Using on a Nikon 300mm f/4 ED-IF AF-S

Besides the 1 vs 2 f/stop difference, what are the other differences between these two TC's?

Tom Makofski

http://tmak26.zenfolio.com/p699515171

Used on a tripod, with good technique, the images are almost identical. Once you go up to 400mm lenses and beyond, the 17 isn't as sharp as the 14. On both 500mm and 600mm there is virtually no loss of IQ with the 14 untl you attempt billboard size images. The 17 will start to show IQ loss at about 11" X 17" prints.

Pretty much what DGC said. You get more reach with the 1.7, but it comes at a cost. The 1.4 is almost perfect on most teles, where you do start seeing a quality loss with the 1.7. I only put it on when there is no other way to get a shot. I generally won't hesitate to use the 1.4x if I need a little extra with my 500 or 300.

Steve

You only lose 1.5 stops with the 1.7 TC, not 2 stops.

I prefer the 1.7 over the 1.4 with cropping. The light and which body you're using has a lot to do with AF ability. D3 sings with this combo.

With a 300mm lens, the 1.4 ==> 420mm f/5.6 and the 1.7 ==> 510mm f/6.3. It's like two totally different lenses. Which one is more useful to you. Or get both!

Actually, the 1.7 is truly a 1 2/3 TC. Which is why it shows up as 500mm f/6.3 on the EXIF data...

and remember the AF will be much slower with the 1.7X vs. the 1.4X.

Thanks guys for the input. Looks like the TC14E will be my choice. . . speed of AF swung it!

Tom

Post up some shots when done

Avi B wrote:
. Which is why it shows up as 500mm f/6.3 on the EXIF data...
If you download software capable of reading Nikon's 120 items of EXIF or use the EXIF link on Flickr the correct focal length is shown plus the distance to more accurate than half an inch up to about 30 meters focus distance using several AF-s lenses.
Here is an example (not with a converter) of the data on flickr http://www.flickr.com/photos/clean_mud/3663694644/meta/
I have no idea why the full (and in some cases correct) EXIF data is not available via Nikon.

One difference between 1.4 and 1.7 is the 1.7 front element protrudes slightly more with slightly less protection than the 1.4.
My advice is get one of each if you can afford it.

Scott Grant wrote:
and remember the AF will be much slower with the 1.7X vs. the 1.4X.


Using a 300 2.8 I don't seem to notice much difference at all between the two. It's a long ways from being much slower, maybe a little, but not much slower. I've shot BIF close in many times, coming straight at me. The D300 300 2.8 +1.7 nails it everytime if I do my job. I have no complaints whatsover about slow focus.
Which lens are you using with the 1.7 that yours is so slow?

geniousc wrote:
Scott Grant wrote:
and remember the AF will be much slower with the 1.7X vs. the 1.4X.


Using a 300 2.8 I don't seem to notice much difference at all between the two. It's a long ways from being much slower, maybe a little, but not much slower. I've shot BIF close in many times, coming straight at me. The D300 300 2.8 +1.7 nails it everytime if I do my job. I have no complaints whatsover about slow focus.
Which lens are you using with the 1.7 that yours is so slow?

+1 but previously I had the f4 and, great lens that it is it's AF doesn't handle the 1.7 as well as the f2.8 esp in less than ideal light which was why I got the 2.8

Andy

Yup, there's nothing slow about the 300 f2.8 and 1.7TC
D3/D300 take yer pick. The 1.4 comes up short for BIF, in my eyes...just not worth the trouble.

geniousc wrote:
Scott Grant wrote:
and remember the AF will be much slower with the 1.7X vs. the 1.4X.


Using a 300 2.8 I don't seem to notice much difference at all between the two. It's a long ways from being much slower, maybe a little, but not much slower. I've shot BIF close in many times, coming straight at me. The D300 300 2.8 +1.7 nails it everytime if I do my job. I have no complaints whatsover about slow focus.
Which lens are you using with the 1.7 that yours is so slow?


I think Scott uses both the 1.4 and the 1.7 on a 500 VR with a D300.

As others have mentioned I'm having no problems with the 1.7 mounted to the 300 2.8 VR on either my D300 or D700.

What about for a 70-200 VR?

They're both good on the 70-200VR. The 14 is sharper wide open but stopped down 1 stop the 17 is very good.

Gregg Heckler wrote:
They're both good on the 70-200VR. The 14 is sharper wide open but stopped down 1 stop the 17 is very good.

+1, the 1.7 needs to be stopped down on the 70-200VR and is soft tacked all the way out to 200mm. Pull in slightly and all is good. I need to get a 1.4.

Andre Labonte wrote:
Gregg Heckler wrote:
They're both good on the 70-200VR. The 14 is sharper wide open but stopped down 1 stop the 17 is very good.

+1, the 1.7 needs to be stopped down on the 70-200VR and is soft tacked all the way out to 200mm. Pull in slightly and all is good. I need to get a 1.4.

I wouldn't exactly call the 70-200 VR soft at full zoom with the 1.7 mounted. Sure it's not as sharp as the naked lens but I'll take it over the 1.4 for a more usable reach with very minimal image degredation over the naked lens. Here's one from the archives...

D70, 70-200 VR wide open at f/4.8 with the 1.7 mounted and racked out to 340mm.

^^^^ Nice! Maybe I need to get my lens checked out then, but if I pull in just a hair from 200mm with the 1.7 attached, I get much better results. I know others who have experienced the same thing, so it may be a sample to sample issue. I agree about the reach, which is why I have the 1.7

geniousc wrote:
Scott Grant wrote:
and remember the AF will be much slower with the 1.7X vs. the 1.4X.


Using a 300 2.8 I don't seem to notice much difference at all between the two. It's a long ways from being much slower, maybe a little, but not much slower. I've shot BIF close in many times, coming straight at me. The D300 300 2.8 +1.7 nails it everytime if I do my job. I have no complaints whatsover about slow focus.
Which lens are you using with the 1.7 that yours is so slow?

the original poster asked how both TCs work with the 300mm f4 AF-S, not the 300mm 2.8.

why confuse the matter?

the 1.7X is considerable slower to focus on the 300 f4 af-s. end of story.

The 1.7X is not what I would call "considerably" slower on the AFS 300, at least on a pro body. If you have a D80/D90, etc, then yeah, it will be considerably slower...

Avi B wrote:
The 1.7X is not what I would call "considerably" slower on the AFS 300, at least on a pro body. If you have a D80/D90, etc, then yeah, it will be considerably slower...


it certainly is slower is on my D300. i shot birds all winter with 300 af-s and both teleconverters. ...maybe 20K or more shots.

it is also much slower to focus on my 500 VR than the 1.4X.

the original poster asked how both TCs work with the 300mm f4 AF-S, not the 300mm 2.8. why confuse the matter? the 1.7X is considerable slower to focus on the 300 f4 af-s. end of story.

Not so on a pro body. Just think about it, the focusing sensor is seeing a little more light from a 1.4 as compared to a 1.7. How much difference is there going to be? BTW, the focusing speed is the same with either converter, it's the same focusing motor. The ability to lock on is what changes.

gene