2x Converter or new lens?

[mariosforsos]

<p>I'm about to embark on a trip around Iceland and Greenland, spending some time over the Arctic Circle photographing whales. My longest lens at the moment is the Nikkor 80-200 f/2.8 and I know this will not be enough for some of the long shots (I had the same lens during my African safaris and, back then, thank God I had also borrowed a 2x converter which saved my bacon!). So right now I'm thinking: should I borrow the 2x again (or even buy my own) or should I buy the Sigma 120-400 f/4-5.6 OS (which I found for a very good price)?</p>

<p>A friend of mine said I should go for the converter because I can then use it with ANY future lens, and he does have a point. But I do so wonder about sharpness. And the reason for that is because some of my safari shots did not come out as sharp as I would have liked...</p>

<p>Any views? Thanks to all in advance...</p>

[keith_durnford]

<p>Not all lenses will accept a tc so you friend is slightly off the mark there. Another thing to consider is that if you do buy a 2x and put it on a suitable lens that is anything slower than, say, a 2.8 then your aperture is going to shoot up to anywhere up to F11, which in most cases is way too slow unless you are using it in extremely bright sun, not to mention the loss of IQ.<br>

What about renting something a bit longer for your trip as this may be a better option than forking out for a new lens or tc.</p>

[eric_arnold]

<p>if you're ok with the IQ with a 2xTC, then go for it. it saves a lot of weight and gives you the same effective FL. you'd get better IQ with a 1.7 or 1.4, though.</p>

[Dieter Schaefer]

<p>Unless your 80-200/2.8 is the AF-S version, none of Nikon's currently available TCs will fit; third party ones aren't that expensive (around $200 I assume) that I can't imagine renting to be cost effective. YMMV, but I can't imagine that decent optical quality is achieved with a 2x behind a any of the 80-200/2.8 lenses; even a 1.4x already shows some degradation. Either go for the Sigma, or rent something longer, like a 300/4 AF-S with 1.4x or even the 200-400/4.</p>

[shiang_wang1]

<p>Nikon TC-201 will fit, but you lose auto focus and two stops. I bought an used one for my 80-200mm f/2.8 no long ago, and I don't like the pictures it produces. It is almost impossible to shoot it hand held, just another thing to keep in mind.</p>

[benniehoff]

<p>The Kenko Pro 300 TCs pass through the AF screwdriver mechanism, so they allow AF on all AF models (however, the screwdriver AF will be very slow, and difficult to use for tracking moving subjects). I have the 2x TC and I'm satisfied with it; it's quite sharp, and I've read that it compares about equally to the Nikon TCs. I use it on my 180mm f/2.8 to give me 360mm f/5.6.</p>

<p>At first images seemed unsharp, but really it was camera shake. You need shutter speeds of at least 1/500, and the sharpness is improved by stopping down a little bit. If you put the lens on a tripod, you should use mirror-up, as I saw some artifacts of mirror slap in some tripod images I took (with shutter speeds around 1/8 to 1").</p>

<p>Here is a handheld image using the 180mm + 2x TC. As you can see, the TC works great in broad daylight...I wouldn't try to use it in other conditions.</p>

<p><a title="DSC_0901 by Ben Niehoff, on Flickr" href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/benniehoff/3638327698/" title="DSC_0901 by Ben Niehoff, on Flickr"><img src="http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3572/3638327698_3fce55620b_o.jpg" alt="DSC_0901" width="685" height="1024" /> </a></p>

[jwallphoto]

<p>A 10-year-old thread, but more food for thought: <a href="http://www.photo.net/nature-photography-forum/000a5J">http://www.photo.net/nature-photography-forum/000a5J</a></p>