Jump to content

Welcome to NikonForums.com
Register now to gain access to all of our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to create topics, post replies to existing threads, give reputation to your fellow members, get your own private messenger, post status updates, manage your profile and so much more. If you already have an account, login here - otherwise create an account for free today!
Photo

Teleconverter - yes or no?


  • Please log in to reply
50 replies to this topic

#1
Steve Simkins

Steve Simkins

    New Member

  • Forum Member
  • Pip
  • 5 posts
  • Country Flag
  • LocationHaverhill, Suffolk, UK

What are your thoughts on using a teleconverter with a Nikon 70-300mm 4.5 - 5.6??

 

I have spoken to a few people with varying opinions, most seem to lean towards "no", the main reason being the obvious loss of light.  I shoot mainly wildlife and my next step

 

was going to be the Sigma 150-500mm but the average cost seems to be about £6-800.  If i can get away with a TC instead it will save me a fortune!!

 

Please share your TC + 300mm experiences with me  :)



#2
PrettyCranium

PrettyCranium

    Forum Veteran

  • Forum Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 410 posts
  • Country Flag
Also interested in this topic. However, I have the 55-300 mm lens, and I don't think teleconverters can be used with it. Am I wrong?

#3
Afterimage

Afterimage

    Forum Veteran

  • Forum Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 615 posts
  • Country Flag
  • LocationPennsylvania

I don't know, it's only 1 stop of light for the 1.4TC. Assume you stop down to f/8 and balance the exposure with ISO adjustments ... yeah it's a close one. Anything less than good lighting conditions are going to push your ISO up too high or your shutter speed down too low. But, if you are normally shooting in good light I don't see why not. It's a cheap "fix" and they always come with their negatives. 

You could rent a TC for a while and see if you can live with it. Or heck, buy one and sell it a year or so down the road if it's not to your liking. 



#4
Stas

Stas

    Forum Veteran

  • Forum Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 436 posts
  • Country Flag
I never used tc, but my friend did. Tc adds a blur what's decrease image quality. Add to this loss of light and as result a long exposure or high iso and you get a very bad image. But maybe there is some tc of better quality...

#5
greenwing

greenwing

    Loyal Member

  • Forum Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 293 posts
  • Country Flag
  • LocationWest Yorkshire, UK

Be aware that Nikon teleconverters will not even fit the 70-300 or 55-300, so you need to look at other brands, Kenko being the most mentioned.



#6
rocknrumble

rocknrumble

    Forum Veteran

  • Forum Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 450 posts
  • Country Flag
  • LocationSydney, Australia

I have the Sigma 50-500mm and it's a great lens, well worth the money.

 

I've also ordered a Kenko 2 x teleconverter (As well as Sigma 150mm macro) which I want to test out.

When the items arrive I'll let you know how it goes with the different lenses.

 

I also have the Nikon 70-300mm lens so I'll test it with that and take some shots.



#7
B Grace

B Grace

    Member

  • Forum Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 40 posts
  • Country Flag

A second caution is the Nikon cameras I've used and/or considered won't meter with a lens with a maximum aperture slower than F5.6 so that 70-300 + TC would be a problem.  Your camera manual should state this if it applies.

 

On the Pentax side I've used a nice Pentax A-series 1.4x TC with my prime lenses and really liked the combinations.  That 1.4x TC + 50/1.4 was a great combo on both film and digital capture, and that TC + 200/4 even worked well.  A high quality TC used with high quality fast lenses should see little reduction in image quality.  Don't forget that shutter speeds must be factored by the TC value if you're shooting handheld.

 

Having said all of that, proper shooting skills should result in images with the 70-300 Nikkor which can be cropped in a bit to get close to that TC resultant image.  I find the shots I get with my 70-300 VR to be nicely sharp.



#8
rocknrumble

rocknrumble

    Forum Veteran

  • Forum Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 450 posts
  • Country Flag
  • LocationSydney, Australia

Ok got the Kenko 2 x Teleconverter and Sigma f2.8 150mm Macro. I'll have a play with them this weekend and see what sort of results I can get and I'll post the photos up.



#9
K-9

K-9

    Jamie

  • Forum Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 883 posts
  • Country Flag
  • LocationNew England

Site Supporter

I guess it depends on the camera.  I'd be curious to see what is sharper with a D800: 70-30mm with a teleconverter, or not using the TC and cropping to the same size as if you were.



#10
iNYONi

iNYONi

    Rob

  • Forum Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,112 posts
  • Country Flag
  • LocationLivingston, Scotland

Site Supporter

What are your thoughts on using a teleconverter with a Nikon 70-300mm 4.5 - 5.6??

 

I have spoken to a few people with varying opinions, most seem to lean towards "no", the main reason being the obvious loss of light.  I shoot mainly wildlife and my next step

 

was going to be the Sigma 150-500mm but the average cost seems to be about £6-800.  If i can get away with a TC instead it will save me a fortune!!

