Nikon Teleconverter Question

[Scottwdw]

Anyone own one the Nikon TC's? Looking for opinions and sample photos using any of them but particularly the 1.7e model. Don't forget to mention what lenses you've used them with. Thanks!

 

[Craig]

I believe Moose Peterson uses the 1.7 ALL the time.

 

[mPower]

I use the 1.7 with my 70-200 all the time on the D300. Works GREAT in all light levels. These were taken from our balcony at the AKL this Jan.

[attachment deleted by admin]

 

[Scottwdw]

Craig, checked out Moose's website about the 1.7x. Yep, he likes it.

Mark, cool...that's the lens I'd be using it with for field sports. Thanks!

 

[Craig]

I have seriously considered changing my bag to include

the 24-70 2.8
the 70-200 2.8 with the teleconverter
the tokina 11-16

and selling the 80-400 to help offset costs.
I would still keep the 18-200 though!

 

[mPower]

Craig,

That would be a solid (no pun intended) bag! In Jan, I had the D300 w/grip, 50 1.4, 10.5, 11-16, 18-200, 70-200 w/1.7x & SB900 many days. All I can say is: thank heavens for the stroller!

Finally over the last few days, I started leaving the 70-200 & 10.5 in the hotel.

 

[Scottwdw]

Oh, boy, not sure I'm ready to give up the 80-400 especially with the idea of going to an FX body in the near future.

I hear you on the 70-200VR, Mark. I used it at AK and DHS on my last trip. At DHS, I kept it in a locker until I needed it for a couple of the shows. DHS isn't that big so going back to the locker wasn't a time killer. Since AK closes around 5pm, carrying it for the day wasn't hard and I had a bag to put it in when I switched lenses.

Having said that, I very happily used my tripod like a monopod during Fantasmic! Worked like a charm.

 

[mPower]

The 80-400 is an interesting lens to me. I've shot it a few times, and while it is somewhat slow to focus, I don't think it'd be that bad for wildlife. That said, it's hard to think about plunking down the 6-9k needed for either a 400 2.8 or a 200-400 4. (who am I kidding, it's FUN to think about spending that...considering it's probably predicated on winning the lottery...)

 

[Scottwdw]

From what I read, the 70-200VR with TC 1.7x will still have the focus speed I'm looking for in field sports given good daytime lighting. If I ever do get a fast prime (hey, I can dream, too!), sounds like the TC works well with them, too.

For wildlife and zoos, it's going to be hard to beat the 80-400 for the price. Case in point...

and

and my favorite...

Almost time to get out to my local wildlife refuge!

 

[mPower]

That sparrow shot is great!

 

[Roger]

For wildlife and zoos, it's going to be hard to beat the 80-400 for the price. Case in point...

I concur. My seal shot was with it, along with some others I took at Sea World. Very nice lens. I actually didn't notice lens focusing speed problems, but then again, you don't use a 5.6 lens for sports.

 

[Scottwdw]

I concur. My seal shot was with it, along with some others I took at Sea World. Very nice lens. I actually didn't notice lens focusing speed problems, but then again, you don't use a 5.6 lens for sports.

I could use it for some sports or for focusing in on one area like a lacrosse goal or a baseball batter. Not being an AFS lens, tracking action will be a challenge and a monopod a must. I'll probably give it a go just to see what it can do on a bright sunny day.

 

[mPower]

I don't know Scott...your collection of lenses sure does leave you with a happy upgrade path to adding an additional '0' to your camera body!

 

[Roger]

I'll probably give it a go just to see what it can do on a bright sunny day.

Egads I'm having flashbacks with the Edsel. I'm even more upset about it since they recalled it again.

 

[Scottwdw]

I don't know Scott...your collection of lenses sure does leave you with a happy upgrade path to adding an additional '0' to your camera body!

Almost like it was planned, eh? 8)

 

[mPower]

Funny how things work out, isn't it?