Gareth said:
Look here http://nikonrumors.com/forum/topic.php?id=168&page=2 for a pic I took with the 300 2.8G with TC-20eiii. Hand held.

You can pretty much forget about birds in flight with a TC though, unless they are landing or taking off. I can never find a small bird in a big sky, sometimes it is even hard when they are not moving. This problem would be the same with a 500 or 600, so I suppose it is technique.

that's from other thread, but here's a good place to continue this topic.

From my experience, once You use AF it's really hard to find a bird in the fly, but once You use manual override and master this technique You will get some keepers.

Not very affordable, but handheld at f8, 600mm on a d300s, so 900mm equiv.

D300S 300 2.8 with TC-20EIII. ISO 500, f/8, 1/400. Handheld.

SO, one year on, what did you get and what are you using now.

Are the recommendations any different for folks wanting to reach out and touch the wild life at a reasonable cost?

The only lens on the market over 300mm from Nikon I want is the 200-400, a beast and over $6,000, a 100-500/4-5.6 VR-ED-IF, at $3,000 (or $4,000) with equivalent optics would earn my money.

I don't want a 80-400 replacement, I want something better.

I have a 70-300 VR (latest version) and rarely use it. I want something a bit longer and sharper. The 70-200 has no interest for me - too short for wildlife, plus I don't want to shoot it with the TC1.4 at 280/4 and get vignetting. I'd rather get the 200-400, but am willing to wait and see what becomes available

I never expected that people will read this posts after 5 months, but there you go ...
100-500, if made according to rumors, will cost at least 2 times as much as current 80-400 and probably more, hardly a replacement ...

If you go for the 70-200, wait and get the new VR ll. It is supose to be better all around. The replacement for the 80-400 (rumor) is to be 100-500mm. Just my thoughts.

Of course there may yet be the mythical AF-S Nikkor 120 to 450 mm f/4.5-5.6G ED VR from the Nikon Roadmap.

Of course there may yet be the mythical AF-S Nikkor 120 to 450 mm f/4.5-5.6G ED VR from the Nikon Roadmap.

Many thanks to all of you. looks like i may end up going for the 70-200/2.8 and TC-17 teleconverter route. it wont give me that much extra reach but i should get a better quality and more flexible (and faster) short zoom out of the combo than my trusty 70-300 AF.

heartyfisher - sorry, my mistake - I confused You with Willis :)

I’ve rechecked about mounting Nikon AF-S 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6 VR on Nikon TC-14 and though it could be done, mounting it will require voiding Nikon warranty and that is really stupid thing to do. This setup could definitely cause the damage at least to the lens and TC barrel on the shortest length and focused to infinity so please don’t try it and disregard all my posts, read the manual before you try anything and play buy it.

D200? Who? Me?

heartyfisher - for sure I'm not offended, maybe You have seen some nice samples, and I have a good Bigma copy and not so good copies of the other two - as it's very common and possible with Sigma - unfortunately. Anyway, if some of You are going to buy any of the sigmas I would suggest to test it and compare results.

as for being old - my 70-200/2.8 vr was introduced before the Bigma, and I still think it's a great lens :)

also as for reaching beyond 300mm - I played today a little bit with Nikon 300/2.8 vr - what a great lens, almost no difference in IQ when You shoot on 300 or at 510 (with Nikon TC-17) - can wait to get one (maybe next year :( )

BTW:
did You get Your d200?

@ adamz : Hope you are not offended.. 8-) (uh oh here it comes! ) But, are you sure about the 2 sigma long zooms? APO 120-400mm F4.5-5.6 DG OS HSM
APO 150-500mm F5-6.3 DG OS HSM
These are pretty new... and the 50-500 is rather old now. The samples I have seen from these new OS HSM sigmas are way better than the versions they replaced.
just checking... :-)

gentoo - as for sigma I'm not a big fan of their lenses, but that doesn't mean that they doesn't produce some good glass, I love the 10-20 and as I've played with the Bigma I think it's really a unique lens with great price/quality factor - definitely I'll choose it over the 80-400 vr from Nikon (as it focuses faster). As with all sigma lenses I will suggest to buy them from a good retailer (with good refund policies) as the build quality is a common issue with this company. As for the performance, I was testing it wide open (6.3 @ 500) and found it is acceptable for most of users and certainly better than You could expected from a zoom with 10x factor, and once You stopped it down a little bit to f8 You will get a really good glass, so as for the light Yup it needs a lot of it. You need to get at least 1/500 (1/250 when You have a really steady hand). Concluding, if You have a camera that performs well on iso 1600 or above than it's a good choice if You need range, otherwise go for something brighter.