 

Please share your TC + 300mm experiences with me  :)

Steve, I have a teleconverter from jessops, I havent tried it on my Nikon 70-300 but used it on my Tamron 70-300, it gets you close to the action but the picture quality wasnt  too great, to be fair i havent tried "messing about" with the setting to try and acheive better result but to be honest...it was only £62 so i cant grumble.



#11
alden

alden

    Nikonian

  • Forum Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,226 posts
  • Country Flag
  • LocationHiding in the hallway

I have a 2x Tamron. I lose an f stop due to light reduction, but otherwise the images seem sharp enough. 



#12
rockjedi

rockjedi

    Member

  • Forum Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 38 posts
  • Country Flag
I've tried tele converters before, they were ok but lost a lot of image quality. The best converter I ever used was the adapter from my nikon j1 to f mount lenses. If offers a 2.7x magnification but of no loss of quality or speed.

The first picture was taken on j1 with a 500 prime = ~1350mm

The second was with a 2x converter too ~2700mm.

They are adequate but not amazing.

Speed is useful for wildlife but not compulsory. I'd save up and go for the better glass if you can afford it.

Attached Thumbnails

  • image.jpg
  • image.jpg


#13
TBonz

TBonz

    Sportz Guy

  • Forum Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,652 posts
  • Country Flag
  • LocationOn A Field Somewhere...

Site Supporter

I just ordered a Nikon TC-14EII that I'm picking up on Saturday.  It is compatable with my current lenses and all the long lenses I'm considering for my next lens.  Right now I'm leaning towards the 200 2.0 which I could use for indoor sports and outdoor sports with the 1.4 or another TC.  I'll probably give the TC a good workout on 1-Nov at a poorly lit high school field and will let you know what I find out.



#14
rocknrumble

rocknrumble

    Forum Veteran

  • Forum Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 450 posts
  • Country Flag
  • LocationSydney, Australia
I have a Kenko Pro 300 DGX 2.0x Teleconverter (Nikon) Lens. I paired it up with my Sigma APO MACRO 150mm f/2.8 EX DG OS HSM Lens (both of which I received recently) and decided to do a quick reference shot. This should give you a rough idea of the quality it is capable of. I will still play with it more and try and get more good reference photos and see what I can do with it this weekend.

For now. Reference Shot.
Without Converter

UnZoomed.jpg

With 2 x Converter

Zoomed.jpg

#15
Kenafein

Kenafein

    Forum Veteran

  • Forum Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 425 posts
  • Country Flag

1.4x TCs, of decent quality, are usually a pretty safe bet.  Beyond that you really want a lens/tc pairing that is designed to work together.  My friend has the Canon 300m/2.8 II lens and the 2x Extender III,  his results are incredible.  Those lenses were designed for one another.  If they're not a perfect match you're likely to have problems.  Kenko has a pretty good reputation, but it's a real possibility that the lens might lose AF with that small of a max aperture.  Going long isn't cheap.  The Sigma is kind of a bargain.  You may consider the older 170-500mm Sigma, they are pretty cheap(<$350).  It might not be the best version, but it would probably give you better IQ than the TC.  Another drawback is slow AF, and I believe it's screwdriven, just in case that's an issue for your body.  



#16
alden

alden

    Nikonian

  • Forum Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,226 posts
  • Country Flag
  • LocationHiding in the hallway

I think we can see from the above reference shots that there is very little loss of sharpness, maybe a bit of contrast. 

 

Thing is, this kind of stuff can also be corrected or compensated for with a little post processing. 



#17
rocknrumble

rocknrumble

    Forum Veteran

  • Forum Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 450 posts
  • Country Flag
  • LocationSydney, Australia
Yeah I was happy with the general quality of the photo. Though as mentioned earlier, a little slower to auto-focus. Saying that it is definitely worth playing with. I have a few other lens that I'll definitely see what I can do with (70-300 and 50-500). Hopefully I will get some good results. It was a fairly cheap purchase compared to the lens so I'm not fussed if it's not the greatest addition to the kit. I am looking forward to playing with it though.

#18
Warrick

Warrick

    Active Member

  • Forum Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 73 posts
  • Country Flag
  • LocationMelbourne, Australia

My opinion on teleconverters... Anything and everything you put infront or behind your lens "may" degrade image quality.

 

Teleconverters are not cheap as they are made of top quality as they are also commonly used on high grade lenses, so i dont really see a downgrade of image quality by using a teleconverter.

 

Images have more of a chance of suffering degradition by unsteady movements, poor focusing, weather conditions (fog, humidity, miraging etc) than attaching say a 600 dollar converter lol

 

And even if there was degradation i don't think the image would be made unusable



#19
Stas

Stas

    Forum Veteran

  • Forum Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 436 posts
  • Country Flag

to rocknrumble

Can you make few photos of something textured with converter and without it? I want to compare the detalization of those shots.



#20
rocknrumble

rocknrumble

    Forum Veteran

  • Forum Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 450 posts
  • Country Flag
  • LocationSydney, Australia
I plan to take more photos with the Teleconverter and couple of different lenses. I will see about doing textured/untextured shorts as well. As long as you're not in a rush I will get it done.