[MBS]

Hi I am thinking about buying a lens converter for my 55-200nikon lens as against buying a 70-300 nikon lens.Opinions on which would be best and why would be very helpfull,any help on this would appreciated

Mick shu

[EdMak]

Personally, I would not buy a converter without trying it, and, evaluating it, thoroughly. Ed.

[MBS]

Hi Ed Thanks for the reply. Buying a 70-300 lens might be the option

[Plantsman]

Hi I am thinking about buying a lens converter for my 55-200nikon lens as against buying a 70-300 nikon lens.Opinions on which would be best and why would be very helpfull,any help on this would appreciated

Mick shu

Nikon tele converters are mostly compatible with their primes. The Nikkor 70-300mm f4.5-5.6 is an excellent lens and well worth the current price. See my profile for the gear I use.

Peter

[Freeman]

Hi Mick

I have a Nikon D610 with which I often use a 80-400mm f4.5-5.6G ED lens. I also have a Nikon 1.4x converter to use with it but this renders the lens f8. (1.7x and 2x converters are not compatible with this lens). So, it can't really be used once the light begins to fade in the afternoon as a result. You might want to check the effect f number of the lens and converter combination you are considering. Even so, my converter definitely helps with bringing distant ducks at the reserve that little bit closer if the light is good, but I suspect that I get the same result by managing without it and simply cropping a bit more. This is because what I gain in reach by using the extender I lose on light and definition.

As the lens is now longer with the converter added, you may need faster shutter speeds at full zoom, again requiring better light. It may depend on the type of photography you do and where you are located geographically. If you do wildlife, a 300mm or lens is barely sufficient reach I would say especially with a full frame camera. But 300mm with a 2x converter (if they are compatible - would need to check) would be adequate reach on a full frame and very good reach on a cropped sensor camera.

Others with more technical competence may be able to express this better or advise us both, but this is my experience after months with this Nikon kit.

Regards, Jeff

[MBS]

Hi Jeff. Thanks for the advise,I think buying the 70-300 lens might be my best option
Regards Mick

[MBS]

Hi I am thinking about buying a lens converter for my 55-200nikon lens as against buying a 70-300 nikon lens.Opinions on which would be best and why would be very helpfull,any help on this would appreciated

Mick shu

Nikon tele converters are mostly compatible with their primes. The Nikkor 70-300mm f4.5-5.6 is an excellent lens and well worth the current price. See my profile for the gear I use.

Peter

[MBS]

Hi I am thinking about buying a lens converter for my 55-200nikon lens as against buying a 70-300 nikon lens.Opinions on which would be best and why would be very helpfull,any help on this would appreciated

Mick shu

Nikon tele converters are mostly compatible with their primes. The Nikkor 70-300mm f4.5-5.6 is an excellent lens and well worth the current price. See my profile for the gear I use.

Peter

[MBS]

Hi Peter Thanks for the reply I am going for the Nikon 70-300 vr lens.
Regards Mick

[Pegger3D]

Hi Jeff. Thanks for the advise,I think buying the 70-300 lens might be my best option
Regards Mick

Hi Mick,

Like Freeman said, it depends on what you are going to shoot.

I have a cheat sheet on what lens can get a good image with each of their magnifiers. I think you can get it at the Nikon site.

The 80-400mm is the best Nikon large zoom to get a good image with the TC magnifiers.
If you are birding, this lens and TC will be much better than the 70-300mm.

For sports and other events, the AF-S 70-300MM VR ED is a fantastic lens (I have one), but magnification is not quite good enough for birding.

Many birders are going to the new Tamron 150-600mm lens at around $1200.

Many stores have them on back order-get in line.

http://www.dpreview.com/lensreviews/tamr...-600-5-6p3

My 2 cents







[/quote]

AFTeleconverter.pdf Size: 62.79 KB  Downloads: 255

   

[Pegger3D]

Hi Jeff. Thanks for the advise,I think buying the 70-300 lens might be my best option
Regards Mick

Hi Mick,

Like Freeman said, it depends on what you are going to shoot.

I have a cheat sheet on what lens can get a good image with each of their magnifiers. I think you can get it at the Nikon site.

The 80-400mm is the best Nikon large zoom to get a good image with the TC magnifiers.
If you are birding, this lens and TC will be much better than the 70-300mm.

For sports and other events, the AF-S 70-300MM VR ED is a fantastic lens (I have one), but magnification is not quite good enough for birding.

Many birders are going to the new Tamron 150-600mm lens at around $1200.

Many stores have them on back order-get in line.

http://www.dpreview.com/lensreviews/tamr...-600-5-6p3

My 2 cents

PS:

The AFT file attached. Make sure you read the 1-4 number notes.

Image taken at 2014 Morris Stampede with my D7100 Nikor AFS 70-300MM ED VR G F/4.5-5.6.
At 300mm 1/1000 F8. I have several more great shots taken with this lens.

[/quote]

[tagdrum]

Hi I am thinking about buying a lens converter for my 55-200nikon lens as against buying a 70-300 nikon lens.Opinions on which would be best and why would be very helpfull,any help on this would appreciated

Mick shu

hi ,i bought the Jessops own brand 2x and its really pants , looks soft with no contrast
so dont get that one , i hear the Nikon ones are a lot better but pretty pricey

[MBS]

Hi Tagdrum. Thanks for the feedback on the Jessup converter ,on another reply they said the converter was not compatible with my Lens ,will go to a camera dealer for more information before investing in one Regards. Mick

[Don Schaeffer]

Hi I am thinking about buying a lens converter for my 55-200nikon lens as against buying a 70-300 nikon lens.Opinions on which would be best and why would be very helpfull,any help on this would appreciated

Mick shu

Nikon tele converters are mostly compatible with their primes. The Nikkor 70-300mm f4.5-5.6 is an excellent lens and well worth the current price. See my profile for the gear I use.

