Home · Register · Join Upload & Sell

Moderated by: Fred Miranda

New fredmiranda.com Mobile Site

New Feature: SMS Notification alert

New Feature: Buy & Sell Watchlist

FM Forums | Nikon Forum | Join Upload & Sell

Archive 2020 · 1.7 tc with 200-500

egd5
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #1 · p.1 #1 · 1.7 tc with 200-500

Has anyone played with this combo? I've got a 200-500 coming from the B&S boards here and I'm thinking that combo with my D500 might make a good butterfly/dragonfly setup. My 1.7 has been very sharp with everything I've tried it with.

Jan 25, 2020 at 04:53 PM

trenchmonkey
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #2 · p.1 #2 · 1.7 tc with 200-500

AF is pitiful for all but the slowest action. Static shots at f11 decent enough
especially if you don't crop. I'd just enjoy the 200-500 at f7.1 (500mm) and
save the TC-17 for a 300 f2.8 or 300 f4 PF where it does a great job.

Jan 25, 2020 at 05:15 PM

Dragonfire
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #3 · p.1 #3 · 1.7 tc with 200-500

You might consider extension tubes for butterflies and dragonflies.

Jan 25, 2020 at 05:34 PM

Kry27
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #4 · p.1 #4 · 1.7 tc with 200-500

The longer the lens, the less effective extension tubes are, @Dragonfire.

Jan 25, 2020 at 06:06 PM

Gary Irwin
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #5 · p.1 #5 · 1.7 tc with 200-500

The 200-500VR is a very good entry-level lens for wildlife, but its sluggish AF is not the best for fast/erratic action. Adding the TC17 will just make things worse. Sorry. Your 300/2.8 with the TC is the better option. Way better.

Jan 25, 2020 at 06:49 PM

Charles Loy
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #6 · p.1 #6 · 1.7 tc with 200-500

I'm not even keen of the 14x (II or III) on the 200-500. Shoot it naked

Jan 25, 2020 at 08:29 PM

Photozack81
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #7 · p.1 #7 · 1.7 tc with 200-500

Kry27 wrote:
The longer the lens, the less effective extension tubes are, @Dragonfire.

They have their uses. Mainly for reducing the occasionally ridiculous minimum focus distance down to something useful. I keep a set of extension tubes around to shorten up my 400 f/2.8 if needed.

That said a 200-500 would not be my first choice for butterflies or dragonflies. The lens will be quite hard to track a small moving target.

Both of those subjects are better shot close up with a macro lens rather than farther away with long glass.

Jan 25, 2020 at 08:36 PM

tntcorp
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #8 · p.1 #8 · 1.7 tc with 200-500

i don't have any problems tracking butterflies/dragonflies within 15 ft range or less with bare lens and d3s body.

i also don't have tracking issues using the 1.4x iii at maximum length for surfing actions at 50 - 60 yrds range.

Edited on Jan 26, 2020 at 01:56 AM · View previous versions

Jan 25, 2020 at 09:15 PM

egd5
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #9 · p.1 #9 · 1.7 tc with 200-500

Gary, seeing your reply made me realize you must have looked at my profile, so I looked at it. Man, I didn't realize I haven't changed that in YEARS. I updated it now.
Thanks all for the replies.

Jan 25, 2020 at 10:58 PM

Kry27
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #10 · p.1 #10 · 1.7 tc with 200-500

Photozack81 wrote:
They have their uses. Mainly for reducing the occasionally ridiculous minimum focus distance down to something useful. I keep a set of extension tubes around to shorten up my 400 f/2.8 if needed.
Good idea. I will have to try that too, even though most of the time I can work around the MFD.

Jan 26, 2020 at 08:07 AM

OwlsEyes
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #11 · p.1 #11 · 1.7 tc with 200-500

egd5 wrote:
Gary, seeing your reply made me realize you must have looked at my profile, so I looked at it. Man, I didn't realize I haven't changed that in YEARS. I updated it now.
Thanks all for the replies.