adamz, I've heard that Sigma has spotty quality control and that it's IQ can't compete at all with the Nikkors. How true is this in your opinion? When I bought my 70-300VR It was between the 50-500 and that one. I settled on the Nikkor. Also, how does it perform being a 5.6-6.3? I would imagine that it would need a lot of light.

heartyfisher - I had both of them, but was referring to the VR version (the non VR non ED version is some kind of joke - I gave it away )
As for sigmas, the difference between the new ones and the old ones is that the old one (50-500) is EX series - pro quality from Sigma - which means better sealing and generally tougher build, also the IQ is better on 50-500 than on the other two (once I've compared all of the sigmas as I wanted to get one - I ended up with Nikon 70-200/2.8 + TC17 :) as I shoot mostly on base ISO and doesn't like to carry a tripod, but if someone has a camera that performs well in higher ISO - 800 and more, than Bigma's lack of VR shouldn't be a problem).

@ adamz : Which version of the 70-300 did you have. The New 70-300 vr is much better than the non vr versions.

Yea that Bigma is rather amazing. The picture samples are better than expected. However the new Sigma OS lenses

APO 120-400mm F4.5-5.6 DG OS HSM
APO 150-500mm F5-6.3 DG OS HSM

look great!. The samples I have seen are really good. I am seriously considering getting the 150-500 OS. Pair it with my extension tubes and I should be able to get some nice pictures of those friendly pelicans. 8-)

adamz Agree with you again although I've not used the Bigma.

gentoo - be surprised but I agree with You 100% - the fact that You can mount TC on any unsupported lens does not equal the true usability as pretty much the rear element will be smashed. Kenko works in a little bit different way, that's why sometimes we are able to use it on non supported lenses.

as for using 1.7 and 2.0 on lenses slower than f2.8 they usually will not work, as the auto focus doesn't get enough light - with fixed f4 lenses - 1.7 TC will give You f6.8 and 2.0 will give You f8, Nikon AF works well when the lens does not exceed f5.6 (Canon OTOH is less picky and works up to f8)

also once again I will try to convince some of You to try the Bigma (Sigma 50-500), I've played with this lens a little bit, and can say that the 750mm reach on DX camera is great, also with enough light You can easily handhold it (although it's heavy) and I bet that IQ is far better on this lens than on 70-300 + TC (I had the 70-300 some time ago I sold it as the IQ on the far end was little bit disappointing)

heartyfisher - thank You, glad You liked it

@ Gentoo : Nice picture .. should clean up very nicely with a lick of sharpening ...

@ Adamz : Just opened your tiger picture at full resolution. Gee-wizz that's a nice combo.I have heard good things about that combo in the past and your picture sure doesn't disappoint.

I use the kenko pro 300 with my prime. Here is an example:

http://www.pbase.com/shonn/image/109402914

The image is a little soft but it worked for me. With a D300 the metering knows that something is askew. It tries to compensate for this be overexposing. With this shot I had to stop down the exposure compensation to -1.0 This is just one other thing to keep in mind when using TC's and telephoto lenses.

Thank you heartyfisher! :)

( I just realized there's a y in there lol sorry)

It is a well known issue that the 70-300 and the 80-400 will crash into the Nikon TCs. The New Kenko TC and Tamron TC provides enough clearance to work with these lenses. These new 7 element TCs are pretty good. I have a Kenko 1.4 and I am happy with its performance.

Please excuse the quality of this. I took it in a hurry and lightened it with Capture NX's D-Lighting to show the inside of the back of the lens:

From left to right: 70-300VR. 70-200F2.8 VR. And 300mmF4.

Now if you look closely, you can see where the 70-300 pokes out a little further than the 70-200 and the prime doesn't poke out at all. Not only this but unlike the 70-200, that glass moves as you zoom. The glass is also not flat or concave like the 70-200 which does not move when you zoom. The 70-300's glass bulges out (or in this case upward) slightly. The Nikon TC's poke inward toward the rear element. This is perfect for the pro zooms and primes. However if you were to forget and zoom back toward the minimum focal length, the glass elements could collide, damaging more than your AF.

Yeah you could try it, if you have the money to replace anything that's damaged, but why?