Converters?

Discussion in 'General Discussion' started by Jarrell, Nov 13, 2005.

  1. Jarrell

    Jarrell

    Feb 13, 2005
    Macon, Ga.
    aka tele extenders, does anyone know of an online comparison in the quality of the Nikon 1.4 and the 2X... maybe even the Kenko? Or if anyone here has knowledge of these that you might share?
    And why does B&H Photo have these listings?
    Nikon Imported Price : $ 329.95
    TC-14E 1.4x II Teleconverter for D-AF-S & AF-I Lenses ONLY

    and then this,

    Nikon USA Price : $ 409.95
    TC-14E 1.4x II Teleconverter for D-AF-S & AF-I Lenses ONLY
    Mfr # 2129 • B&H # NITC14E2
    with a $70 difference in price.
    http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/con...=65_435&shs=&ci=278&ac=&Submit.x=7&Submit.y=4
    Thanks,
    Jarrell
     
  2. Hi Jarrell,

    What i learned from these boards is that 1.4x times teleconverter is still very sharp in results.

    The 1.7x teleconverter produces also very sharp images not much noticeable lose of sharpness.

    And 2x teleconverters will lose some sharpness.

    I am still looking for a 1.7x teleconverter. But i there are alot of teleconvertor users in the Birds and Animal forum on Nikon Cafe. These guys use 300mm lenses or 400mm or even bigger with TC so they will know all about it.

    Greetings,
    Vince
     
  3. Bob Coutant

    Bob Coutant Moderator Moderator

    May 17, 2005
    Pleasantville Ohio
    Can't answer your question Jarrell, but you might also want to include the new Nikon 1.7X TC is your research. (At least it was marked new in a flyer that I received a couple of days ago.)
     
  4. Jarrell,
    I am sure you will get responses from many on this and I am no expert. I purchased the TC1.4E II usa version and am quite happy with it. it only takes away 1 stop of light and image degredation is nearly imperceptible. I purchased the TC1.7E II in the imprted version and it was also flawless but took away more light and I found it did not give enough additional reach to be worth the extra light. I have never owned the TC2.0E II but it is widely known that it degrades the image enough to be noticable as well as taking away 2 full stops of light.
    Check your lens' for compatibility to TC's prior to purchasing one. The 80-400 VR is not compatible with the above TC's but Gale uses (very successfully) the Kenko TC with that lens.
    Regards,
    Dave
     
  5. Jarrell

    Jarrell

    Feb 13, 2005
    Macon, Ga.
    Much obliged for the information! I think I may have a closer look at the Kenko since it seems to be well regarded.
    Thanks again,
    Jarrell
     
  6. Flew

    Flew

    994
    Jan 25, 2005
    Alabama
    Jarrell,

    I have the 300 2.8 and have used it extensively (thousands of shots) with the 1.4, 1.7, and 2.0 TC's. I find the 1.4 to be almost as sharp as the lens alone, and as mentioned, it only loses one stop, so your AF should be plenty snappy and images plenty sharp. I haven't been as impressed by the 1.7. It only loses 1.5 stops, but I have found that the sharpness is noticeably affected (still not bad, but definitely noticeable).

    The 2.0 loses 2 full stops and really does affect the sharpness. If you shoot at f8 or above, it still can give acceptable images, and it is obviously significantly less expensive than a 600mm lens. Just be aware that you will lose sharpness.

    For a very good comparison of these TC's, on the 300VR, see this thread. My only comment on this excellent evaluation is that all shots are taken wide open. When using TC's, you can get much better performance shooting at f8 or above.

    https://www.nikoncafe.com/vforums/showthread.php?t=56449

    Hope this helps.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Mar 15, 2017
  7. Gale

    Gale

    978
    Jan 26, 2005
    Viera Fl
    Ed Mac and I both use a Kinko Pro300 1.4 on the 80-400 VR.

    Much more reasonable. The quality is great.

    I think Kevin uses a Tamron ????
    And a Nikon 1.7
     
  8. general

    general

    Apr 30, 2005
    Nebraska
    Tele-Extenders

    Jarrell,

    I own all four of the extenders being discussed. First, the difference in price is because of the Nikon policy on lens (it is a lens) differentiating between those imported by Nikon North America and those imported by others. There are physical reasons why these extenders will work (without modification) only on the specified lenses. Nikon makes extenders that will fit on other Nikon lenses. Very rarely can I detect the presence of the 1.4 as far as quality is concerned. My copy of the 1.7 is almost as good - certainly acceptable. The 2.0 does lose a little quality but acceptable if you must get the picture. The Kenko Pro 300 1.4 is of superb quality when used on my Nikkor 80-400 VR. I have never tried to use on my other Nikkor lenses since I have the Nikon extenders. Hope this helps.
     