Gary's suggestion is still a good one even w/ the updated profile. The AF of your D500 & 120-300 f/2.8 Sport w/ 1.4 will outperform the AF of D500 & 200-500 w/initial focus acquisition. The addition of a 1.7 converter to the 200-500 might be a live-view static combination, but the 1.7x is not among Nikon's best converters. Other than the 2xIII on the 400 f/2.8E, I find that the 1.4xEIII is the only Nikon converter that I would consider using.
The 200-500 shot on the D500 can be used for tracking dragonflies and other erratic subjects, it just depends on how good you are at pre-adjusting the lens to the target. If you prefocus a little and can lock on, the camera/lens combo will maintain the focus just fine. The key AF limitation of the 200-500 is its ability to acquire initial focus.

Jan 26, 2020 at 08:23 AM

egd5
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #12 · p.1 #12 · 1.7 tc with 200-500

For whatever reason my 1.7 has produced sharp results on whatever I put it on. I was mainly thinking of using it just to be able to fill the frame more with little critters while hand holding it for short periods.
I have tried extension tubes with a zoom lens before but it gets a little wonky in use, and then if you quickly spot something a little further away it's a mess trying to change out quickly.
I'm hoping I'll have enough magnification without the TC, as you all say. Just thought I'd ask if anyone else had played with it.

Jan 26, 2020 at 09:45 AM

arbitrage
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #13 · p.1 #13 · 1.7 tc with 200-500

The 1.7 is pretty bad on the 200-500. It may be fine optically but dealing in AFMA is really tough and it is very inconsistent to focus. Contrast takes a big hit. Even the 1.4 on the 200-500 is usually best avoided IMO.

In my testing cropping the bare 500mm was better than using either TC even when focus nailed it. Shoot the 200-500 at f/6.3 or f/7.1 for its sweet spot and forget about the TCs.

My 1.7 was excellent also on my 300PF, 500E but the 200-500 just starts off too far behind optically to make it useful.

Jan 26, 2020 at 10:32 AM

RexGig0
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #14 · p.1 #14 · 1.7 tc with 200-500

If you have the TC, and the lens is en route, well, give it a try. While Nikon will not say that the combination of an f/5.6 lens, and the TC-E17 will work, I know that a D500 will AF with my AF-S 80-400G VR, which is f/5.6 at its long end. You will almost certainly find that only the center AF point, plus perhaps the immediate few surrounding AF points, will be active. This should work for a large insect that is not flying.

If you are serious about large insects, the AF-S 300mm f/4D, widely available pre-owned, in excellent condition, in the $600-$700 US range, plays well with a TC-E17 II, has a Magnification of 0.27x, and has a nicely close Minimum Focusing Distance. A TC will not affect MFD.

I have yet to try it, but the Canon 500D Close-Up Lens, a high-quality macro adapter, available with 77mm filter threads to match the AF-S 300/4D, has been reported to be a viable combination. (Infinity focus will not be available.)

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/87503-REG/Canon_2824A001_77mm_500D_Close_up_Lens.html

Jan 26, 2020 at 10:41 AM

ericbowles
Offline
•
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #15 · p.1 #15 · 1.7 tc with 200-500

The Z6 and 200-500 work pretty well with the TC14E III, but the 1.7 is going to struggle. I found the combinaiton worked well for static subjects in good light. For birds in flight, you need great light and plenty of lead time because the 200-500 is not the fastest focus anyway. If you start a burst by pre-focusing near the right plane, you'll have better results. Also use your AF limiting switch on the lens. I'd forget using the 1.7 - it's just too much. Try the 1.4 if you want to give a TC a reasonable shot.

