Why can nothing be easy (200mm f2 related)

Discussion in 'Lens Lust' started by VOLKeith, Jul 4, 2008.

  1. Well I am ecstatic over my new 200mm f2 but....

    The 200mm is spot on, no AF fine tune required. I slapped on my Kenko 1.4 pro 300 TC and the combo back focuses, even -20 is not enough to correct it fully. The Kenko worked fine on my 70-200mm VR and 300mm f4 both AFS and AFD. I wasn't too concerned because I had a new Nikon 1.7 TCE II on the way. Slap on the 1.7 TC and same thing. I can't test the 1.7 with another lens because I don't have one that is compatable. When using MF the combo is very good. The problem is more pronounced at moderate distance. So I am now looking at sending the combo to Nikon. Any ideas or similiar experiences?
     
  2. keith....
    why would you put a KENKO TC on that 4K nikon lens?

    i have used my TC-14EII on the 200/2 without any problem

    honestly... the 200/2 is arguably nikon's sweetest glass ever...
    and it should be shot "NAKED"
    leave the TCs OFF of it

    if you need to go longer... use another lens
    take advantage of the 200/2 "beauty" by never attaching anything to it

    IMHO, of course
    no offense intended
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Jul 4, 2008
  3. No offense taken. I know what you mean by the Kenko that is why I bought the Nikon 1.7. Again with MF the combo of 200mm f2 and Nikon 1.7 is very good and I will get a lot of use out of it if I can get it to not back focus. I am again frustrated by gear not working as it should and perlexed that I have this problem.

    As far as the Naked 200mm f2 it is about as close to perfect as I have used, but I can't agree with not using it with a TC.
     
  4. good luck with the incoming nikon 1.7
    we all get frustrated when gear isn't working at 100%... especially at THESE PRICES...

    i am really wanting a 400/2.8
    but.... that just isn't going to happen

    even 200+1.4 on an FX D3... doesn't get you too far... :frown:
     
  5. The 1.7 is not incoming. I have already tried the 1.7 and it does the same thing. That is why I am so frustrated especially when I can see the potential with the MF. A 340mm f3.3 VR with the 200mm and 1.7 is something that I was looking forward to.

    The 400mm f2.8 is the lens to get if you already have the 200mm f2. Come on Doc you only live once:smile:
     
  6. Hey Keith, I tried the Kenko 1.4 DG on the 200 f2 VR/300 f2.8 VR and didn't care for it.
    The Nikon's TC's have much better IQ. Both the 1.4 and 1.7 work fine with my 200, in fact
    you'd hardly know they're on there. Fast, accurate AF. That's using the D300. I'll be testing
    those combo's with the D3 over the next few days and will no doubt post a fews pics. GL...Will
     
  7. sorry that i'm so dense today that i can't figure out what you said.... :redface:

    as for only living once...
    yeah...
    i've given that "speech" to my life many times
    it think it might be wearing just a bit THIN with her these days... :tongue:
     
  8. McQ67

    McQ67 Guest


    I completely agree with you. My 200 f2.0 was magic, but I recently sold it as I was using the TC far too often. The Magic really came with no converter on it. It was really a difficult decision, but shooting surfers and Hummingbirds, I needed the reach of at least a 300 2.8. I have the VR version on hold and I am thinking about canceling the order in favor of the 200-400.
     
  9. Gary Mayo

    Gary Mayo Guest

    Kenko stuff is not super quality, it is super affordable. Seldom do both qualities go hand in hand.

    If I were lucky enough to own that lens, I would shoot it like Greg said, nude!


    Greg, does the owners manual mention using a Nikkor TC with that lens?
     

  10. I'm with ya on that---that's why I am never truly satisfied whenever I cave in and buy one of "Consumer's Reports" Best Buys.

    I want quality with the least number of compromises--to do otherwise simply means I will shell out more money later for what I wanted/needed in the first place!

    But that doesn't solve VOLkeith's frustration!
     
  11. Gary Mayo

    Gary Mayo Guest

    I own a Kenko 3x TC.

    Do you know why Nikkor does not make a 3x TC?

    You will if you use the Kenko!

    To be fair, it is not that bad for 3x, but is does soften things down a bit.

    This is the best shot I have with it to date on a 80-400mm VR.

    Distance? Farther than I can walk in a week! lol

    Now that I have a 500mm f/4 P IE ED this 3x tube will be a dust grower for sure.

    birds.15.jpg



     
  12. Nikkor AIS

    Nikkor AIS

    Jun 5, 2008
    Alberta
    I saw this at a key cutting store. I even took a photo of the sign because I though it was right on the money.

    You can have it fast
    You can have it good
    You can have it cheap
    Pick any two.


    This is one of the problems when we count on technology for such a critical part of the image chain.
    Thats one of the things about using Nikkor AIS 200 F2 ED-IF focus is the same every time . Right where "I" put it. And its like that with the TC-14B. Which like many folks here I dont use very often on this lens. Its true, some of the magic is lost with converters.
     
  13. Gary Mayo

    Gary Mayo Guest

    Out of all the TC's out there the 14b is a great one as it adds just a little without taking away much if any.

     
  14. The 200mm f2 and the 1.7 TC were released at the same time

    http://www.dpreview.com/news/0405/04052801nikkor200.asp

    I appreciate the fact that the 200mm f2 loses its magic with TCs. And my problem is not with the image quailty. My issues are not with the Kenko but with the Kenko and a brand new Nikon 1.7 TCE II. They both back focus with the lens. The Kenko works fine focus wise with other lenses. If the lens is perfect by itself one would think it is not the lens that is the problem but if both TCs back focus and one I know AFs fine with other lenses then maybe it is the lens. I hate the thought of sending the lens in but I guess I will. It could be the D300 for all I know.

    For what it is worth I plan to use the 200mm naked most of the time but I am not giving up a 340mm f3.3 VR without trying.
     
  15. Keith,
    The copy I had backfocused with the 1.4 and not the 1.7... but at least with fine tuning I was able to adjust it.
    Yet with another 1.4 it did not backfocus... go figure..:biggrin:
     
  16. Thank you, this is what I was looking for. I may go ahead and try another 1.7 TC. Would be the easiest thing to do.
     
  17. Well I am now without my 200, hated to send it off but it had to be done. The 200 and the 1.7 are on their way to Melville. I got another 1.7 TC and as expected same result. The results with this combo using contrast detect AF are quite stunning. Hope I can get it straightened out on the first try.

    You should have seen the look on the guys face at Kinkos when I declared the value of the package:eek:
     
  18. lf911sc

    lf911sc

    71
    Jun 15, 2008
    Monmouth, NJ
    From Nikons web page: