Which tele-converter with Nikon 300mm f.4: TC14E or TC17E?

[fugl]

I'm contemplating upgrading to a D300 from my present D70. My main (in fact, my only) birding lens is the AF-S Nikkor ED 300mm f.4D IF prime which I've used hand-held on the D70 for several years now, with (as far as I'm concerned) quite satisfactory results (check-out http://www.flickr.com/photos/7117259@N05/ for examples). In poor light, I generally shoot with the lens wide open at ISO 400. I'm pretty happy with the image quality at ISO400 (though a little less "graininess" would be nice) and as far as I can tell, the lens (which is a very good one) is as sharp at f.4 as stopped down. I understand from the reviews that D300 IQ at high ISO ratings is markedly improved over earlier Nikon DSLRs, such as my D70. This being so, I'm thinking I could probably get away with ISO 800 with the D300 and could thus lose a stop or 2 of aperture and still have fast enough shutter speeds for hand-holding under less than ideal lighting conditions.

So, finally (sorry for the long preamble), here's my question. In terms of image quality, with my 300mm f.4 used wide-open or stopped down a little bit, am I correct in assuming that the TC14E would give noticeably better results than the TC17E. If the answer is no, I would probably go for the 17E (for the extra reach); otherwise it would have to be the 14E. Has anyone had any experience with either of these TCs with the Nikon 300mm f.4?

Any and all opinions on any of this would be welcome.

[fugl]

I'm contemplating upgrading to a D300 from my present D70. My main (in fact, my only) birding lens is the AF-S Nikkor ED 300mm f.4D IF prime which I've used hand-held on the D70 for several years now, with (as far as I'm concerned) quite satisfactory results (check-out http://www.flickr.com/photos/7117259@N05/ for examples). In poor light, I generally shoot with the lens wide open at ISO 400. I'm pretty happy with the image quality at ISO400 (though a little less "graininess" would be nice) and as far as I can tell, the lens (which is a very good one) is as sharp at f.4 as stopped down. I understand from the reviews that D300 IQ at high ISO ratings is markedly improved over earlier Nikon DSLRs, such as my D70. This being so, I'm thinking I could probably get away with ISO 800 with the D300 and could thus lose a stop or 2 of aperture and still have fast enough shutter speeds for hand-holding under less than ideal lighting conditions.

So, finally (sorry for the long preamble), here's my question. In terms of image quality, with my 300mm f.4 used wide-open or stopped down a little bit, am I correct in assuming that the TC14E would give noticeably better results than the TC17E. If the answer is no, I would probably go for the 17E (for the extra reach); otherwise it would have to be the 14E. Has anyone had any experience with either of these TCs with the Nikon 300mm f.4?

Any and all opinions on any of this would be welcome.

Bump

[Duke Leto]

fugl, yep use em both on the 300AF-S and they both work fine, the 1.4 is just about invisible and the 1.7 can be used as well but needs better contrast / light for AF.
I was surprised as to how well the 1.7 works (have a look in my gallery for the ringed godwit picture) my friend who has the dD3 reckons that you can go as far as 3200iso before it looks like 800iso in his D2Xs. I do uses the 1.7 on a tripod with the 300 but the 1.4 is manageable on a monopod and is a nice walk about combo.

[Stuart R]

fugl, yep use em both on the 300AF-S and they both work fine, the 1.4 is just about invisible and the 1.7 can be used as well but needs better contrast / light for AF.
I was surprised as to how well the 1.7 works (have a look in my gallery for the ringed godwit picture) my friend who has the dD3 reckons that you can go as far as 3200iso before it looks like 800iso in his D2Xs. I do uses the 1.7 on a tripod with the 300 but the 1.4 is manageable on a monopod and is a nice walk about combo.

Hi Steve

I have all of the above and see you use with a monopod - what pod and head do you use and recommend for "walkabout" with this setup

Cheers

Stuart R

[ikw101]

fugl, yep use em both on the 300AF-S and they both work fine, the 1.4 is just about invisible and the 1.7 can be used as well but needs better contrast / light for AF.
I was surprised as to how well the 1.7 works (have a look in my gallery for the ringed godwit picture) my friend who has the dD3 reckons that you can go as far as 3200iso before it looks like 800iso in his D2Xs. I do uses the 1.7 on a tripod with the 300 but the 1.4 is manageable on a monopod and is a nice walk about combo.

Steve - have you had the chance to try the 300mm and 1.4 on a d300 yet? Just wondering if it'd be possible to hand-hold with this set-up and still get the excellent image quality. Normally I'm happy to use this set-up on a tripod or even hide clamp but hand holding has proved extremely difficult unless I'm prepared to go to iso 800 and above.

