Some Nikon V1 + FT-1 + TC 2.0x + 400mm f/2.8 fun = 2160mm

Here are some samples from the Nikon V1 + FT-1 adapter + TC 2.0x + Nikkor 400mm f/2.8 lens. The focal length calculation should be: 400 x 2 x 2.7 = 2160mm:

Some Nikon V1 + FT-1 + TC 2.0x + 400mm f/2.8 fun

Images credit:ย Razvan T.

This entry was posted in Nikon 1, Nikon Lenses and tagged . Bookmark the permalink. Trackbacks are closed, but you can post a comment.
  • JChau

    Now THAT’s overcompensating for something! ๐Ÿ˜‰

  • Clumsy

    Very interesting test. I have been considering to add V1/J1 to my Nikon set. One never knew when one needs that extra reach.

    • Global

      Birding in daylight with no shutter noise?

      • Clumsy


      • KitHB

        Birding from the next county?

        There’s a good half moon up this week. I’d like to see what the setup does with that.

    • il Mando

      I had this idea too some years ago, when I passed from Dx to Fx. A used Dx body was about 400-500 euro, so I thought that more or less it was the price (in euros) of the 2x TC. It’s curious that we think at Dx/Cx sensors as teleconverters ๐Ÿ™‚

  • Why, just because you can do something does not mean that it makes sense for others to emulate.

    • BBB

      Why, just because you can do something and it makes no sense for others to emulate and someone says so, dosen’t mean you shouldn’t.

  • Mike

    I always thought about it, but these are great visual confirmations.
    I think Nikon should capitalize on this – and advertise Nikon-1 to current Nikon SLR glass holders. J1 was already a hot seller in Europe in 2011.

    • Ball_Lightning

      I would love to use one of them on my 500/4, but in my opinion Nikon screwed it up with just one AF point and AF-S only. It makes the whole adapter a lot less appealing.

  • Can you fit it in your pocket? ๐Ÿ™‚

    • Gav

      No my dear. It isn’t my camera I’m just happy to see you ๐Ÿ˜‰

  • This is huge for paparazzi and wild life, $10.000,00 kit , not so much for 2160mm.

    • John

      You’re kidding right?

    • Michael

      I think he meant the body, only…

    • nir.exe

      Heaven for Paparazzi, a 70-200 2.8 is 189mm-540mm. you need nothing else.

      • PHB

        Yep, that was my plan.

        I have the V1 and the FT1 and it works great on an 18-200. I will probably move up to a 70-200 in due course. An 80-400 AFS would probably be the ideal.

        This is why I thought Nikon got the sensor size right. A DX sensor would not provide any better quality, it would only make the camera bigger.

        I am not sure what the focus point limitation is, if it is software it may well get fixed.

  • WOW!

    • Marky Mark

      Who cares? Am I the only one that doesn’t see how this is even important? Must be a slow news day….

      • and the Funky Bunch

        Not important, just cool.

  • Wow, now. That’s impressive. Tests like these have been popping up for a while now. The results are amazing, but it won’t really be of much use once the D800 is out. 2.7x crop will be a no brainer, and you’ll get 11-13MP. If you’re carrying around a 400/2.8, you’re not going to worry too much about the size of a D800 vs V1.


    • Parci

      Actually, 36MP FX sensor with 2.7X crop is less than 5MP…

      • WoutK89

        +1, but that is still of higher quality than what a mobile phone does at 5MP ๐Ÿ˜€

        • More than enough for a tabloid print…

    • JED

      It does highlight the potential of a 24MP DX D400. That would provide about 7.4MP at the Nikon 1 ‘CX’ crop size.

      • ben

        For DX this suggests we should be good for a 31MP dx camera.
        The pixels at 31MP on dx would be the same size as the cx nikon 1 at 10MP

  • gwen

    I’m impressed by the IQ ! Excellent resulsts…gives me some ideas with my Sigma 50-500 OS ๐Ÿ™‚
    Thanks for sharing !

    • 120-300 os

      Thanks for sharing but what is the F number finally ?
      and combines with my new 120-300 os lol!

