Nikon 70-200 E FL with teleconverters?

[jhallettbc]

I currently have the Nikon 80-400 VRii which I'm reasonably happy with but I don't take a lot of bird or wildlife photos. I'm thinking of getting the 70-200 E FL because it is more versatile for my interests. I am wondering if I combined it with the Nikon TC14 or 17, and then did a little cropping if the photos would be sharper than with my 80-400.
Thanks for any thoughts you have.

 

[dabhand16]

FWIW I have a Nikkor AF-S 80-200 f2.8 and I use it with a 1.4TC and get good results. In good light AF is good but when it is gloomy it is a bit more hit and miss. This is obviously dependent on the subject and camera body.

My 300mm f4 works extremely well with the 1.4 TC even in low light. If you don't mind not having the zoom I think this is a good option.

 

[Warren D]

I have the 70-200EFL (actually 2 of them) and often use them with either the 1.4 EIII or 1.7 EII (no EIII version of the 1.7). I can tell you the image quality with the 1.4 is superb, in fact the first time I used a 1.4 I had to look at the metadata as it didn't appear to have had any negative effects. The 1.7 is very good, IQ wise, and I don't hesitate to use it if needed. I have had a 80-400 AFS VR for many years and it doesn't get much use anymore. I have not done a side by side but my gut says that the 70-200 EFL with a 1.7 is sharper at 340mm than the 80-400 is at the same focal length. You don't mention which body you are using and that could figure into a decision. I've used the 70-200 EFL with tc's combo mostly on a D850 and that body does give you some more pixels to play with.
As for the AF, the 70-200 EFL with a 1.7 tc is faster than my 80-400. My experience, YMMV.

 

[jhallettbc]

Thank you for your responses which I find very helpful. I am using the Nikon 780. Based on what you've said, I'm now planning on getting the 70-200E FL. However I would like to sell my 80-400 first but I've been shocked to see how little they go for nowadays. It seems like the market for used DSLR cameras and lenses has hugely disappeared.

 

[DavidT]

I tried the TC 2EIII and the 70-200 2.8 E and I was really impressed. The lens itself is crazy sharp and fast, with a 2X it didn't seem to take much of a hit. I didn't try it on any DSLR's but I did try it on a Z6 my spouse was using and needed more reach.

 

[Warren D]

This was with a 1.7 on the 70-200 EFL on a D850. Very minimal crop, shutter speed 1/250 sec. I've done a poster size print of this and it's crazy sharp.

Uh, I know it's a nature forum, see, there are trees in the BG!

 

[jhallettbc]

Wow. I'm really impressed. I'm getting the 70-200F FL with teleconverters.

 

[Woodpecker]

I currently have the Nikon 80-400 VRii which I'm reasonably happy with but I don't take a lot of bird or wildlife photos. I'm thinking of getting the 70-200 E FL because it is more versatile for my interests. I am wondering if I combined it with the Nikon TC14 or 17, and then did a little cropping if the photos would be sharper than with my 80-400.
Thanks for any thoughts you have.

Can't believe it, thanks for asking "my" question here . I left a side note somewhere else this morning, but opening a thread is probably the better way.

I am looking at the same question, but from a different perspective.
I have the 70-200 f4 G and the 300PF. Knowing that the 70-200 f2.8 FL VR is incredibly sharp and fast and can even be used wide open, I thought it might have enough headroom to allow replacing the 70-200 f4 G and the 300 PF, if I can combine it with a TC. Here is what I wrote there - including some links to information regarding loss of IQ by using TC's...

One is a general article around TC's including giving a kind of guideline for estimating IQ drop by TCs (exemplary test done with a 70-200 FL VR), the other one looking at the differences between TC-14E II and III. Would be interesting to compare this with experiences made by the people here.

Because of my experience with the TC-17E II have not been very good with some other lenses like the 200-400 F4 G VR or the 500 f4 G I was quite surprised about this comment ...

I have the 70-200EFL (actually 2 of them) and often use them with either the 1.4 EIII or 1.7 EII (no EIII version of the 1.7). I can tell you the image quality with the 1.4 is superb, in fact the first time I used a 1.4 I had to look at the metadata as it didn't appear to have had any negative effects. The 1.7 is very good, IQ wise, and I don't hesitate to use it if needed. I have had a 80-400 AFS VR for many years and it doesn't get much use anymore. I have not done a side by side but my gut says that the 70-200 EFL with a 1.7 is sharper at 340mm than the 80-400 is at the same focal length. You don't mention which body you are using and that could figure into a decision. I've used the 70-200 EFL with tc's combo mostly on a D850 and that body does give you some more pixels to play with.
As for the AF, the 70-200 EFL with a 1.7 tc is faster than my 80-400. My experience, YMMV.

Anybody out there who had a chance to use both the 300 PF and the 70-200 E FL + TC and - if yes - what do you think ?

Not that I am unhappy with the lenses I have got, but I am looking for streamlining my equipment a bit and if I get the chance to go shooting I often sit somewhere with two bodies, one with 500+ on the tripod and the second one with the 300 Pf or the zoom on my laps for the things happening around me. I think the 70-200 E FL with an optional TC-14 - or even the 17 - would give me a bit more flexibility compared with having either the 300 PF or my small zoom on body 2 that is not really good in AF when combined with a TC.

 

[Warren D]

If you're not totally on board yet, the VR on the 70-200EFL is about the best there is! Gotta love f2.8 glass!

 

[DRwyoming]

Anybody out there who had a chance to use both the 300 PF and the 70-200 E FL + TC and - if yes - what do you think ?