[Duke Leto]

Hi Steve

I have all of the above and see you use with a monopod - what pod and head do you use and recommend for "walkabout" with this setup

Cheers

Stuart R

Manfrotto 679b and either a 234rc or a 484rc2

[Duke Leto]

Steve - have you had the chance to try the 300mm and 1.4 on a d300 yet? Just wondering if it'd be possible to hand-hold with this set-up and still get the excellent image quality. Normally I'm happy to use this set-up on a tripod or even hide clamp but hand holding has proved extremely difficult unless I'm prepared to go to iso 800 and above.

No not on a D300, its all down to the light, I will handhold successfully if the shutter speed is high enough or I'm panning, trouble is birds to tend to like dark backgrounds so I very rarely use it without a support. I will be trying it on a D3 soon and will let you know how it goes.

[Neil]

The 300/f4 plus 1.4x is hand holdable with the D300 and iso 1600 is equal to iso 400 on previous models. The 1.7x is a bit softer than the 1.4x and you lose 2 stops of light which slows the AF too. I wouldn't recommend it for action shots except as mentioned in very good light. Neil.

[Duke Leto]

The 300/f4 plus 1.4x is hand holdable with the D300 and iso 1600 is equal to iso 400 on previous models. The 1.7x is a bit softer than the 1.4x and you lose 2 stops of light which slows the AF too. I wouldn't recommend it for action shots except as mentioned in very good light. Neil.

You only loose 1.5 stops with the 1.7

[ikw101]

The 300/f4 plus 1.4x is hand holdable with the D300 and iso 1600 is equal to iso 400 on previous models.

That's a significant leap forward. I was contemplating a D200 and 400mm VR or OS zoom (far too many dull and overcast days up here in winter to handhold a 300/4 and 1.4x). However, it sounds like spending a bit extra on upgrading to a D300 will be a better investment than purchasing a 400mm zoom.

Don't suppose anybody knows whether Nikon have any plans to add VR to the 300/4?

[Dipper]

Has anybody experience of using the 300f.4 with the TC of choice and a flashgun? A powerful flashgun such as the Nikon SB800 should be of great use with this lens as I think most of the achievable good shots taken with this lens would be within range of the flash, therefore allowing faster shooting speeds, no need for a tripod, monopod or VR. Just a thought but it is the way I am thinking of going, much cheaper, flexible and lighter than some of the other options considered.

[D. Taylor]

I use the nikon 300/4 EDIF AS (older model) on a D 50 and use a SB 800 with and without a better beamer flash extender. I find I can had hold at around 400 sp and get good results. If I use my 1.4 TC or drop below that I use a monopod or tripod. Seem to get pretty good results although I am by far no professional. Most of the photo I have posted in the last month have been with this combination.

Donny

[joespy]

Anybody know if these two telecons (TC14E-TC17E) "work" with the Nikon S type lenses

[Duke Leto]

Anybody know if these two telecons (TC14E-TC17E) "work" with the Nikon S type lenses

Sorry are these AI-S or AF-S lenses?

[joespy]

Thanks Duke, didn't realise there's more than one S type but mine is ths 18-200 AFS. Any ideas...?

[Duke Leto]

sorry I don't believe any will work with this lens as the rear optic is to proud for a TC to be mounted, do a search for TC compatibility on google and you'll get a list from somewhere

[Chris Twine]

I use the Nikon 300 F4 with the Nikon 1.4 TC and all my shots are handheld. Usually using ISO 400 on the D200. I wouldnt use a 1.7 or 2.0 as you may loose AF in bad light.
I like having a 420mm 5.6 Lens, works for me.

[ruchai]

Manfrotto 679b and either a 234rc or a 484rc2

I use Manfrotto 685B automatic monopod, can adjust height with one hand. The 484RC2 was designed for monopod and works well.

[Gentoo]

The 300/f4 plus 1.4x is hand holdable with the D300 and iso 1600 is equal to iso 400 on previous models. The 1.7x is a bit softer than the 1.4x and you lose 2 stops of light which slows the AF too. I wouldn't recommend it for action shots except as mentioned in very good light. Neil.

One thing to note is that the D300 is less grainy at higher ISO's but it sacrifices sharpness.

The D200 has a little more noise than the D300, but the D200 is also sharper. The only difference between them is how much noise reduction is used in the cameras' firmware. Change the camera defaults or add more as a Photoshop plugin, and you can make them match.

Heck, pushing the D40 to ISO 6,400 in Photoshop and adding NR, I can make the D40 have about the same amount of noise and detail at high ISOs as the other Nikons! The D40 is noisier than the D300 at ISO 6,400, but it's sharper!