      • WoutK89

        500 x 2.7 = 1350mm @ F/6.3 (does the V1 even AF with lower than F/5.6?)
        1350 x 2 = 2700mm @ F/13 (No AF guaranteed or even possible)

        • me

          No, no, no!
          Crop doesn’t change the aperture!
          So it’s a 500mm f4 equivalent to 1350 f4

          If you add a x2 extender, then you have f8.

          • No, he’s right. The Bigma 50-500/4.5-6.3 is F/6.3 at its longest end. So, with teh 2.7x crop of the camera, that’s a 1350mm F/6.3.

            The 2x extender loses 2 stops of light. F/6.3->+1 stop->F/9->+1 stop->F/13. So, this would give you a 2700mm F/13.


            • PHB

              The teleconverter and the DX crop both lose stops and for the same reason.

              Both lose stops because they are throwing away the light that would otherwise fall on the sensor.

              The only thing is that because of an accident of measurement and history, the teleconverter stop is charged against the F-number and the DX crop is charged against the ISO number. But the same thing is happening, you are throwing away light so you loose sensitivity.

              One stop is about three years R&D so the Nikon 1 has the same performance as the D300 and vastly better performance than the D2 or D50 generation cameras.

  • Ben Hipple

    The pixel density of a 10MP V1 if made in FX would be over 70MP.
    This shows how good Nikon Glass really is.
    And how High the MP of FX may get one day.

    • SF

      agree with you…
      yet another proof of how staggering the 400mm is!

    • Anonymous Maximus

      Corners? Diffraction?

      • Danilo

        Maybe for a FX lens, the corner of the CX crop is not that far from the centre.

        • Anonymous Maximus

          Sorry, I wasn’t clear enough, just wanted to criticize if a 70mp FX ever happens in the future.

          For corner sharpness you have to stop down at least 2 apertures even in a stellar lens (to cut that high pixel density) , then you’ll enter diffraction zone.

          Center-only sharpness vs. ok-corners but softness in general. This issue will become problematic with 36mp D800, let alone anything 70mp… That’s why digital MF exists.

          • nobody

            When would you ever need corner sharpness for the purposes the 400mm f 2.8 is made for? Typically, this lens is used wide open. But even stopped down to f5.6, the corners will be way out of DOF in most cases.

            Besides that, the MTF50 diffraction limit for a 60mp FX sensor would be f5.6. Nothing to be afraid of!

            • T.

              An excellent point. Comments about “corners” suggest a lack of experience with super telephoto lenses, especially the 400mm f/2.8. I use mine wide open 95% of the time. And if I need to “slow it down” I use ND filters.

              I should add that with anything over 300mm we begin to worry about other issues.

              In terms of combining a super telephoto with a J1/V1 body, we are looking at something of very limited application. I have a 600mm f/4 in the closet somewhere and I use it only rarely, and that’s with a DSLR.

      • Anonymus Maximus 1st


        I can understand that intelligence and wit of my remarks have caused such an admiration that you use my name.

        However I would have appreciated if you would have had the tact to call yourself ” Anonymus Maximus 2nd”

        The original

        • spam

          Must have beren something else

    • No Name

      Ben Hipple, lens are good but diffraction is diffraction. TC take +2 EV, V1 sensor size takes +3 EV, therefore they use F/2.8 lens in this case. When you count everything together you get 2160mm, F/16, but that situation doesn’t work any more. They said “the tripod was not steady enough”… Yeah right, it’s diffraction, not shake. Tripod doesn’t shake just like that… That means you can use only high quality F/2 lens (it’s 200mm only or shorter) and this story means 1080mm F/11 for sharp picture (But I even don’t believe in that combination, too, because V1 sensor density is too high for present modern lenses).
      Therefore, I don’t understand high MP demand… I mean, where you can find lenses to get sharp images over F/8??? It’s better to save money and buy medium format, people should not expect 36mp camera for for few bucks or something like that because it doesn’t work any more…

      • OleThorsen

        You’re totally wrong. A 400mm f2.8 with a 2x teleconverter is 800mm f5.6 on a FX camera, and have a FOV of a 2176mm lens with the Nikon 1 camera and FT1 adapter , and the aperture is still f5.6, but with the DOF like a 800mm lens.

        Have you ever shot a 2176mm lens from a tripod? I can tell you that you’ll need a very steady tripod if you want a shake free picture, even with the V1/J1.

