Mark E
New member
Has anyone tried using a 2X TC on either a Nikon 500mm PF or the original Tamron 150-600mm, and if so, what was your opinion? Thanks.
2X TC?
- Thread starter Mark E
- Start date
If you would like to post, you'll need to register. Note that if you have a BCG store account, you'll need a new, separate account here (we keep the two sites separate for security purposes).
I've tried various versions of Nikon 2x teleconverters on faster glass like the 70-200mm f/2.8, 300mm f/2.8 and 600mm f/4 with mediocre results. The best results were probably with the 300mm f/2.8 but even then if I didn't absolutely need the 2x converter I'd avoid using it. I love the 1.4x Nikon teleconverters and have had pretty decent results with the 1.7x teleconverters but having tried various versions of the 2x converters over the years I'm not really a fan.
Also know that neither of the lenses you mention will retain autofocus capabilties on Nikon DSLRs with a 2x teleconverter attached. The 500mm f/5.6 PF lens will effectively become a 1000mm f/11 lens and the Tamron 150-600mm f/5.6-f/6.3 will effectively become a 300-1200mm f/11 - f/12.6. Once you get above a wide open aperture of f/8 you're going to lose AF capabilities on even the best Nikon DSLRs, it might still grab AF for high contrast targets in good light but at f/11 or smaller wide open apertures I wouldn't even bet on that. You might get contrast based AF as in Live View or some mirrorless cameras to work but I wouldn't bet the farm on it.
arbitrage
Well-known member
I'm not a big fan of the Nikon 2xTC. I have both the Mk 2 and Mk 3 versions (don't ask why 
).
I would certainly not recommend it on the 500PF. On my D500/D850 it was almost impossible to AFMA it into spec. I had to go to +20 for both TCs on the 500PF and even then I think the Mk 3 needs more. And of course the DLSRs don't officially support the f/11 aperture you end up at but in brighter light the camera will focus the lens okay. Now with a Z camera it is easier to get decent focus results but I still feel it isn't gaining me much resolution over cropping a lesser TC like the 1.4 or 1.7.
Even on my 500/4 E FL, I wasn't all that impressed with the 2x and that should be a lens that it would do best on. For whatever reason I was most happy with the 2xTCs (both versions) on my 300PF. I actually was able to make nice sharp shots with that combo on my DLSRs and on my Z camera....go figure??
).I would certainly not recommend it on the 500PF. On my D500/D850 it was almost impossible to AFMA it into spec. I had to go to +20 for both TCs on the 500PF and even then I think the Mk 3 needs more. And of course the DLSRs don't officially support the f/11 aperture you end up at but in brighter light the camera will focus the lens okay. Now with a Z camera it is easier to get decent focus results but I still feel it isn't gaining me much resolution over cropping a lesser TC like the 1.4 or 1.7.
Even on my 500/4 E FL, I wasn't all that impressed with the 2x and that should be a lens that it would do best on. For whatever reason I was most happy with the 2xTCs (both versions) on my 300PF. I actually was able to make nice sharp shots with that combo on my DLSRs and on my Z camera....go figure??
I've never had any luck with 2x converters on Canon equipment, so when I switched to Nikon, I went for the 1.7x and love it, but not on either of the lenses you mention. I do sometimes use 1.4x on the 500mm PF and that works okay in good light. Know nothing about the Tamron lens.
My experience with 2X TCs echos the above two posts - I've not been impressed. I've also had people at the workshops using them with higher end 300 2.8 and 400 2.8 lenses with just "OK" results. Also, as mentioned, no more AF with a 500PF + 2X. I think you're better off using a 1.4 TC and maybe cropping if needed. Not ideal, but probably at least as good if not a bit better than using the 2X.
BrianSmall
Active member
Steve.................what's your general impression of the Nikon 1.7 TC? Not only with the gear mentioned in this thread but across the full Nikon line up of bodies and lenses.
Lbuckley67
Member
Has anybody tried the Kenco 2x pro Hd , I use it on my D850 with a 300 2.8, the results with that converter are amazing , I was shooting the 200-500 on the D850 , the images I get are sharper with the 300 and 2x and the autofocus is still pretty snappy , way faster than my 200-500
SanDiegoSteve
Member
I don't know if you'll be able to focus with the 2x on the 200-500, but my head hurts from the math. You will loose 2 stops taking 5.6 to 11? Some cameras need at least f8.
I have tried the 1.4x on the 200-500. A bit soft for me, but if I nailed focus it was good.
I do use a 1.4 and a 2x on my 300/2.8. When they hit, they are solid. The 2x makes AF much, much slower. And, the reach isn't much more than the 1.4 (I was surprised). I carry the 2x for the prime, but it isn't my first choice.
I have tried the 1.4x on the 200-500. A bit soft for me, but if I nailed focus it was good.
I do use a 1.4 and a 2x on my 300/2.8. When they hit, they are solid. The 2x makes AF much, much slower. And, the reach isn't much more than the 1.4 (I was surprised). I carry the 2x for the prime, but it isn't my first choice.
I've had some luck with the 2xTC III on my Z bodies, for slow & static subject with both the 600F4 & 500PF.
Never had any luck at all with D500 or D850.
Z50, 600F4 + 2xTC, 1200mm
Z50, 500PF + 2xTC, 1000mm
Z50, 300PF + 2xTC, 600mm
I've had similar success with the Z6.
Never had any luck at all with D500 or D850.
Z50, 600F4 + 2xTC, 1200mm
Z50, 500PF + 2xTC, 1000mm
Z50, 300PF + 2xTC, 600mm
I've had similar success with the Z6.
I think it's better than the 2X, but not as good as the 1.4. I personally almost never use anything but the 1.4TC. The 1.7 and 2X just seem too much of a compromise and I'd rather take my chances cropping (especially if I can keep the ISO down and have something like a D850).