When we see though this trick in the D300, the D300 is the same as the other Nikons. The D300 has a little less noise, but a little less detail and texture at the highest ISOs.

Sadly the D300 doesn't really shoot at ISO 100 if you use Auto ISO and Nikon's Adaptive Dynamic Range (ADR) feature as I do. Since the D300 defaults to ISO 200 mostly as a marketing gimmick, my D300 shots at ISO 200 in daylight have a small amount of visible noise at 100%, which I've never gotten in my D200 (or 5D) shots at ISO 100.

Wankers worry about noise; artists worry about color and tone. The D300 has far superior color and tone to anything else I've used.

All the DX Nikons are about the same. There is more variation from one speed to the next, or in the camera's use of noise reduction which you can do later in software, than there is from any DX Nikon to the next. The D300 has the least noise of the Nikons at high ISOs, but that's because it's also FUBARing (blurring) the image almost to beyond all recognition at high ISOs just to smother the noise.

The 5D is the easy winner for high ISOs, because it stays sharp while the Nikons' noise reduction blurs the images along with the noise. I crown the 5D because it has the highest detail (signal) to noise ratio. With this, I can apply NR in software and get the smoothest image of all if I let it get as soft as the Nikons.

Get a D300 for its spectacular treatment of bold color and outstanding highlight rendition. Don't throw money at a D300 if all you want is better high ISO performance.

If you want better high ISO performance, get a 5D which costs about the same as a D300

Ken Rockwell
http://kenrockwell.com/tech/iso-comparisons/2007-11/index.htm
click the link to see photo comparisons of the above.

I have been thinking about a D300 myself but haven't made up my mind yet. Currently, I'm still shooting with a D40 and just got the 70mm-300mm Nikkor with VR. Thing is, this lens was made for a normal film 35mm camera so the smaller sensor size on these Nikon digitals means that you have an apparent zoom of 105mm-420mm, a 1.5 conversion factor. Plus I slapped that kenko pro 300 1.4 teleconverter on it so I get the equivalent of 580mm or whatever plus VR for hand held shots. The VR allows you to step down further in F stops and performs better in low light than non VR does.

[Gentoo]

Also, the Kenko pro 300 as far as I know is the only teleconverter that has passthrough connection so your camera can still communicate with your lens. You autofocus and VR will still work. With other teleconverters you're on full manual mode.

[Duke Leto]

Also, the Kenko pro 300 as far as I know is the only teleconverter that has passthrough connection so your camera can still communicate with your lens. You autofocus and VR will still work. With other teleconverters you're on full manual mode.

Apart from all the Nikon TC's..................

[cadman342001]

Ok, mate, here goes.............

I have a D300, 300f4 AFS (bought used recently), kenko 1.4TC, nikon 1.7TC.

The 300+1.4 works fine but the 300+1.7 the AF worked at first but then stopped. I believe it's the increased resistance from the TC and that there is a grounding/earthing mod that Nikon can perform (solder wire from circuit board/capacitor to the lens body) that will make it work. Other's have had no such problems. I have used it MF since but it's not easy !

All my shots are hand held but I have had plenty of practice with macro work with the sigma 180 hand held. Tripods are for wimps ! (j/k)

The D300 is light years ahead of D70 or D200 that I had previously ISO wise.

Here's a Striated Heron at ISO3200

Andy

[gary gas]

1.4 works fine with my D300+Afs 300mm and manage to hand hold ok at pretty low iso

[Fozzybear]

I have the Kenko Pro300DG 1.4x that I use on my old non AF-S 300mm f/4 and D80. It certainly slows the AF with screw-drive lenses but it's not a bad combination if you don't need lightning autofocus. I've also used it with my Tamron 90mm macro and my Nikon 70-300 VR but that lens is too slow really so AF is rather hit and miss to say the least!

[redtail7]

Hi Guys
I currently am using a D-300 with a 70-200mm f 2.8 Question... Am I going to notice any improvement in photos other than the extra 100mm reach if I were to purchase the 300mm f 4 lens?
Regards Redtail7

[Fozzybear]

Not sure really - the 70-200 is, I'm told, a very sharp lens already. The 300 f/4 is amazingly sharp though, so you 'may' or 'may not' gain in clarity as well as getting the extra pull.

Really you'd need to try one out in comparison to the 70-200 I think.

[Duke Leto]

I have both and a 1.4x and I find that both are pin sharp and to be fair the 300mm with a 1.4 is a nice combo the 70-200 with a 1.4 again is a nice 100-280/4 and you get vr.
If 300mm is all you need then I would try the 1.4 its a cheaper option and more flexible than a 300/4.
I used the 300/4 with my old D200 at the weekend as I like taking insect shots with it not too close as to disturb the critters, it is a nice lens.