        • NoName

          …OleThorsen, I hope that you was good in physics at school? ๐Ÿ™‚
          Because, you are obviously forgetting that this 400mm FX lens is made for FX sensor size… So, mettering will choose amount of light enough to cover 24x36mm sensor and diameter of circle will be around 43mm to cover whole FX sensor. OK?
          But we have 13.2×8.8mm sensor… so CX sensor will take/get only around 15mm diameter circle of light what is -3EV amount of light (-2.9 exactly). So, CX sensor will always take circle like 3 stops smaller aperture than have chosen on your aperture ring or dslr display…
          Second thing, tripod shake… you have more than 10 lb lens and less then 1 lb camera body (so balace is good)… also you have hard marble floor, and very solid building around you (no wind etc.)… and you get blur/shake? I mean, why they didn’t shoot more shoots and publish good one?
          I’ll tell you why they didn’t… because they couldn’t get it.
          Or they have had Alzheimer? (black humor, I know) :-)))
          Also, I realized that sensor have 74 MP density (FX relative). It’s huge resolution and even 20mm lens engineered specially for that sensor can be used only to aperture 5.6! You can’t find lens for that resolution!
          Shortly, this combination above is useless…

          • freakout

            OleThorsen is right – NoName is wrong – amount of light must be taken per area! The smaller sensor gets the same amount of light as the bigger one within the same area!

            • NoName

              …still no one answered to my question why they didn’t publish sharp image instead of “explaining” to us that was earthquake around tripod… ๐Ÿ™‚

              Point is that nor teleconverter or CX sensor DO NOT expand focal length of the lens. As former military sniper shooter I know what shaking looks like… Actually they use 400mm lens with all optical caracteristics of 400mm lens only… not 800mm or 2160mm. Therefore, it wasn’t shaking! 2160 mm is only effect produced by, first, enlarging central part of lens circle (lens in TC 2x) and, second, much smaller CX sensor then FX sensor which collects 15mm of light from middle of 43mm circle.
              Also, TC 2x decrease resolution of the lens, too. Please count…

              It’s funny situation… people naively think that they can buy few thousands bucks 400mm F/2.8 lens and few hundreds bucks CX body and they’ll get fully usable 1080mm F/2.8 (!?) lens.
              Yeah, right! :-)))

  • Neil

    Wow, that might breathe new life in my 200-400. Maybe an idea for me instead of a D4 (seriously).

  • T.I.M

    Can someone check if we actually landed on the moon ?

    • nir.exe

      We didn’t, everybody knows that but nobody talks about is..

  • amazing quality great imagination

  • neversink

    I’d like to see some outdoor shots and see what the atmospheric conditions render… However, I am impressed…. How quick the world is changing… How much fun this can be!!!!!

    Guess I’ll have to get a V1… Never even thought of buying one of those little critters until now…

    Can you get an underwater housing for it????

  • BlackWolf

    400mm? What about the 800?

    • Anonymous Maximus

      Is there any tripod & head sturdy enough for that combination (V1 + 800mm + 2x TC + adapter) ? Sure there may be, but it will weigh a ton. And there must be no trace of vibration or wind around. Plus, the air must be very clean & devoid of thermal currents (mirage effect), even indoors at that degree of magnification: 4000+ mm !

  • Coolpux

    Useless !

    Any coolpux or fuji superzoom could do better in a small package !!!

    • @Coolpux, -1

      You won’t get over 2000mm with a coolpux or fuji superzoom. Nor will you get nearly the sharpness. In fact, all those considering using this combo with lesser lenses will be disapointed.

      • spam


  • R!

    Good reason to buy a V1 camera ……interesting !

  • DAS
  • nwhiker

    and Tommy Hilfiger sells that pair of shoes for $455… Thanks, but I’ll save my $ to buy a V1 instead… ;p)

  • Catalin

    Price tag says 455 RON (Romanian LEU) which roughly means 140 USD. These photos are made I think in a Yellow Store (Nikon dealer) in Baneasa (near Bucharest).

  • toad

    Looks like 455 euros. And it also looks like they are not selling them at that price, since they are being marked down substantially.