  9. Jarrell,
    Ron Reznick addresses all in the lens section of his web site. As I recall he rated their optical quality in the following way (lower number is better)

    1.4 1
    1.7 2
    2.0 10

    He discusses his reasoning.

    Rich
     
  10. Commodorefirst

    Commodorefirst Admin/Moderator Administrator

    May 1, 2005
    Missouri
    Jarrell,

    I have used the 1.4 extensively with my long lenses, and I just purchased a 1.7. both were import versions, my reasoning being A. the price, and B. Generally if they are good from the start, they stay good. So I took a chance. They are the only grey market I own.

    The 1.4 I can't really tell the difference with our without, the 1.7 just a tiny tiny bit, but still very acceptable for me.

    I would recommend the grey market from nikon. A huge savings.

    Wade
     
  11. Jarrell, from reading all of the comments on a number of forums regarding the TC's the common "thread" is that the 1.4 is not much different, other than the 1-stop loss, from a "bare" lens and that the 1.7 is pretty darned close. I have also seen comments that state that the 1.7 really degrades quality and that the 2.0 is pure "mush". Given my own use, I have the Nikon TC-14E, TC-17E and TC-20E, I don't find the 2.0 to be as bad as many of the reviews state. I have modified my TC's to work with my Sigma 120-300 f2.8 and 500mm f4.5 HSM and I have even stacked the 1.4 and 2.0 on the 500mm. Not something that you want to do if you want AF to work :biggrin: , but in a pinch not bad. My TC-14E and TC-20E are the "old" versions, not the II, although I don't think that in and of itself is much of a difference, but I do think there must be variability in the TC's as well. The comments about "stopping down" some with the TC's is a point well taken, and this is somewhat forced anyway by the light loss.

    One other thing to note is that all of my TC's work very well AF-wise on the 70-200 f2.8 AFS VR, but only the 1.4 works for AF on the Sigma lenses. This is generally an issue of f-stop, but for reasons unknown the Sigma's just don't like anything beyond a 1-stop loss. I may try the Sigma or Kenko 2.0 just for grins if I can find one locally to test.

    I would suggest that if you have a friend or a store with any of these in stock that you take your camera and lens combination over and give a few a try.
     
  12. Jerrell

    I purchased the Kenko DG pro 1.4x and I couldn't be happier! It's a steller perfomer AND it works with ALL of my Nikon glass. I've used it on my 85mm with great results.

    JohG
     
  13. Hi Jarrell,
    I first bought the Tamron 1.4x (Pro something or other) teleconverter, mainly because of price vs the Nikon. I have not noticed any ill effects when used with my Nikkor 300/f4 AF-S. Focus is fast, still able to use wide apertures and the pic quality is very, very good. (I'm a sharpness snob in training :wink: ). I'm not certain but vaguely recall that the Tamron teleconverter is actually made by Kenko. Maybe someone more knowledgeable can confirm.

    I also just acquired the Nikon 1.7x. Again, I use it on my 300. Not to contradict Frank (Flew) but I have not noticed any degradation in the sharpness of my resulting shots. If you take a quick trip over to the Bird Forum and check out my Raptor post and Mealtime post, as an example, you'll see what the 1.7 delivers regarding sharpness. They were all handheld shots and are some of the sharpest shots I've taken. I've been trying to shoot at f7.1 or f8 primarily with this combo and it really seems to deliver. I have not been disappointed whatsoever with the quality.

    Hope this helps!
     
  14. Kevin kevin Kevin,

    Actually the Tokina and Kenko converters aare made with Hoya Glass.. Hoya, Kenko and Tokina are all within the same company... web address is http://www.thkphoto.com

    So, you are a sharpness snob in training? :eek: :eek: Who is your mentor?
     
  15. What about the Tamron converters? Aren't they Kenko, too?

    As for the mentor....hmmmm....I don't know. Just got spoiled from seeing all those great, sharp Nikon shots over at the other place before I bought my D2x and just came to expect the same for myself. :wink:
     
  16. Flew

    Flew

    994
    Jan 25, 2005
    Alabama
    And why should you be any different? My wife does it all the time. :biggrin:
     
  17. Hardee, har, har!!! Not Janie! She wouldn't do that now, would she??
     
Loading...
Similar Threads Forum Date
OT: Converting m4A files to mp3? General Discussion Dec 2, 2014
Convert home movies to better quality? General Discussion Oct 31, 2013
Sensor Cleaning for IR-converted Camera? General Discussion Mar 21, 2012
Lens Scope Converter? General Discussion Apr 10, 2011
Non-photography question about Digital TV converters General Discussion Sep 5, 2010