Teleconverter or not for sports photography

[bill_burke1]

<p>I am trying to decide if a teleconverter might be the best option. I have a D700 with a 24-70 2.8 and an 80-200 2.8 (no VR). These lenses do great for my weddings, corporate events and portraits. However, I'm toying around (nothing professional right now) with sports photography - mostly high school and college sports. My problem is "reach". Even with the perfect position and my 200mm zoom, I still need to crop quite a bit afterward to fill the frame and get the image I visualized. I can't afford a 300 or 500 fixed lens, and wouldn't have enough use to justify it even if I had the money. SO - what would the impact be in putting a teleconverter on my 80-200 lens?</p>

[Jerry_]

<p>(...I'll likely catch *flack* for this....) Have you tried to shoot with your D700 in DX mode? That will give you both high ISO and a bit more reach with your AF 80-200mm f2.8 lens.</p>

<p> </p>

[Matt Laur]

<p>Looking at your EXIF data, could you have achieved the exposures you got at f/4 or f/5.6? That TC is going to cost you lens speed, and you may need to stop down even more (say, f/8, in order to sharpen up some combinations. Now, with a D700 you've got some pretty usable higher ISO settings, and might get away with it. A lot of this will depend on how you expect to use the output. If you give up any pixel-peeping habits, you might be very pleased with the results, and very pleased with the flexibility.</p>

[ShunCheung]

<p>Jerry, shooting the D700 with the DX crop is not that different from cropping it yourself afterwards. The image files will be smaller but for sprots, I would rather crop afterwards because in case my subject is off center due to rapid subject movement, you are much better off having a larger image coverage and then crop later on.</p>

<p>I haven't checked prices recently, but a used 300mm/f2.8 AF-S, early generation could be affordable at below $3000. That is still a fantastic lens today, and its makes far more sense to add a 1.4x TC to that if necessary. Adding a TC to the 80-200mm/f2.8 will really hurt its image quality, even though you don't mind the smaller aperture.</p>

[elliot1]

<p>What is your budget? Are you shooting during daylight hours?</p>

[bill_burke1]

<p>If I go with a TC, I could easily shoot outdoor events (soccer, football, track, etc) at f/4 or 5.6 - possibly higher if I increase the ISO, but its the image quality issue that I wanted to find out about - Shun, how would degrade the image? grain? contrast? resolution?<br>

My budget is definitely in the TC range - yes mostly in the daylight events, staying away from low light indoor sports for now.</p>

[bikealps]

<p>I believe a TC is not compatible with a 24-70 and also that the 80-200 f2.8 is a screwdrive lens and therefore won't AF with a TC.<br>

I have a TC-1.7 and have used it with my 70-200 VR2. It works well, but for the sports I shoot, 200mm is enough reach.<br>

Comparing TC-1.7 + 70-200 VR2 to 70-200 VR2, it's supposed to focus slower, but it seems to acquire and track focus very well. Comparing TC-1.7 + 70-200 VR2 to 300 f4 AF (screwdrive) the 70-200 + TC combination definitely acquires focus faster and seems to track focus better.</p>

[frank_skomial]

<p><em>"and a bit more reach with your AF 80-200mm f2.8 lens" </em>- to get this use a smaller sensor camera like D300S where the crop sensor idea for longer reach works. On the D700 - the crop mode does not give any longer reach benefit, except smaller file and narrower view. </p>

<p>Also unkown yet to me, but perhaps mount it on the new Nikon 1 camera, with apropriate lens adapter, and the reach will be significant. I believe Nikon 1 will work with AF-S lens, but not sure about AF lens focus. Focus speed on the new camera should be fast? Perhaps manual focus would work?</p>

[elliot1]

<p>As it appears you are trying to get to around 300mm, consider a 70-300mm lens, like Nikon's VR version which is light in weight and offers really great image quality and will probably give you better IQ than your lens with a TC. And is in within your budget.</p>

[ShunCheung]

<p>Bill, exactly which 80-200mm/f2.8 do you have? If it is any one of the 3 earlier "screwdriver" AF models, there is no Nikon TC that can maintain AF with them. If you have the 80-200mm/f2.8 AF-S, you can mount a TC-14E/TC-14E II on it and maintain AF.</p>

<p>However, in my experience, the only that type of zoom that works well with TCs is the 70-200mm/f2.8 AF-S VR II; even the first 70-200 doesn't. If you have the 80-200mm/f2.8 AF-S, IMO you need to stop down by one stop to get really sharp images. However, since you are shooting sports, absolute sharpness is not always necessary. AF issues, subject motion, etc. will lead to some unsharpness anyway.</p>

<p>If you desire Sports Illustrated magazine type results, some 300mm/f2.8, 400mm/f2.8, 200-400mm/f4 is probably necessary. Eventually you'll need to shoot during the day and niggh, outdoors and indoors.</p>

[wpahnelas]

<p>Skip the TC and get a D300s. You ought to be shooting with two bodies anyway, IMO.</p>

[paul_k1664875007]

<p>Hi Bill</p>

<p>contrary to earlier postings, I can confirm there are TC of very good quality availible for screwdrive lenses from Kenko/Tamron. If you go for the 300 series,, that can even be used on both screwdrive and AFS lenses. \</p>

<p>Quality is not as good as Nikon (if you compare the Kenko 300 Pro 1.4 with the TC 14E-II) but optically it's still pretty good. I used to combine my Kenko 300Pro (till I lost it) with a 2/200VR and 200-400VR, but got an original Nikon TC when i tried using it with a 600mm AF-I lens where the fit of the lensmount became very critical.</p>

<p>AF speed will also be affected, thought less with a AFS lens then with a screwdrive lens</p>

<p>Disadvantage though of using a TC (original Nikon or third brand) is that any fault in the lens gets magnified, so the 2.8/80-200 (I have the old AF-D version which is a bit soft wide open) needs to be stopped down at least one stop in order not to get a (too) soft picture</p>

[wilsontsoi]

<p>If Bill has 80-200mm f2.8 AFS, then I think that he will be quite happy with using TC-14E as it will maintain good AF performance and decent image quality, and the resulting f4 at 280mm is still plenty of flexibility for outdoor daytime sports that he mentioned. If the 80-200mm f2.8 is an AF or AF-D, then I would second Paul in recommending the Kenko Pro300 1.4X TC (Tamron sells soemthing similar) which will maintain AF with the Nikon screw-drive telephotos. Bill might lose a little in AF performance even in daylight, though image quality is still good. At f4 with TCs in daylight shooting, at least Bill can afford to stop down a bit to gain image quality. Depending on the sport, with the effective 280mm focal length (William's D300s suggestion is good in yielding 420mm in DX,) Bill might have to give more thoughts about how and where he'll be shooting from.</p>

[bill_burke1]

<p>My 80-200 is the earlier (1992) push-pull (AF). I think I'll end up going with the less expensive 70-300 with the larger max aperture and just stick with the outdoor events for now while I work toward the the 80-400 f/4.</p>