Thought on the Nikon 1.7TC

[Nancy A Elwood]

Hi all and happy new year:)! I have been thinking about getting this TC for my Nikon 500 f4 for just those times where you want a little more reach on a stationary subject. I have the 1.4, and the results are quite good, but just wanted peoples thoughts on whether the 1.7 was worth the cost. Thanks ahead of time:).

[allanrube]

When I had the same lens you have I used the 1.7 only when the subject was far away. I thought the results were inferior to the 1.4.

[Thonnaksar NOP]

Personally, I think the combo 500 VR+TC-17EII won't give you good results.
The TC-17EII works best with the 70-200 VR and the 600 VR.

Have a look at these two images I took a few weeks ago :


200-400 VR + TC-17EII
http://www.pixelistes.com/forum/imag...esize2_157.jpg




500 VR + TC-17EII
http://www.pixelistes.com/forum/imag...esize2_164.jpg

[Nancy A Elwood]

Personally, I think the combo 500 VR+TC-17EII won't give you good results.
The TC-17EII works best with the 70-200 VR and the 600 VR.

Have a look at these two images I took a few weeks ago :


200-400 VR + TC-17EII
http://www.pixelistes.com/forum/imag...esize2_157.jpg




500 VR + TC-17EII
http://www.pixelistes.com/forum/imag...esize2_164.jpg

I cannot view the links.:(

[Fabs Forns]

I find the 1.7X works on the 200-400 VR when subjects are close to you, for instance, to do a head portrait. To get subjects far away close, not that good. For flight, I don't like it.
With the 600/4 VR it's pretty decent, although you loose quality compared to the 1.4X
But sometimes, it's the only way you can get the picture, and as long as you know what you are getting....

[Tony Whitehead]

My experience echoes Fabs. Close subjects where you are closing down to achieve DOF results are fine on the 200-400 but AF slows too much for flight shots which become rather hit and miss.

[Ed Erkes]

I've tested the Nikon 1.4X, 1.7X and 2.0X with the 200 400 zoom with a resolution chart, using flash to eliminate camera/lens vibration. I've compared the results to the MF 400mm f3.5 and MF 600mm f4 with 1.4x and 2X converters. There is very little difference in resolving power between the TC14EII and TC17EII. I have no hesitation at all using the 1.7x (auto focus is a little less responsive though). There is a significant drop off in sharpness with the the TC20EII, but surprisingly, the 200 400 with 2X converter is significantly sharper than my 400with 2X and the 600 with 2X.
It is really hard to judge sharpness of different camera/lens combinations without using controlled conditions (i.e test conditions of the same subject, same light, and same magnification). There are too many other variables involved to make a really good comparison and a whole lot inaccurate info (some by very talented photographers) being posted in various forums. It is better to borrow a teleconverter and test it yourself. A newspaper with fine print will serve as a substitute for a resolution chart. However it is critical to make sure the magnification is the same with the different setups. It is really hard to judge small, but significant differences in resoving power if the newsprint or resolution lines/bars are at even slightly different magnifcations.

http://members.photoportfolios.net/ederkes

[Nancy A Elwood]

Thanks all for your imputs!

[Alfred Forns]

I rely on the 1.7X and like it AF wise it does slow it down but find it totally usable, you just need to be more precise and plan.

[Thonnaksar NOP]

I cannot view the links.:(

Ooops, sorry for the links.

You should see the images with these new links :

200-400 VR+TC-17EII
http://img145.imageshack.us/img145/1...resize2db7.jpg



500 VR+TC-17EII
http://img125.imageshack.us/img125/2...resize2lq9.jpg

[James Graham]

Great Pics, Thonnaker. What were the camera settings.