Test: Z7II and Nikon 300 f/4 pf with Nikon 1.4 III TC

Joined
May 1, 2005
Messages
11,862
Location
Thunder Bay Ontario Canada
Trying to decide whether it's worth getting the Nikon 2.0 Z TC to give me more reach for the Z7II. To help me decide I thought I should try the 1.4 TC on a 300 pf and adapter to the Z7II.
The conditions were: dull grey morning, with some wind. Images were taken hand held, manual mode, Single point AF, Auto ISO, F/5.6, 1/400ss. Images were straight out of camera, resized for web, no sharpening or other adjustments applied.
1a. Small birds 20-25 ft away.
Nuthatch 20 ft away 1294.jpg
Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)


1b. The crop:
Nuthatch 20 ft away 1294 cropped .jpg
Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

Not great focus on the eye of the little bird
2a. Larger bird: 25 ft
Hairy 25ft 1314.jpg
Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)


2b. The crop:
Hairy 25ft 1314 crop.jpg
Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)


3a. Largest bird today 25 ft away
Jay 20 ft 1300.jpg
Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)


3b. The crop:
Jay 20 ft 1300 crop.jpg
Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

4a. The Squirrel: 10 ft away
Squirrel 10 ft 1304.jpg
Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)


4b The crop:
Squirrel 10 ft 1304 crop.jpg
Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)


Overall I would estimate that for my purposes this combo resulted in ~ 75% keeper rate. No doubt if I would have used a tripod then the keeper rate could have been better, especially for the smaller birds at distance where eye focus noticeably dropped off. Again for my purposes I believe that this combo would give me enough acceptable results that I will forgo purchasing the Z2.0 TC and probably wait for when the 100-400 Z comes out. Thanks for looking.
 
Joined
Dec 7, 2005
Messages
920
Location
MN, USA
But you haven't actually compared the 300+TC to the 70-200+TC? I ask because I'm trying to answer the same question for myself. I have a 70-200 coming (eventually) and the TC2.0Z is on backorder. I also have the 300PF+TC14 combination . . .
 
Joined
May 1, 2005
Messages
11,862
Location
Thunder Bay Ontario Canada
But you haven't actually compared the 300+TC to the 70-200+TC? I ask because I'm trying to answer the same question for myself. I have a 70-200 coming (eventually) and the TC2.0Z is on backorder. I also have the 300PF+TC14 combination . . .
You're very right I haven't had the opportunity to test out the TC 2.0 Z. I have the 70-200 S lens and love it. The 2.0Z TC is on back order which is what caused me to try out the 300 pf and 1.4 combo. I found the results acceptable enough for me to not purchase the expensive TC and wait for a Z lens with a longer reach than the 70-200 eg 100-400 Z . The other reason is that while the online reviews for the 1.4Z TC are favourable, reviews for the 2.0 Z TC are mixed.
 
Joined
Dec 7, 2005
Messages
920
Location
MN, USA
Cameralabs is the only written on-line review I've found of the 2.0Z and they are somewhat equivocal. Frankly I don't understand their statement about the 2.0Z:

"Regarding the Z TC 2.0x I’d rather wait: You’d probably need an excellent telephoto prime lens to see the full potential which the TC-2.0x can deliver!"

Are they suggesting that the 2.0 will perform better on a prime than on the 70-200? It just seems like an odd statement.

Ricci gives his usual pretty well considered review, although he is looking at comparing the 500PF with the 70-200/TC20Z combination. It's no surprise that he gives the nod to the 500PF -
 
Joined
May 1, 2005
Messages
11,862
Location
Thunder Bay Ontario Canada
Cameralabs is the only written on-line review I've found of the 2.0Z and they are somewhat equivocal. Frankly I don't understand their statement about the 2.0Z:

"Regarding the Z TC 2.0x I’d rather wait: You’d probably need an excellent telephoto prime lens to see the full potential which the TC-2.0x can deliver!"

Are they suggesting that the 2.0 will perform better on a prime than on the 70-200? It just seems like an odd statement.

Ricci gives his usual pretty well considered review, although he is looking at comparing the 500PF with the 70-200/TC20Z combination. It's no surprise that he gives the nod to the 500PF -
Here's another review - albeit non written - that influenced me to wait and be satisfied with using an F mount lens with adapter
 
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
Forum GIFs powered by GIPHY: https://giphy.com/
Copyright © Amin Forums, LLC
Top Bottom