Will the TC-20E work on my 70-200?

[kevin_swan1]

I just bought a TC-20E teleconverter off eBay for $212 (good deal?). I'm 99%

certain this will work with my 70-200 VR lens, but it's not the latest version

of this teleconverter (i.e., not the "II" version). Will it work with my lens?

Is this a good deal? The eBay item number for the auction is 160228355631.

[ShunCheung]

I am 100% sure that combo will work because I have them both and have used it. Opinions vary, but IMO you need to at least stop down the 70-200 to f4 for an effective f8 to get decent optical quality.

 

There is essentially no difference between the TC-14/20e and the II version. Nikon merely changed the outside appearance to a wrinkle finish to match the current long teles.

[kevin_swan1]

Thanks, Shun. Do you find you get good results with it? A friend tried to convince me to get the TC-14 instead, claiming the TC-20 will rob my photos of sharpness and contrast. I'm of the opinion that the longer reach will be preferable to digitally cropping a marginally brighter/sharper photo. What's your experience been?

[ShunCheung]

Even the TC-14E will rob your 70-200 sharpness. Teleconverters are still best with fixed-focal-length lenses, but stopping down the 70-200 by a stop will make a big difference.

[Matt Laur]

Shun's right. I use the TC-17EII on the 70-200, and am satisfied with the results <i>given the inherent compromises</i>. If the unit's pristine, then that's a pretty good price. I opted for the 1.7x to maintain just a little more focusing speed and a brighter finder. The difference between the resulting 340mm and 400mm, on a DX sensor, isn't really all that much. If you can improve performance a bit by dragging in more light, the 1.7 might actually make more sense. It's a very subjective issue, and driven entirely by how you weigh the compromises against your subject matter and shooting circumstances. How you'll end up using images is a big consideration, too... mostly web viewing, or 8x10-or-smaller prints? Big difference between that and trying to render 20x30 on fussy-content images.

<br><br>

I made a nice 12x18 for the guy <a href="http://www.photo.net/photo/7114604&size=lg"><b>in this image</b></a> (70-200 + 1.7 = 340mm in slightly odd light). I'm not sure I'd have had the patience to get that shot if I'd also been lugging a long prime around with me in the field... so, the TC was a sale-enabler in this case. In some light, though, I can find myself wishing I didn't lose a touch of contrast... but the <a href="http://www.uplandlife.com//eventphotos/photozoom.asp?i=0018/0018-0240-8205svl.jpg" target="_blank"><b>AF is still very nimble</b></a> (note the chukar partridge on the right). You'll find that using a TC with the 70-200 can be a very rewarding experience once you understand its sweet spots and reasonable limitations.

[kevin_swan1]

Well, my intention with this teleconverter is to use it during an upcoming air show. I expect that there will be enough sunlight (planes in a bright sky) to allow me to stop down enough to retain sharpness, while still getting enough light to produce sharp shots handheld. I may have to boost the ISO, however, as shutter speed will be the limiting factor when shooting fast-moving planes. I'm hoping that even stopped down to an effective f/8, there will still be enough light to allow the camera to autofocus on moving objects.

[ShunCheung]

Metering and auto-focus are performed while the lens is wide open, in this combo it'll be f2.8 - 2 stops from the 2x TC, so you'll be auto-focusing at f5.6. Outdoors during the day, it should be good enough. The aperture doesn't close down to f8 (or whatever) until the moment the image is actually captured.

 

As far as higher ISO goes, it highly depends on the camera body behind it. The newer DSLRs do a lot better.

[walterh]

Kevin you probably know this so just take it as a reminder. Watch out that your camera might want to underexpose the "planes in a bright sky" when the sky is bright.

 

I personally would prefer the 1.4x TC as most of the time a 2x TC with this lens will not give any advantage over a tighter crop. (This is based however more on general impression using similar lenses since I got the 70-200 Nikkor AFS only for a short time.)

[dan_brown4]

Everytime I get tempted to purchase a TC-xxE for my 300/4, or any other lens for that

matter, I look at the price Nikon charges for them, and then change my mind. I guess it

makes sense in the super-telephoto realm.

[Matt Laur]

Dan, the cash is part of it... but handling/style/portability is an issue too (for me, anyway). I can walk miles in day, shooting the whole time behind the subjects I'm following. For a few minutes, periodically, the extra reach is really helpful. I fish the TC out of a pouch, and buy some reach at the modest cost of a few ounces and some marginal reduction in my 70-200's capabilities. But the rest of the time, it's back to the lens in its native state, and only a tidy little object back in my bag ... not a big ol' honker of a long prime. A TC is magic in a situation like that.

[angkordave]

Having tried the TC x2,1.4 and 1.7 I use the 1.7 as a good compromise. The x2 is soft land the 1.4 not long enough (for me) Like Matt the portabilty is an important issue. I'd go fo the TC1.7 without hesitation.