teleconverters on 400mm f2.8

[jon_teague]

<p>Hello,<br>

I have recently bought a 400mm f2.8 AIS lens, and i was wondering which TC's would be compatable with this lens, as ive heard some are not made for certian lenses etc. Also any any advice on the image quality of these TC's would be very helpful too<br>

Jon</p>

[ShunCheung]

<p>Get the TC-14B for the AI-S version. The current TC-14E/TC-14E ii will not fit unless you file off the extra tab on its front mount; those are for AF-S lenses.</p>

[curt wiler]

<p>Shun is correct about the TC-14B for this lens, but I was never happy with the quality of the TC-14B on big lenses like my 400mm f/3.5. In addition I wanted the capabilities of a "P" lens with my F5 so I had the lens "chipped" and got the TC-14E. I have never looked back - the TC-14B has sat unused for ten years. The advantage of going with the TC-14E is that it works with newer lenses so you spread the investment over all your telephotos such as the 70-200 AF-S, but you do need to file the tab as Shun has said, and since you have now removed that protective device you need to be careful that you don't try to fit it on a physically incompatible lens (just check the compatibility tables).</p>

[ShunCheung]

<p>I sold my TC-14B about 10 years ago. I didn't think it was bad, but then, I only used it on film SLRs. Today, all of my long lenses are AF-S so that I only need the TC-14E.</p>

[Andrew Garrard]

<p>The modification to grind the unnecessary (sorry, Nikon, I'm not in the market for a 500 f/4 VR even if you try to force me...) tab off the TC-14E is very simple and low-risk - it's just five minutes with a metal file. I'd not be afraid of doing it - for me, the primary reason to go with the TC-14B is cost. If you ever expect to get an AF-S lens that's worth teleconverting (I have an AF-S 200 f/2 and an Ai-P 500 f/4 - no experience with a 400 f/2.8, sad to say), the E is the obvious option.<br />

<br />

The other option I'd consider is the TC-16A, so that you get autofocus. I've not given mine much of a go yet - and, on a 500 f/4, I'm not sure how reliable it'll prove to be - but my experience of trying to get manual focus on small garden birds suggests that <i>any</i> autofocus might sometimes be useful. If you're not after moving targets, don't worry about it. Allegedly the edges of the frame with a TC-16A are a bit ropey (I've not shot enough yet to confirm); I intend to use mine when the TC-14 doesn't have enough reach, and when I'm mostly interested in the middle anyway - it may also not be such a problem if you have a DX camera. The DIY conversion to make a TC-16A compatible with a modern system is much more painful than grinding the TC-14E tab - I'd been meaning to add some comments to one of the conversion pages to add my experience. It's entirely possible, though, and my difficulties may be down to my own incompetence.<br />

<br />

<a href="http://www.naturfotograf.com/lens_converter.html">Bjørn</a> talks about teleconverters, although without specific mention of your lens. So long as it's long enough for you, I doubt the TC-14E would be a bad choice.<br />

<br />

Good luck, and I hope that helps.</p>

[conrad_smith]

<p>I've had good experiences using my TC-14E on 400mm and longer MF Nikkors after modifying it by following the step-by-step instructions I found at http://nikonpages.heymanphotography.com/tcmod/</p>

<p>The TC-16A also works well with my long MF lenses on DX bodies. I haven't tried it on FX or film cameras, but Bjørn Rørslett reports soft edges with the 16A in full-frame images.</p>

[John Crowe]

<p>I have used my 400/2.8 AIS with the TC-14B, TC-14E II, and TC-16A. There is very little difference in image quality between all three. Image degradation from the 400/2.8 was also very little and I now use the 14E with it on a regular basis. If the TC-16A was soft at the edges I never would have noticed since with this kind of focal length my subject is in the centre and I want the out of focus areas soft. I was able to convince myself that the 14E was sharpest and kept only it so that I could use it with my 80-200/2.8 AF-S as well. </p>

<p>I had excellent AF results with the TC-16A on my 200/2 AI since I was able to get enough focus range to cover an entire soccer field on my D2X. Focus was just as fast as my AF-S zoom. The range you get with the 400/2.8 is definitely more limited and this is why Nikon does not recommend it. Still, it can be useful, but the few times I tried it on the 400/2.8 the focus seemed to hunt a bit, but that may simply have been the subject/environment.</p>

<p>I did file the tab on the 14E off in a couple of minutes. I was going to buy a TC-20E this year for use with the 400/2.8 as well but have made another ridiculous lens purchase instead. I believe you can get the TC-300 or TC-301 as a doubler for the 400/2.8 AIS as well. I have never tried any of these.</p>

[jon_teague]

<p>Thanks for your help!<br>

I will be shooting on a d200. I dont think filing down the tab on the TC14E would be much of a problem, so thanks for the tip and link.<br>

I'm still sort of confused about the modified TC-16A. will it make a non-MF lens (AIS) auto-focus?<br>

Also does anyone know what the TC-17E is like?<br>

Many thanks jon</p>

[John Crowe]

<p>Yes, the TC-16A makes a manual focus lens autofocus! It only works on very few cameras, so check compatibility on the internet. It provides extremely fast autofocus by moving elements within it. By doing so it only provides a range of focus, depending on the focus you have set on the lens itself. For instance, with my 200mm lens, while standing behind the goal line of a soccer field I would auto focus on the net at the other end and bring the manual focus as close to me as possible while still achieving autofocus on the net (confirmed by the AF light). I would leave the manual focus at this setting, thus setting the new infinity focus point of the lens. This would provide a close enough autofocus range to focus on a player about 30 feet from me. Perfect for following the action all over field.</p>

<p>The wider the focal length of the lens the greater the focus range provided. The longer the lens the narrower the focus range provided. With my 400/2.8 I could set infinity focus to about 200 feet away and have about 40 feet of focus range. </p>

<p>It does this while providing a 1.6x factor, and reducing the speed of your lens by about 1 1/3 stops, and has little effect on image quality.</p>

<p>The 17E is a bit wishy washy. I find I either want the quality of the 1.4 or the extreme length of the 2. The 1.7 becomes a jack-of-all-trades, master-of-none, scenario.</p>

[jon_teague]

<p>Thanks John, i wasnt sure how it worked at first but after more research i understand now. I would need to mod the TC to get it to work on my camera, however it can be done. how well does it preform on the 400mm AIS? do you get a lot of focus range once you start to focus close e.g. 30 feet?</p>

<p>Sounds like good advice on the 1.7, i think i will go for the 20E if the 1.6 doesnt work out.<br>

Many thanks<br>

Jon</p>