< ! --Digital window verification 001 -->

Nikon AF-S Teleconverter TC-14E III is also listed

Update: Nikon USA corrected their website, the smoke remains.

Same "typo" for the Nikon AF-S Teleconverter TC-14E II:

Good timing on updating those teleconverters before the 2010 winter Olympics.

This entry was posted in Other Nikon stuff and tagged . Bookmark the permalink. Trackbacks are closed, but you can post a comment.
  • http://armansworld.com alphanikonrex

    LOL, this is hilarious! :-)

    Nice work admin!

  • Tim

    Interesting. Where there’s a converter there is a big tele too… does that mean more updates to Nikon’s exotic glass perhaps? Not sure what Nikon would add to their line up for now unless the new VR II unit gets unleashed on their long primes.

    • King Of Swaziland

      For the 487,923,211th time: ALL of Nikon’s SuperTelephotos (400 f/2.8, 500 f/4, and 600 f/4) have VRII. The II in the lens title has NO connection whatsoever to what generation of VR is on the lens.

      Is the entire internet incapable of reading Nikon’s published product specs?

      • WoutK89

        The only (long) lenses VR-I: 80-400VR, 200-400VR, 200/2.0VR

        Maybe those three will get their update.

        As far as the rest, you are totally right, there are no prime superlong lenses left that need VRII. I dont understand too why people dont read…

      • Tim

        Go easy guys! Yes, I see these are VRII. But the catalogue lists a 300/2.8 VR (3-stop VR) and a 300/2.8VR II (4-stop VR). While the 400, 500 and 600 are all listed as VR, even though they have VRII in them. Why not call them VRIIs as that’s the technology they use? That would make more sense to me.

        The VRII in the lens name doesn’t refer to VRII, but the model number within the VR incarnation. So a 3rd generation 300/2.8 with VRII would be a VRIII. It’s easy for simple folk like me to get confused when Nikon come out with what seem like ambiguous lens names.

        • WoutK89

          VR-II is always 4 stops, VR-I is 3 stops, no need to see a VRII in the name you can just deduce it.

        • WoutK89

          Ok, I will even explain further :-)
          The addition of the ‘II’ in the name, has to do with the fact if there has, or hasnt been a version before it that already featured VR. If the version before had VR-I and is now VR-II, it is necassary to differentiate the models by adding the version of VR inside the lens. Look at the: 70-200, 18-200DX, 300/2.8
          The absence of the ‘II’ in the long teles is because they are “new” lenses with no predecessor featuring VR so no differentiating needed. And as far as I am concerned, what beginner will buy those lenses anyway, so who cares if it is clear what version of VR is in it, people in the know and NEED of such a lens understand it anyway.

          • Tim

            Like the TC-17e II?

          • WoutK89

            The TC-17E is another problem :-P I think they did that, to make sure everyone knew it was the lastest, and not seeming older because it missed the ‘II’ in the end.

          • PHB

            Yes, the 18-200 was originally marked ‘VR’. The new version is marked ‘VRII’ but they both use the same VR system and have the same VR characteristics.

            There is no such part as a ‘VRII’. Each VR system is specific to the lens design. Later versions are better than earlier. Is that a surprise?

            I would expect VR updates to get the same level of priority as optical updates. At this point that should be a lot lower than converting/replacing the AF designs to bring the whole line up to date with AFS.

        • El Aura

          “Why not call them VRIIs as that’s the technology they use? That would make more sense to me.”

          Because the lens name is not
          300 mm f/2.8 (VR II)
          but
          (300 mm f/2.8 VR) II

          • Tim

            Exactly my point. Nikon’s naming of these lenses is ambiguos and will get more confusing as more products are upgraded and brought in.
            Nikon UK list lenses as follows:
            300mm f/2.8 ED-IF AF-S VR Nikkor
            300mm f/2.8G ED VR II AF-S NIKKOR
            500mm f/4G ED VR AF-S NIKKOR

            To me that reads the 300/2.8 now uses VR II and the 500/4 does not. Not that the 300/2.8 is model II and the 500/4 model I.

            It’s a bit anal I know, but the specs aren’t clear to a buyer in the lenses names, and given the number of abbreviations Nikon use, they could easily be.

            Incidentally I see the new lenses with it have dropped the “IF” from the names, though they use internal focussing mechanisms.

          • WoutK89

            So tell me, what is the difference in VR between the 18-200VR and 18-200VRII? :-P They were already both VR-II ;-)

  • Jesus_sti

    Good I’m thinking about buying one converter. interresting

  • Anonymous

    Good timing? Really? Is there really any chance of these making it into the hands of anything other than a few, hand picked, pros before the Olympics? They should have been announced in Nov. for Dec. wide release if Nikon really wanted them in the hands of the pros for the 2010 Winter Games.

  • Pataro

    I hope the new converters fix the CA problems I have with my AF-S II 400mm f/2.8 when I use it with TC’s.

    • Canon Fangirly

      I totally agree. Nikon already added an aspherical lens element to the TC 2x to reduce CA. It’s so annoying having to correct for CA all the time.

  • http://www.natuuridee.nl/ D300 user

    Lets not hope these puppies will set us back as much as the 2.0x will.

    • WoutK89

      Time will make the price go down
      Dont be so naive…, never compare current to just new prices

  • Back to top