I've had several versions of Nikon 70-200mm f/2.8 lenses (and the older 80-200mm f/2.8) and they do work very well with matching Nikon 1.4 teleconverters. I had less luck, or at least wasn't as impressed with the image quality when trying a 1.7 or 2.0 teleconverter. I've had similar thoughts at various times like if I could just carry the 70-200mm with a couple of teleconverters I'd have a lot of range covered. It works, especially with the 1.4x converter but in the end I swapped first for a 300mm f/4 AF-S lens and then more recently to the 300mm PF lens and I much prefer the 300mm PF to the 70-200mm with a teleconverter, it's crazy sharp but also crazy small and light compared to the 70-200mm f/2.8 with TC combo and in my experience the 300mm PF focuses faster than the 70-200mm plus TC-14.

Lot's of different approaches but for me at least I much prefer the 300mm PF to getting close to that with a 70-200mm plus converter but I suppose it depends a lot on your favorite subjects and how often you'll need to pull back on the zoom in the field for larger subjects. When I ran the 70-200mm plus converter it was almost always at the longest focal length.

As a separate note, I swapped to the 70-200mm f/4 lens a couple of years ago and sold my f/2.8 version. The f/4 version of this lens is also really sharp, lighter, more compact and shares the same tripod mount as the 300mm PF so I only carry one of those easily removable mounts in my kit. My rationale for all the years with the f/2.8 versions of this lens was mostly human portraits as outside of hummingbirds at feeders 200mm is pretty short for most wildlife work. But these days I mostly use the 85mm f/1.8 prime for portraits and in a pinch the 70-200mm f/4 wide open does a great job there as well especially out near 200mm where you work a bit further back but subject isolation is still pretty easy. About the only place I miss the 70-200mm f/2.8 is shooting indoor sports like hockey where the zoom range and faster glass is a big plus.

 

[Warren D]

I've had all 3 versions of the 70-200 f2.8 and the EFL is in a different league.

 

[DRwyoming]

I've had all 3 versions of the 70-200 f2.8 and the EFL is in a different league.

Good to hear!

 

[Woodpecker]

It works, especially with the 1.4x converter but in the end I swapped first for a 300mm f/4 AF-S lens and then more recently to the 300mm PF lens and I much prefer the 300mm PF to the 70-200mm with a teleconverter, it's crazy sharp but also crazy small and light compared to the 70-200mm f/2.8 with TC combo and in my experience the 300mm PF focuses faster than the 70-200mm plus TC-14.

Thanks a lot @Warren D and @DRwyoming for your input.
After I fell in love with a 24-70 f2.8 E recently - which means that I already started to love 2.8 glass - I can imagine that I would like the 70-200 E FL as well, although it's a beast compared with the 70-200 f4 G. But as always decision seems not to be simple like black and white. Reason for starting these thoughts is that I can get hands on one of these 70-200 in splendid condition with 3 years warranty left and that's really tempting although the price tag is still on a level where I just can't just go out and get it. My primary idea behind it is for going "light and smal ". I know that sounds like a contradiction, but if AF and IQ is o.k. for my needs, with the 70-200 plus TC(s) I would have a chance to get a range from 24mm f2.8 up to 280mm f4 or even 340mm f4.8 (if the results with TC17 would be o.k.) with just two lenses for travelling. And if I find a space for my DX body somewhere it would be 510mm f 4.8.

Well, I have 2,5 days left to think about it. Let's see what happens .

 

[jhallettbc]

So I now have the 70-200 E FL and the TC17ii. Have taken some test shots over the past few days and am extremely pleased with the results. It was Warren D's photo that convinced me this was the combination I was looking for. Any deterioration in picture quality with the TC17ii is virtually unnoticeable to my eye and the AF speed does not seem to be affected. Thanks for all the information and suggestions here.

 

[Woodpecker]

So I now have the 70-200 E FL and the TC17ii. Have taken some test shots over the past few days and am extremely pleased with the results. It was Warren D's photo that convinced me this was the combination I was looking for. Any deterioration in picture quality with the TC17ii is virtually unnoticeable to my eye and the AF speed does not seem to be affected. Thanks for all the information and suggestions here.

Good to know ! After I just decided to get another body I have to take a deeeeeep breathh and give my wallet a rest.
But I assume that the development of F mount high end pro lenses will more or less come to an end soon because the majority is going towards mirrorless.
So, if you forget about weight it is probably a good idea to get the best-in-class F mount lenses in each category corresponding to your needs and then lean back and just keep it., because these lenses are typically made to actually survive the one or the other photographer . Maybe I rethink my decicion to keep the 40-200 f4 and the 300PF one day ...

With your 70-200 you have definitely reached the point for this lens category - at least if we look at the DSLR / F mount world.

 

[fcotterill]

Images from my 70-200 f2.8E and 300 f4 PF are very good with TC14 III. In contrast, I gave up using TC17 on the zoom (despite repeated AFFT), yet the IQ on the prime with TC17 II is excellent ie as a 510 f6.7. I also have tried TC2 III on the 70-200 but the results are satisfactory only. THis is with D850 and also Z7 and D500.

There are 3 main caveats with Nikon's TCs:
1. only a select subset of Nikkors listed as compatible actually give decent IQ. IME and reports from several owners on forums the 400 f2.8E FL is one of the very best. There were comparative Imatests on PL by Mansurov a few years back, confirming the incremental penalty. Basically, IQ with TC14 III is very good
2. Image quality drops off at longer subject distances ie 20m with 70-200 f2.8E + TC14 and ~40m with 400 f2.8E
3. Complicating (1) there is copy variation between TCs (probably lenses too!). I suspect this is the underlying problem with my copy of TC17 II. TC14 III seems to do best with E Nikkors but the vII is not that bad. The obsolete TC2 II is est used as a paperweight /fishing sinker.
Orange-Breasted Sunbird - Nikkor 70-200 f2.8E FL + TC14 III, D850

You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.