Peter

I'm told that converters don't work very well with zoom lenses. The 70-300 is by far the best option, I think.

[Pegger3D]

Hi Jeff. Thanks for the advise,I think buying the 70-300 lens might be my best option
Regards Mick

Hi Mick,

Like Freeman said, it depends on what you are going to shoot.

I have a cheat sheet on what lens can get a good image with each of their magnifiers. I think you can get it at the Nikon site.

The 80-400mm is the best Nikon large zoom to get a good image with the TC magnifiers.
If you are birding, this lens and TC will be much better than the 70-300mm.

For sports and other events, the AF-S 70-300MM VR ED is a fantastic lens (I have one), but magnification is not quite good enough for birding.

Many birders are going to the new Tamron 150-600mm lens at around $1200.

Many stores have them on back order-get in line.

http://www.dpreview.com/lensreviews/tamr...-600-5-6p3

My 2 cents

PS:

The AFT file attached. Make sure you read the 1-4 number notes.

Image taken at 2014 Morris Stampede with my D7100 Nikor AFS 70-300MM ED VR G F/4.5-5.6.
At 300mm 1/1000 F8. I have several more great shots taken with this lens.

Bump

[/quote]

[EnglishBob]

Teleconverters work best when they are the same brand as the lens they are attached too. I have a 1.4x and 2x converter and haven't used them in over 8 years.

Even a good pairing makes you lose light and sharpness/detail. They will slow down autofocus, or in the case of the 2x, render it impossible in all but the best light. The 70-300 would be the route I would choose.

[Gandalf1953]

Hi I am thinking about buying a lens converter for my 55-200nikon lens as against buying a 70-300 nikon lens.Opinions on which would be best and why would be very helpfull,any help on this would appreciated

Mick shu

Hi Mick
I am a Canon shooter so can't really advise on the Nikon 70-300 v converter but at a guess you might be better of with the longer telephoto.
There are certain things you must consider before buying/using a lens converter (or Canon extender): They will lose you anything from 1 to 2 aperture stops so with a 1.4x converter your f/5.6 lens becomes a f/8, a 1.7x will lose 1.5 stops and a 2x converter will lose 2 stops so a f/5.6 widest aperture becomes f/11.
Converters have glass elements so more glass generally means a loss of definition (slight though that might be).
The loss of aperture speed may well limit the AF on your camera. I'm a Canon shooter and most Canons require a minimum aperture of f/5.6 to focus (except the 1DX, 5DIII and 7DII that can all auto focus at f/8)
The AF function if it still works will be slower and less accurate when using a converter.
With Canon lenses extenders are not compliant with the whole range of lenses. With some lenses you cannot use at all, some the quality and AF issues are too great to bear, the best lenses to use with converters are the long prime telephotos and the new range of MkII L lenses. I'm afraid I'm not sure what the Nikon position is but a little research I'm sure will throw up some answers.
Even with all these down sides I do use Canon extenders with very good results on a 300 prime and the new MkII 100-400 L zoom.
The advantages of converters is they increase the range of lens lengths you can use at little cost and are very portable so easy to stuff in you pocket, for the occasions you need that extra reach.

Hope this helps even just a little
Regards
John

[Jocko]

I used to use a 2x converter back in my Praktica days. I loved it but it, but it did soften the image considerable and knocked 2 stops off whichever lens I was using. But back then it was all I could afford and, for me, it served a purpose.

[MrB]

If you wish to make a purchase, and have the available funds to do so, then a longer zoom lens is the better option, because of the issues arising from the loss of image quality and loss of light when using a converter.

However, there is another consideration which depends upon the quality of the current zoom lens, the resolution of the camera sensor, and how the images are viewed, and this would involve no cost, very little discernible loss of quality, no loss of light, no increase of ISO (and noise), and no auto-focus issues:

If there are at least 16 Megapixels in the image from the camera, it could be cropped by a factor of at least 1.5x (i.e. 2/3 of its linear dimensions), giving the equivalent of an image taken at 300mm focal length from a 200mm lens, and still make a good quality screen image, and a good quality print of at least A4 size (8x12 inches).

Anyway, it's worth trying. And, of course, if you then get the 300mm lens, you could produce the equivalent of an image taken at 450mm by this method!

Cheers.
Philip

[Browser Mike]

Hi Mick,

Which Nikon camera do you use ? If a DX that would give you approx. 450mm equivalent using a 300mm lens. If I am talking rubbish, someone will put us right.
Regards,
Mike.

[MrB]

Thanks Mike - you are right. The suggestions in Post #19 assume a full-frame sensor. For a "1.5 Crop" sensor camera such as you suggest, the focal length equivalents in my post can be multiplied by 1.5 again.

Cheers.
Philip

[GrahamS]

Mick, I don't know whether you have made your purchase yet or not, but in case you haven't, I use the Nikon 70-300mm f4.5-5.6 G IF ED VR AFS Nikkor tele zoom with both a Nikon D7100 DX camera (1.5X) and a Nikon D610 FX camera. The results are superb, and it is one of the only tele zoom lenses I have ever owned that is sharp across the entire zoom range wide open. It is lightweight and has very quick focussing. Here's a sample taken with the D7100, 1/500th, f8, 210mm: