would be the same size thru the lens of a film camera as it looks thru a dx camera.

Peace
Mark
That is correct. I did not mean to confuse the issue, I was mearly trying to encourge the use of a tripod with that set up. I should have said 510 effective.

The issue is relative movement. With the crop you increase the amount of percieved movement due to camera shake. With the crop you are cramming (in my case 12) megapixels into a smaller space, that has a real effect on motion blur do to camera shake. You will see many threads about how people who have moved to higher megapixel cameras found that with the increase they had to revisit proper stabilizing techniques in order to get sharp photos.


Another way to look at it. I have two pairs of 8X binoculars. The one pair is a nice full size set, the other a small pocket sized pair. They both have the same magnification, however the small pair has a narrower feild of view. The smaller pair is much harder to look through as the narrow field of view makes any movements seem large due to the small viewable area. The large pair with a wider view is much easier to look through as the greater feild of view makes the moments seem smaller compared to the larger veiwable image.
 
R

rubendparra

Guest
I think is not a problem of the combo i tried the TC on a D80 today and found similar results it's not easy to lock the AF , but if you practice and take a look at your shutter speed then you definetely will get more keepers.

at the beginning i though there as a problem but then i decided to practice , here's one i took today using the 70-200 + tc no PP.

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)
 
Joined
Apr 1, 2007
Messages
58
Location
SLC, Utah
Last edited by a moderator:
Joined
May 16, 2006
Messages
898
I'm another that is not happy with the results I get with the 1.7 on the 70-200. I rarely use it and when I do I dump most of the the shots. I should have gotten the 1.4.
 
F

fictional math

Guest
I took the 70-200mm + 1.7x + D200 last year to Mosport for the ALMS race on a cloudy day (plus a few soccer matches) and was very satisfied with the results.
 
Joined
Sep 6, 2006
Messages
2,475
Location
Lompoc, CA
I really like my 70-200 + TC-17. One thing is I need to stop down to about f/8 to get really good results. Shooting wide open is OK, but I'll need to bump the contrast and saturation up a little in PP.
 
Joined
Jan 25, 2006
Messages
1,837
Location
Huntsville/Muscle Shoals, AL
It works very well on the 70-200 with my D2H, but not as well with my D200 under normal conditions. I have been meaning to do a test using the tripod because I am quite certain that the 4mp D2H lets me get away with a little movement without showing camera shake.
 
Joined
Dec 22, 2006
Messages
510
Issue lies mainly with expectations, I'm afraid. I've the same combo and I don't use it for some things because of it's limitations. If you're in need of high detail small bird shots, it's not the right combination. If you're taking pictures of moving objects in relatively low light yielding 1/125th of a sec or slower, it's not the lens or your motion, it's the object itself.
For birds, a 400/2.8 or higher is a must.
Here's a picture of our cat, hand held at 1/250th with 1.7TCEII and 70-200mm taken tonight. Cropped only.
Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)
 
Joined
Apr 1, 2007
Messages
58
Location
SLC, Utah
Luckily he wasn't peeved at me - it was another eagle just out of camera shot. They were (obviously) fussing over the fish.
 
Links on this page may be to our affiliates. Sales through affiliate links may benefit this site.
Nikon Cafe is a fan site and not associated with Nikon Corporation.
Forum post reactions by Twemoji: https://github.com/twitter/twemoji
Copyright © 2005-2019 Amin Forums, LLC
Top Bottom