With a D500 and 200-500 you're going to struggle with any teleconverter. The conventional wisdom is to not use a teleconverter with that lens. I would not consider using the 1.7 teleconverter at all. It's unlikely to provide acceptable focus. Nikon only represents you will get AF to f/8 - and even then with limited AF sensors - and the 1.7 TC puts you at f/9 or so. The bare lens is not the fastest from Nikon, and with a teleconverter it gets much slower. If you want to give it a try, use a static subject in great light. Only use the Nikon 1.4 teleconverter which will give you f/8 equivalent. Use the center AF point only - it's the best. Start by getting focus close to your subject so you are trying to just fine tune focus - and it will be more accurate and faster.

My guess is you will be better off cropping the bare lens and working on your technique.

Edited on Jan 28, 2020 at 10:30 AM · View previous versions

Jan 26, 2020 at 11:37 AM

RandyR
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #16 · p.1 #16 · 1.7 tc with 200-500

I don't use TCs on zooms, except the 70-200 and then I use a 1.4 on 2.8 and f/4 glass and a 1.7 on 2.8 only

Jan 26, 2020 at 05:37 PM

bs kite
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #17 · p.1 #17 · 1.7 tc with 200-500

egd5 wrote:
Has anyone played with this combo? I've got a 200-500 coming from the B&S boards here and I'm thinking that combo with my D500 might make a good butterfly/dragonfly setup. My 1.7 has been very sharp with everything I've tried it with.

Don’t get discouraged.

Although too front-heavy to hold up for long, the 200-500 is a sharp lens that allows plenty of working room for butterflies.

Several years ago I began reclaiming a section of lawn into native wildflowers. I wanted Monarchs and more. It now supports a great diversity of bees/wasps, aphids, beetles, flies, gray tree frogs, American toads and Boreal Red backed voles. I do not mow it in the fall, nor do I rake it out, leaving the leaf litter as is. Each summer I go through and pull up any undesirable plants.

Here are just a few of the images I’ve gotten with my trusty old 200-500 around that meadow. The routine is to let the rig hang from a Black Rapid sling, while slowly walking the perimeter, looking for butterflies in excellent light on the inside.

I agree with the others here: Alone, the 200-500 AF is sluggish enough. I’ve used a 1.4 on it a few times and that's no fun. Forget the 1.7, as it would be nearly impossible! For nature photojournalism I do like this 200-500 and will keep it. And I use it for short nature video clips too.

Tried a 500 5.6 PF in New Mexico last fall. Light, sharp, fast and agile. I think it will be my new loon lens.

Monarch on Joe-Pye-Weed

This one is laying eggs in the leaf litter and illustrates the reason I don’t rake out leaf litter. Quite sure it's a Great Spangled Fritillary, though I've not taken the time to make certain.

Eastern Tiger Swallowtail on one of three Milkweed species planted here.

Edited on Jan 30, 2020 at 01:35 AM · View previous versions

Jan 27, 2020 at 10:51 PM

tntcorp
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #18 · p.1 #18 · 1.7 tc with 200-500

your yard is a perfect nature reclaimation effort.

for static subject in good light similar to your images, i'm surprised to hear that a 1.7x will not work w/ the lens.

bs kite wrote:
Don’t get discouraged.

Although too front-heavy to hold up for long, the 200-500 is a sharp lens that allows plenty of working room for butterflies.

Several years ago I began reclaiming a section of lawn into native wildflowers. I wanted Monarchs and more. It now supports a great diversity of bees/wasps, aphids, beetles, flies, gray tree frogs, American toads and Boreal Red backed voles. I do not mow it in the fall, nor do I rake it out, leaving the leaf litter as is. Each summer I go through and pull up any undesirable plants.

Here are just a...Show more →

Jan 28, 2020 at 06:04 AM

bs kite
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #19 · p.1 #19 · 1.7 tc with 200-500

tntcorp wrote:
your yard is a perfect nature reclaimation effort.

for static subject in good light similar to your images, i'm surprised to hear that a 1.7x will not work w/ the lens.

thank you much

Jan 28, 2020 at 10:09 AM


FM Forums \| Nikon Forum \| Join Upload & Sell

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.