Re 70-200 VR 1 & TC-1.4E combo with FX Body

[joe_m10]

<p>I recently purchased a used 70-200 VR 1 to use with my D200 and the combo works great as expected. I will only be using this lens to shoot potraits and kids sports. Given all the negative press regarding using the 70-200 VR 1 with FX bodies and the resulting vignetting and soft corners, I would like to know if anyone has tried using a TC-1.4E with their 70-200 VR 1 and FX body (either D700, D3 or D3X) and how well it works. According to Ken Rockwell this solves the problem with no perceptable loss in IQ, recognizing of course the f-stop penalty. I anticipate upgrading to a D700 or D700X within the next year or two, hence my interest. I have no plans to buy the new VR 2 version anytime soon given the rediculous price tag, so that's not an option either. Thoughts anyone???</p>

[niccoury]

<p>I use it ALL THE TIME and it works perfect.<br>

I have a 70-200 (vers. 1) and a D700 and use a 1.4 TC all the time when I shoot sports.<br>

I have nothing but good to say about the combo.<br>

Check out many of the images here (all shot with the combo):<br>

http://photographnic.blogspot.com/2009/07/california-rodeo-salinas-sunday.html</p>

[ilkka_nissila]

<p>Using a TC adds a bunch of new elements, leading to greater propensity to flare and ghosting and some loss in image definition, but it does leave out the problematic corners of the image projected by this lens.</p>

<p>I think using a 10-12 MP DX format body with the 70-200 and no TC would lead to much better results than what you're proposing.</p>

[joe_m10]

<p>Thanks Nic and Ilkka. I've read only good reviews about the TC-1.4E with DX cameras, but none when used with FX cameras. I tried one at a local camera store with my D200 & 70-200 VR 1 and was not very pleased with the results. I'm sure there's sample-to-sample variation with TCs as well, so perhaps I was unlucky and tested a poor sample. I have yet to try one with an FX body though.</p>

[roypanos]

<p>Hi.<br>

Personal opinion only. I have the same lens and use it on the D200 and D700. I think that the criticism is overstated in that many other factors are likely to have negative impact greater than its oft-quoted deficiencies. The vignetting is easily dealt with, if apparent. The corner softness, imHo, is not serious unless you're printing large uncropped landscapes with detail in the corners. Which I dont.<br>

I use a TC17E and I think that the results are pretty good, particularly if stopped down a bit (elevated ISO is hardly a problem with the D700) however I have no other equivalent lens with which to make side-by-side comparison. Weightier opinions than mine (Thom Hogan for example) are positive. I assume that a TC14E would perform even better than a TC17E.</p>

[ShunCheung]

<p>I tend to agree that the problem with the 70-200mm/f2.8 AF-S VR version 1 is exaggerated. At 200mm on FX this lens is not ging to give you corner-to-corner sharpness, but perhaps 90% of our photography does not require extremely sharp corners. It is an issue only if you are a landscape photographer.</p>

<p>As far as vignetting goes, it is not worse than the average lens. The 24-70mm/f2.8 AF-S has far worse vignetting at 24mm, f2.8 but most people accept that.</p>

<p>The problem with adding a TC-14E onto the 70-200 is that it'll toally mess up the center performance which is far more important. And of course you'll also totally change the focal length. If you are really pickly about sharpness, don't use TC on any zoom.</p>

[ivan_verschoote1]

<p>I have a D700, the 70-200/2.8 VR, the 300/4 AFS and the TC14EII.<br>

The 70-200/2.8 VR is a very good lens on the D700. Vignetting occurs sometimes with blue sky and on 200mm, nothing to worry about. <br>

Adding a TC14E gives good results, if the lens is stopped down to f5.6. I mention good, but not perfect, it NEVER reaches the quality of the prime 300/4 AFS. It is however a good substitute if I forget my 300/4.<br>

The 300/4 AFS is a real juwel on the D700. Adding the TC14E on the 300/4 doesn't seem to affect the IQ. The perfect combo.<br>

Hope this answers your question.</p>

 

[ivan_verschoote1]

<p>I have a D700, the 70-200/2.8 VR, the 300/4 AFS and the TC14EII.<br>

The 70-200/2.8 VR is a very good lens on the D700. Vignetting occurs sometimes with blue sky and on 200mm, nothing to worry about. <br>

Adding a TC14E gives good results, if the lens is stopped down to f5.6. I mention good, but not perfect, it NEVER reaches the quality of the prime 300/4 AFS. It is however a good substitute if I forget my 300/4.<br>

The 300/4 AFS is a real juwel on the D700. Adding the TC14E on the 300/4 doesn't seem to affect the IQ. The perfect combo.<br>

Hope this answers your question.</p>

 

[joe_m10]

<p>Thanks everyone! This is a great forum. Shun, perhaps it was the degradation in center performance that caught my attention the other day without realiziing it, as I did not spend much time studying the LCD display.</p>

<p>I also own a Nikon 300/f4 AF-S that I purchased used as well, but have not used much either. Would it be fair to say that the 70-200 VR & TC-14E combo will not be able to match my 300/f4? Sounds like an obvious assumption, but I'll ask nevertheless. Thom Hogan has written that they're comparable.</p>

<p>I'll be giving both lenses a good workout this fall when the kids' soccer season resumes. I just didn't want to go out and buy a TC-14E only to be disappointed later. My bottom line takeaway from what I've read so far is that the 70-200 VR 1 is a great lens that will serve me very well for many years even after I've upgraded to an FX body.</p>

[alvinyap]

<p><strong>Would it be fair to say that the 70-200 VR & TC-14E combo will not be able to match my 300/f4?</strong><br>

Alright I'm on a D200 here, no FX stuff for me, I would say the 300/4 has the edge (assuming you can get the proper shutter speeds/stabilization for the 300/4) in terms of sharpness. However, the 70-200VR, with or without the TC14EII has *much* better bokeh. Well for me anyways :) Plus, it has VR stability. I regularly use my 300/4 with the TC14EII now, and somehow the reduced dof helps improve the bokeh slightly. Horses for courses though, the 300/4 and 70-200 serve very different purposes - 300/4 + TC14EII is my primary long "wildlife" lens, 70-200VR +tc1eII is my walkaround lens, in case I spot some critters X)<br>

Alvin</p>

[joe_m10]

<p>I was hoping that I could be convinced that the 70-200 and TC-14EII combo was as good as the 300/4, as I was considering selling the 300/4. Wishfull thinking I suppose. I agree that the two lenses serve somewhat different purposes although they are both good for sports. I think I'll just keep 300/4 for now. Can't ever imagine parting with the 70-200 though. Thanks again everyone!</p>

[ShunCheung]

<p>I have demonstrated several times that the 300mm/f4 AF-S is far superior to the 70-200mm/f2.8 AF-S VR (version 1) + TC-14E: <a href="http://www.photo.net/nikon-camera-forum/00G5ff">http://www.photo.net/nikon-camera-forum/00G5ff</a><br>

Despite what some reviewers may have written, it is easy to reproduce those problems and observe them yourself.</p>

<p>I wouldn't use any TC on the 70-200 unless you are willing to stop down by at least a stop. Of course when you are willing to stop down, any junk lens is going to look pretty decent.</p>