Some of you have expressed an interest in the New Nikon TC 17EII. I have had one for about 3 or 4 weeks and have never gotten around to using it. Anyway I decided to do a comparison with all the TC EII's series and hope it will shed some light on the different ones. I used the 70-200mm VR f/2.8 because from the post I have read here this seems to be a lens of interest for many of you to use with a Teleconverter. These are pixel for pixel crops straight out of the D2H. No post processing except to crop and assemble for web prep. The camera was moved to keep the target size equal for each shot.
psystudios wrote:
Yeah the 1.4 looks very nice, but I am disappointed in the 1.7
Thanks for posting Gary, do u have any other samples?
Cheers
Matt
I am disappointed in the 1.7 as well. I had plans for that TC. No all the samples are the same. I shot them all at different f-stops and the results were pretty much the same all the way through. I really didn't have much time this evening to shoot anything else with it. I will try it on some primes, but I don't expect much difference than what is shown here.
I am very familar with the results from the 1.4 and the 2.0, so those really turned out as I expected. The 1.7 kinda falls inbetween those two. Dang!!!
I'm not sure what to think now. I was hoping the 1.7X would be closer to the 1.4X, much closer. If it is closer to the 2.0X, as it looks, then why not get the 2.0X for as much reach as possible and deal with the soft images?
HI Gary,
You got any more test comparing the 1.7 and 1.4 teleconverter. I got a 70-200 vr zoom and was deciding which one to get. Do you think i should just get the 1.4 teleconverter. Harry
Harry, I plan on shooting the 1.4TC and the 1.7TC with some primes particularly the 300mm and 600mm to see how well the 1.7TC compares with the 1.4TC. TC's are really optimized for large primes. I am not expecting the results to be greatly different.
I wouldn't hesitate to recommend the 1.4TC to anyone. My experiance as well as many others have always been excellant. I am a detail freak so I am a little disappointed in the 1.7 in that area. I think I may post a comparison using the 70-200mm and the TC's on a more realistic subject. Sometimes fine detail is not what people are after and the 1.7 may be the answer for them.
The 2X is actually softer than the 1.7X. It is a subtle difference. My conclusion is based on all the different test shots. Just too many to post, so I tried to pick the average representation for all of them at the same aperture. What I need to do is build a testing site indoors and perhaps use some strobes at the target. I believe I have plenty of room to test everything up to the 600mm and the the 2x combo, just need some strobes. I probably need to be a little more scientific about it, rather than doing these by the seat of my pants.
andries52590 wrote:
What is the result of using 2 TC1.4 teleconvertors together?? Anyone ever tested that?
It is physically impossible to mount to 1.4tc's together. The front element on the 1.4 protrudes too fall to mate up with the back of the other one. Anyway it would be softer IMO.
Whats the point of the 1.7 when using the 80-200? The 1.4 gives you a 112-280, and the 2x a160-320. Since they overlap so much, what does the 1.7 give that is actually useful?
Don't mean this as snotty; just puzzled.
No all the samples are the same. I shot them all at different f-stops and the results were pretty much the same all the way through. I really didn't have much time this evening to shoot anything else with it. I will try it on some primes, but I don't expect much difference than what is shown here. 