1. Welcome to NikonCafe.com—a friendly Nikon camera & photography discussion forum!

    If you are thinking of buying a camera or need help with your photos, you will find our forum members full of advice! Click here to join for free!

I have the Tamron-F TC...

Discussion in 'Lens Lust' started by Catz, Dec 3, 2005.

  1. ...and was wondering if this would be okay for now or should the Nikon version be the one to use. I was looking for something that does not eat up a lot of battery power and the Tamron does. How about the Nikon Version? Does it eat up the battery power quickly?
  2. GaryW

    GaryW Guest


    At the risk of showing my complete ignorance and incompetence, why would a teleconverter eat up battery, unless it caused a considerable amount of hunting for focus????
  3. Hi Gary,

    Thanks for the post. I found that when using the Tamron converter that it focuses real slow and drains on the battery. I just wanted to know if the Nikon focuses faster than the Tamron or are they about the same.

    I'm on my way out the door to do some xmas shopping and will check this thread when I get back.
  4. jfrancis


    May 8, 2005
    Orlando, FL
    I have used the Nikon TC 1.4 and 1.7 and there is no noticable difference in focusing speed.
  5. Thanks John...then it must be the Tamron that has the problem. I will stay with the Tamron until I can get the Nikon Version. At least it works.
  6. If your teleconverter is a 2x, instead of 1.7x or 1.4x, then you could have more problems. Also, focus speed is lens dependent. Teleconverters are stressed by slow lenses. Don't know effect of VR lenses. Anyway, once you rule out these factors, you can only then be pretty sure it's the fault of the Tamron. The sure way is to test them side-by-side in the same light, on the same lens, pointing at the same subject.
  7. Hi Muril...I have the 2x Tamron Converter so do you think that this could be the problem? I am using it on the 70-200 VR lens. I like your idea of a side by side testing. At lease if there is no difference, I can send it back.

    Thanks for the idea,
  8. Melissa,
    Yes, the 2x is more taxing in terms of light. Generally, f/2.8 is the slowest lens a 2x will effectively AF. There are other factors as well, such as amount of light and complexity of subject. Autofocus works better when there is variation in the scene. A monocolor wall will drive a lot of AF's crazy. Infrared assist can mitigate some of this difficulty. This is why I suggested a side-by-side comparison. Let us know if you do such a test and what it shows.
  9. paintman


    May 18, 2005
    Sonoma Calif.
    Kenko Pro 1.4 DG

    I use this with the 80-200 2.8 for soccer and football it works great.
  10. Second the Kenko - I find it works better than the Nikon ones, and of course allows use on slow and/or screwdriver lenses too!

    (Believe it or not, the kenko x2 turns my 55-200/5.6 DX into a 110-400/11; the D2H will STILL AF with this combo!!)

  11. Hi Melissa, I have the Tamron 1.4x and the Nikon 1.7x. Using both on my 300/f4 AF-s, I don't notice much difference in focusing speed with the 1.4 but with the 1.7 I have a hard time shooting birds in flight. Even when I've used them on the 70-200VR, I've never noticed a drain on the battery. After a full day of shooting, my battery might have dropped only 1 bar. Maybe the 2x is the difference.
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.