Nikon TC-20E III disappointing on a 70-200 2.8G ED VRII ?

Nikon Rumors Forum » Nikon DSLR

Nikon TC-20E III disappointing on a 70-200 2.8G ED VRII ?

(60 posts) (22 voices)

Tags:

« Previous 1 23

El_Pickerel

preferred member
Joined: Jul '11
Posts: 581
offline

Nikoner said:
Advise wanted on D800+fast tele+tc

I shoot sports indoors, outdoors, and at night under the lights.
Use a D800 as primary and D90 as backup.

I had bought the 80-200 2.8D as a stopgap measure till I can afford the 70-200 vr2, indoors I can get by with it, but for outdoors sports like soccer/lacrosse/baseball the tele end is limiting.

If you are shooting sports, I imagine the VR is not the greatest concern for you as you are stopping motion anyways. Maybe you can look at older pre-VR telephotos. The demand is much lower for these lenses - for example you could get an older 300mm f/2.8 lens for a steal.

Posted 6 months ago #
bossa

senior member
Joined: Jun '12
Posts: 63
offline

msmoto said:
I have shot hundreds of race cars, some at high shutter speeds, some at slower shutter speeds. And, with the D90 and with the D4, I have no complaints with the 70-200mm f/2.8 VRII with either the TC-20EIII or TC-14EII. I wonder if the lens/
TC, camera body needs to be fine turned in cases where there is a problem. Now, shooting wide open with the TC...this may be where problems show up. I have not tested this out, but will be doing this in about three days shooting the World of Outlaws at Charlotte, north Carolina at night . I will use the 70-200 with TC 20EIII and try to remember to shoot some wide open.
But, the alternative to a 70-200 with teleconverter is a 200-400mm f/4.0 for nearly $7,000......or a couple of non-pro zooms to 300mm

Of course the 300mm f/2.8 with a TC-14EII would be a nice lens.

With due respect the OP is asking about use with a D800 and I doubt a D90 or D4 qualifies as an answer in this regard. The D800 will show up every fault in the optics if you zoom in to 100%. And why wouldn't you? You may as well buy a D4 or D90 if all you wanted was Lo-res. ;-P

Posted 6 months ago #
msmoto

big gun cougar
Joined: Mar '10
Posts: 2,736
offline

@ bossa

No argument about the D800 having greater resolution characteristics....

So, if one wants good resolution, 300mm f/2.8, 400mm f/2.8, 500mm f/4 are the lenses of choice, used as suggested by El_Pickerel. And, the question for me is aways just how large does one want to go in the final print? I tend to be very pragmatic about all this.

For the money, I am still of the opinion the teleconverter is the best option.

Posted 6 months ago #
PaulR

senior member
Joined: Nov '11
Posts: 80
offline

I moved up to the Mk 111 converter quite a while ago.I now use it with a 300 2.8 =600 and a V1 2.7 crop factor = 1620. Needless to say this cannot be hand held but I shudder to think if Nikon made a lens this big what would it cost
When used with the V1 video mode , I am amazed at the quality, Ok I don't use this converter everyday but I would not be without it

Posted 6 months ago #
msmoto

big gun cougar
Joined: Mar '10
Posts: 2,736
offline

@ PaulR

Information has it that Leica built a one-off APO-Telyt-R 1:5.6/1600mm lens and it cost $2,064,500.

To see the photo http://nikonrumors.com/forum/topic.php?id=8053&page=3

Posted 6 months ago #
sevencrossing

preferred member
Joined: Sep '10
Posts: 1,265
offline

Nikoner said:
Advise wanted on D800+fast tele+tc

1) I wonder how a 70-200 vr2 with a teleconverter fare for soccer?

this is not a good combination with the D800. The 70 -200 is a fabulous lens, the D800 a brilliant high resolution camera

The x 2 converter will magnify any defects in the 70-200
and with a D800 those defects will show
You will not be much better off than simply cropping
The answer is one of the expensive super teles
300 f 2.8 + 1.4 converter
200 -400 f4
400 f 2.8 + 1.4; 1.7 and x2 converters

http://nikonrumors.com/forum/topic.php?id=8053

Yes they are expensive, and sorry, if you want high, IQ you are going to pay for it

Posted 6 months ago #
bossa

senior member
Joined: Jun '12
Posts: 63
offline

I wish I'd hung on a bit longer for a 300/2.8 (I'd really prefer a 400 if I had a choice). A mint used one (400) was offered to me a few weeks ago and I didn't have the cash available so I started to sell off all of my Pentax gear but someone bought it the day I called to buy.. The 300/4 is a nice lens but doesn't grab my imagination for some reason. I really like the 14E II though.. I'd never use a 2x on these lenses.. I did buy one but couldn't return it quick enough when it turned my 70-200 VR2 to mush.

Posted 6 months ago #
Nikoner

preferred member
Joined: Apr '10
Posts: 171
offline

Thanks all for replying.

After giving it much thought I don't think a TC would cut it with D800/soccer, lacrosse use because of multiple player density in a relatively small area (as opposed to a big car moving in almost predefined path with no arms, legs, goalnet, and sticks); unless I use manual focus, which I don't 80% of the time.

As suggested by many, I am leaning towards a fast fixed lense, but don't need to upgrade till spring next year.

In the meantime am hoping for nikon to upgrade their 80-400 or 300f4, in which case I will buy either one (most likely 300) and keep the 80-200 for indoors/night use.

El_Pickerel suggested a non vr used 300/2.8, this will work very well; but they (AF-S D versions) are still 3k, to afford that I may have to sell 80-200 (probably get ~$650 to $500) and be left without an indoor/night time lense. I have the 85/1.8g but that doesn't serve the purpose all the times.

Maybe my financial situation would change, and I can buy 300 vr, still have 5 months to save.

Posted 6 months ago #
msmoto

big gun cougar
Joined: Mar '10
Posts: 2,736
offline

OK, here is a crop from the 70-200mm f/2.8 VRII with the TC-20EIII. This is about 15% of the entire FX image. And it is shot at 1/400 sec, f/5.6 (wide open) with -0.7 ev. ISO 12,800.

The car was moving over 100mph and is about 600 feet from the camera.....

IMO, even with the 400mm f/2.8, at this distance one would not see a great difference, the only big factor is the sharpness would be higher as a result of lower ISO shooting at f/2.8 or using the TC-20EIII on the 400 would bring it up closer.

Posted 6 months ago #
msmoto

big gun cougar
Joined: Mar '10
Posts: 2,736
offline

Here is the full frame of the above...

And, these cars are moving all over the place, so in a way it is like shooting a sports event where the direction of travel of the subject is not always known. I think for the price of USD $3000, the TC and 70-200 works very well.

Posted 6 months ago #