Nikon 200 2.0 purchase

I will soon be buying the new Nikor 200 2.0 lens. I have not had a chance to handle this lens but have

read just about every review. On my D200 this lens is effectively a 300 2.0, when adding either the 1.4 or

1.7 teleconverters thislens seems to be a perfect option, (this is my thinking anyway)... Has anyone had

experience with using this lens with teleconverters and is there any degradation of contrast or sharpness

and mechanical/weight issues found.

 

Thanks for your input.

TCs always give some degredation of contrast and sharpness, because you're throwing on

glass, but in general this lens should take a TC better that pretty much any other Nikkor. I've

even seen really good results with the not-often-lauded TC20EII.

It's a phenomenal lens. It's still a 200/2 lens of course on your D200, so don't fall into the crop-trap. It will never be a 300/2... just a 200/2 with a FOV of 300 on your D200.

 

Now to the TC-issue.

 

Lets just assume that you have the Nikkor 85/1.4 AFD lens. You chose this one over the f/1.8 version, for one reason. SPEED. Would you think of mounting your f/1.4 lens on a TC for extra reach? The analogy propagates to the 200/2... Why did you favor it over the 180/2.8? SPEED (and VR to boot). Would you mount a TC on a phenomenal lens to make it an average performer for 40% extra reach? (The 1.7TC is supposed to be teamed with the 200/2, at least according to Nikon, but there's ALWAYS a penalty).

 

The 200/2 is a special purpose lens, being f/2 and VR-capable. Why cripple it with a teleconverter?

Why "cripple" a lens with a teleconverter?

<p>

Teleconverters are a lot easier to carry than another long lens. You don't need to count hairs in every picture, but you may need to <b>get</b> the picture anyway you can. I use one regularly with my 70-200 VR. Since my subjects are alive and light levels often dim, <i>machts nichts</i>.

Edward, I know why people use TCs. I use them myself. But if I could afford a 200/2, I wouldn't be teaming it with a TC... Wu Wi Wong, perhaps you're better off with a 200-400/4 VR?

Yaron, I've been pondering this one from a slightly different direction: I've always wanted a 300/2.8 AF lens, but never made the plunge. Now this 200/2.0 comes along, and that would be pretty useful to me indoors. I'm figuring I might be better off with the 200/2.0 and one or more matched TC's in lieu of the 300/2.8. Same money (more or less), more useful to me.

 

The wildcard (and hard to quantify without detailed 'shootouts') is the difference in image quality between a 200/2.0 w/ TC14EII and the 300/2.8, both shot wide open or one stop down.

Todd, it's a credible dilemma :) ... to be frank, I never used the 200/2 with a TC. I played with it, and took some shots in a shop on my D200-- it was brilliant, even wide open. From my experience, a TC not only robs you of 1 or 2 fstops, but also forces you to close down a bit in order to preserve performance... I use my 300/2.8 AIS ED with a 1.4 TC, but rarely shoot wide open... Following the same procedure on the 200/2, effectly leaves you with a 280mm f/4 lens.. Hmmm..