    • Woah. Pretty bad diffraction even at F/4! F/2.8 is a MUST if using a 2xTC obviously.

  • jen

    thats ridiculous..

  • tracey allen

    Is it only me or am I the only one who noticed that the camera is set to “auto” not “manual”!!!

  • Heiko


  • ShaoLynx

    OK, OK, all of this is a farther reach than my little freehand test that I posted some days ago (only able to reach 1080mm — same setup, different lens: 70-200mm).
    At least I didn’t pay excessively for the lens… :-p
    And since I freehanded it, it shows that VR works in the combo.
    Sorry for the re-itteration, but here’s the link once more for the interested:

  • Ralph

    Come on Nikon!!! Give us what we want, an adaptor for the iPhone.

    • Slimy Sally

      Come on Nikon!!! Give us what we want, a D800!

      • El_Pickerel

        Come on Nikon!!! Give me what I want, an AF-S VR 50-300mm f/4G ED IF ๐Ÿ™

  • A 24MPixel DX camera will be better to do a similar image.

    • pagni

      Like a plastic sluggish alpha77 that cant go over iso 1

  • VoP

    I used nearly the same setup some days ago.
    J1 + FT1 + TC-20E III + 400 2.8 VR

    Hier are the images and a video …

    • Jim

      Could you please tell something about the tripod head you’ve used (name, approx. $)
      I assume one part is for panning and the other for up-down?

      • VoP

        The tripod is a good old Berlebach UNI 16 black (about 550โ‚ฌ today).
        The gimbal head is the GH2 from Benro (about 300โ‚ฌ).

  • Andrea Leganza

    This is Camera porn ๐Ÿ™‚

  • 2.1 meters, forget about millimeters.

    • Matt_XVI

      Haha! Took me a second to get that one!

  • Like to see some birding pictures with this combo and not in broad daylight but in low light conditions!

  • Well, well, well, someone took my post on NR Forum seriously…. darn, now I have to get a V1 and adapter….. and will use two tripods, sand bags, catching motorcycles coming over a hill…. yes!!!


  • Terry

    Well, as much as I am a birder and would also love to see some pictures of birds and wildlife, I realized after looking closer to the details of the FT-1 that auto focus is severely limited when using the FT-1. AF is limited to only one center point and with no auto tracking. The subject has to be perfectly still to get proper focus which makes it next to impossible for birding and wildlife (although I’m sure there will be people who can work with this limitation). I think for birding and such it will be best to not use the FT-1 in the mix which kind of defeats the purpose of getting those high focal lengths. Oh well, Nikon just needs to fix this limitation on future versions (if they can).

    • Razvan T.

      We tried the FT-1 with V1 and 70-300MM and it was pretty fast, but I think it was set on center if im not mistaken. Another thing I noticed V1 + 70-300 looks really nice! ๐Ÿ™‚

  • Camaman

    I guess that would be a cool safari cam, small body fast AF. ๐Ÿ™‚
    Results are quite good!

  • ben

    Holy smokes, this is serious photography. How fast does it acquire focus with the lens?

    • Razvan T.

      The focus was relativily fast, but just so you understand… We strugled a little to find the subject and when I photographed a friend from another store I prefered the manual focus because once it losted it was a pain to get it back in focus especialy to a moving subject. The fact is I never had a lens that would go more than 200 mm ( 300 on the dx body I curently have ) and managed to take photos with the help of a tripod which I consider motionless, but surprize only if took a step beside it the image would start moving at that focal length.

      In nature where you will have a lot of open space I think you can rely on the autofocus on static subjects. Moving subjects would need a lot of sincronizing on the photographers part because 1 mm in the wrong direction and you got something totally different in your shot.

  • Awesome, I’ve always wanted to get into bird beak photography.

  • Ron Scubadiver

    Forget about millimeters, this is 2.1 meters.

  • Big Mike John

    I think the technical term for this is: Crazy Shizzle!

  • wow!
    that’s awesome!!!
    I hardly remember what it looked like shooting on a crop-cameras, but this is … fun-tastic :))

  • Andrew

    Sorry, but the focal length is not 2160mm

    It’s 400*2=800

    Cropping the image circle does not increase the focal length of the lens. Yes, it gives the the same angle of view of as a 2160mm lens, but it doesn’t increase the magnification.

