Z Mount 1.4x Teleconverter

Discussion in 'Nikon' started by ShunCheung, Nov 24, 2021.

  1. ShunCheung

    ShunCheung Administrator

    Received my first Z-mount teleconverter, a 1.4x. It is quite a bit larger than the F-mount TC-14E III and noticeably heavier, but that is expected due to the wider lens mount. The front element of the Z converter sticks out quite a bit. And similar to its F-mount counterpart, it has an extra notch on the bayonet.

    I tried mounting the 1.4x TC behind the FTZ adapter, and as expected, the baffle on the FTZ blocks the long front element of the TC. The rear mount of the FTZ is also missing that notch, which is required to mount the 1.4x TC.


    F mount TC-14E III on the left, Z mount on the right.
    Teleconverters14_2132.jpg


    Both converters have an extra notch.
    TC14_TopView_2134.jpg


    Notice that the mount on the 1.4x TC has that notch in the 9 o'clock position. The Z6's mount has no such notch.
    Body_vs_TC_mount_2138a.jpg


    On the rear mount of a long Z tele, such as the 70-200/2.8, there is a matching notch in the 4, 5 o'clock position, left. On the rear mount of the 1.4x TC and other shorter lenses, there is no such notch. Therefore, Nikon is preventing people from mount one TC behind another TC.
    70-200_mount_2143.jpg
     
    Mary Doo likes this.
  2. These z-mount teleconverters are high quality but, unfortunately, they can only be used on the 70-200 S lens at this time. With the 2X mounted, the 70-200 is ridiculously long and clunky but it takes the focal length to 400mm @ f/5.6 (not too bad) with good image quality. The focus speed is excellent too - did not notice any slow-down if any. I can't wait to try them on the 100-400 S, which I believe will be available in the "foreseeable future" (LOL) - but the downside is the F-stop will be higher than 5.6.
     
  3. I used the TC-17EII for years on an AF-S 300/4 lens on the D200 and D300 - unfortunately there were substantial costs in terms of image quality loss and reduction in AF speed. Never bothered with the 2x. Nowadays, I even question the use of the 1.4x ones (I own the TC-14E and the TC-14EIII) - cropping the image in most cases yields better results.
     
  4. A part of the image quality loss from TCs with DSLRs is that the focus becomes less accurate (often with TC you need to adjust the focus fine tune setting) and there is also more variability from shot to shot especially at longer distances. Additionally as the maximum aperture gets smaller, the autofocus becomes less good. With mirrorless cameras, AF with TCs even when the maximum aperture is smaller is quite good, and one can expect that useful results would be obtained with the Z 100-400mm + 1.4X TC with sufficiently capable camera body and bright enough light.
     
  5. With relatively grainy high speed film and then earlier lower resolution DX format DSLRs, use of a TC that was well matched to a lens probably helped. But I have generally been in the "just crop" camp for a while. Not even sure where my TC-17e is. I do think it was beneficial behind a 300/4AFS on a D300 when shooting sailing racing a while back.

    I would be interested to see the Z-TC + 70-200/2.8S and/or 100-400 compares to a cropped Z7 image under careful testing and then in actual use. The potential for improved AF accuracy that Ilkka refers to should help.
     
  6. ShunCheung

    ShunCheung Administrator

    I am going to check out how well the Z 70-200 works with this 1.4x TC. At this point I am not planning to get the 2x version, as I think the 100-400 S will be an excellent lens with a nice zoom range.

    The cross-section diagram is from Nikon, of course. This 1.4x TC has an interesting construction with a very large and thick rear element. Also since the front is protruding quite far, the front cap is very thick. I guess Nikon doesn't want us to use that thick cap on camera bodies.

    CrossSection.jpg

    _DSC2150.jpg
     
  7. ShunCheung

    ShunCheung Administrator

    But I don't follow their guidance.:rolleyes:

    Actually I normally put the TC caps on my DSLR bodies, but in this case, the Z TC cap is just way too thick.

    _DSC2153.jpg
     
  8. Exactly my experience. AF fine tune with a TC behind a lens of f/4 or even f/5.6 maximum aperture (I have used the 300/4PF, 500/5.6PF and 200-500/5.6 with both the TC-14E and the TC-14EIII) becomes quite difficult to accomplish and it is possible that the tune cannot be accomplished because the available parameter range is insufficient. None of the lenses I mentioned needed AF fine tune on the D850 - I got quite lucky in that regard. Adding the TC changed that behavior - it appears that only the 300/4 PF with the TC-14EIII worked without adjustment. Using any 1.4x behind the AF-S 80-400 is pointless - the optical quality just isn't there. I'll use my existing TCs when the situation warrants it and only with the combos I have thoroughly tested out - but I won't be buying any TC anymore.
     
  9. The illustration is to suggest that people should not try to mount the TC on the camera in reverse orientation by accident, as the front of the TC could hit the sensor.
     
    Mary Doo likes this.
  10. ShunCheung

    ShunCheung Administrator

    Interesting. I didn’t quite think of that.
     
  11. True, the previous crop of TC's render image degradation and the prior 2x's focus speed also suffer. However, the Z-mounts are excellent in these two areas. It may not be cost-effective to buy them at this time as they can only be used on the 70-200 S lens.
     
  12. I think that my TC1.4eii mounted with my 500mmPF on my Z6ii via FTZ gives much more accurate AF than the same combo on my D850. Speed feels about the same.

    However, for anything moving quickly, the D850 wins even if they're not pin sharp, the Z6ii is consistently missing by some margin.

    I guess the combination of phase and contrast detect gives accuracy but not speed.

    Bring on the Z9!
     

Share This Page