    Put that lens on a DSLR (aps-c or full frame) and you’ll get the same resolution, just more shop.

    • Joseph

      Who cares? The point is that it gives the SAME ANGLE OF VIEW as a 2160mm lens on a 35mm/FF camera. And you WON’T get the same resolution unless you’ve got the D900 with 72 megapixels from the future.

    • Camaman

      Your aunt must be Debbie Downer, right?

  • Alex

    This is the only reason for me to buy the V1/J1: the possibility to get very close using an adapter and “normal” Nikon lenses. Considering the crop factor, this was the first thing that came to mind. A lot have been said about the new system, but I haven’t read any thoughts on this aspect of it – being able to zoom really close. Together with the supposedly very accurate AF it should make an interesting setup for bird watching (both kinds).

  • frAnk

    So, the Nikon 1 finally found it’s core customers, the birders and paparazzi.

    From now on, we should refer the Nikon 1 as birders & paparazzis’ standard issue.

    • Earl

      Does Nikon 1 have application for OB GYN doctors?

  • frAnk

    On Feb 7th, 2012, Nikon will release an adaptor for stomach scopes they sell in the medical field. The gynecologists will have a field day with J1 or V1.

  • I wish the FT-1 adapter was available when I published my Nikon 1 system review article on [NR] awhile back. It would of been fun using it on my 80-400 VR. ๐Ÿ™‚

  • Cedric

    Did anyone know this could work or not:
    Nikon One + FT1+ sigma 800 f5.6?

    • spam


  • Robert Daniels

    Are you all seeing the bigger picture? I would love to see a sports photographer go out and shoot the superbowl with this set up. I definitely see this set up being used during te Olympics from hard to reach areas!!!

  • The Manatee

    The idea that crop factor provides extra reach is a myth. Crop factor does not affect magnification. Why is this myth still perpetuated?

    • PAG

      Here’s the way I’ve heard it explained. Let’s say I have a 12MP D90 and a 200mm lens and the guy standing next to me has a 12MP D700 and a 300mm lens. We both focus on the same object, frame it identically, and shoot. Who has the larger subject in their image? Unless I’m mistaken, the answer is “neither, the subject appears to be the same size.” Ditto for “who has more pixels?” By any real world application, this sounds a lot like magnification.

      I’ve read descriptions of why sensor cropping are effectively magnification in the field. I’ve read technical ones as to why it’s not, but they don’t matter one bit to what happens in the field. But I’m open minded and if you can explain why the distinction of glass vs. sensor magnification matters to me, I’m all ears. Please focus on the size of the subject and pixels making up the image (effects expected by magnification), not on other factors such as DOF, dynamic range, better ISO, or other factors that have nothing to do with the size of my subject in my image. Thanks in advance.

      • Bengt Nyman

        True virtual focal length.
        What counts is how many pixels you end up with in the final, cropped image.
        To multiply the lens focal length with the sensor cropping factor to advertise a virtual focal length is only half the story. You have to include the sensor pixel counts and the post editing cropping factors as well before you have a true comparison.
        f v= f*cf*(mp1:mp2)*(cfe1:cfe2)

    • El Aura

      Crop factor is only relevant for framing, what really matters is pixel density. If Nikon made a 72 MP FX version of the Nikon 1 sensor, the image center would look exactly the same as what is shown in this example.

      • Bengt Nyman

        Your part about the 72 MP FX is of course true.
        The expression pixel density is not very useful unless you specify number of pixels per what …
        It becomes meaningful only when you refer to it as the total number of pixels for the finished and cropped image in question.

  • Perfect for candids ๐Ÿ™‚

  • kulturindustrie

    I am totally not buying this nikon 1 system! Haven’t you noticed how blurry these pictures are in the corners (Japanese tourists @ 30mm and the Tommy Hilfiger logo @ 10mm)?

    Happily it is quite useful with this DSLR lens…

    • samseite

      because he edited with liquify and blur tools on photoshop (censor) to protect, in case for upload on any website.

      i use nikon 1 system and DSLR, ofcourse yes it can’t be comparable with DSLR. but both system are usefull for me, and i enjoy it.

      nikon did a great job for CX system

  • Back to top