Use two 1.4X TCs or one 2X TC on the Z 400mm f2.8 or the Z 600mm F4

[Ivan Rothman]

For the large prime lenses with built in 1.4X TCs (the Z 400mm f2.8 or the new Z 600mm f4) - if you want more reach than you can get with just the built-in 1.4X TC, are you better off using the built-in 1.4X TC along with an attached Z 1.4X TC or should you not use the built-in TC and use just a single attached 2X TC? Reach and f stop the same either way. But what about the quality of the photo
With the Z 600mm: 1.4X TC + 1.4 TC = 1176mm at f8 2X TC = 1200mm at f8

 

[mdirvin]

I saw that addressed in a review for the 400 f2.8. It's been awhile but I think it was a YouTube review with Matt Granger. His testing showed that the internal TC did not work well with an external TC. Either use one of the other either the internal 1.4, or an external 2.0 for the best results.

 

[arbitrage]

One of the members on this forum has demonstrated that the IQ between two 1.4s vs the 2x is very similar...near as makes no difference.

Personally I'd always choose two 1.4s because that would give me versatility while shooting the same way the bare lens does. I would have a 560 to 784 lens with the 400STC and a 840mm to 1176mm lens with the 600STC. That said I probably wouldn't bother with the extra 1.4 on the 600. 840 is enough for my shooting and anytime I try to reach out with 1200 the air quality usually ruins the shots anyways. 600-800 is my sweet spot. With the 400 I would like to use the two 1.4TC to get to 800 some of the time and when doing so would like that flexibility to go back and forth between 560/4 and 784/5.6.

 

[mdirvin]

Here is just the info you are looking for:

 

[Ivan Rothman]

Here is just the info you are looking for:

Thanks so much for this reference to Matt Granger's video. I just watched it. He is testing the Z 400mm f2.8 with TCs along with comparison to the F-mount 400mm.
Here are Matt's findings:
He finds that the Z 400 with the built-in 1.4X TC gives very very little degradation of image and that image is as good as the F-mount 400mm without TC.
The Z 400 with external 1.4X TC is just a hair less good than using the built-in TC
The Z 400 with built-in TC + external 1.4X TC is not quite as good but still very good.
The Z 400 with external 2X TC is quite good and better than using the built-in TC + external 1.4X TC. (although as noted in previous post here, using two 1.4X TCs over the 2X TC gives the advantage of versatility in being able to switch from using both together to using just one to immediately change focal length of lens).

If these findings hold up with the new Z 600mm, then I would have to agree with Steve's suggestion: "Best Wildlife Lens Ever?"

One other feature of the Z 600 that I am very taken with (also in the Z 400 f2.8). It has Save Focus Position controls all built into the lens. No longer have to program a function button on the camera. Just press Memory Set Button to set focus point. Then rotate the Function Ring to recall last-saved position.

I believe that this lens along with the Z9 is going to very significantly elevate my wildlife photography experience.

 

[Calson]

Moose Peterson is of the opinion that the Z 400mm f/2.8 lens works very well with the Z 2x teleconverter to provide a1120mm at f/8.

Nikon 400mm f/2.8 S TC VR Lens Review | Thom Hogan

Review of the Nikon (Nikkor) 400mm f/2.8 S TC VR lens for the Z mount

www.zsystemuser.com

If cost was not a concern the 400mm f/2.8, 2x Z teleconverter, and the 100-400mm f/5.6 lens would make for the ideal setup for most photographers. It is the lightest and most compact kit to provide a focal length range from 100mm to 1120mm with two lenses and a teleconverter. Total weight of these 3 items is only 10.2 lbs. For me the $15,200 cost to buy the 400mm f/2.8 is a bit daunting for what is a hobby with my wildlife photography.

 

[CoyoteCreationsNW]

I have used the 400 mm TC on my Z9 with both the 1.4 and 2.0 teleconverters. Loss in image quality when using either the 1.4 or 2.0 without the internal TC may be slightly impacted but I have to go to 100% or greater crops to really see much of a difference. When using an external TC stacked with the internal TC, the IQ degradation is more noticeable but the images are still good enough for smaller prints up to 11 X 14 inches. I prefer the 2.0 TC to get 800 mm at f/5.6 compared to stacking the internal TC and 1.4 external TC, but the difference is not very noticeable unless you are really pixel peeping. My only experience is with the 400 TC 2.8. I don't know if the 600 mm TC will behave the same. For now, I keep the TC 14 on a 70-200 f/2.8 lens and Z7ii body and have the TC20 to use on the 400 TC and Z9 if I need the reach for birds. I rarely used TCs with my DSLR bodies and F mount lenses. The mirrorless bodies and TC have changed by though process a lot.

 

[Calson]

The problem Moose found was with diffraction that was more evident with the Z9 45MP sensor. I could see the diffraction in the viewfinder with my D850 when using my 600mm f/4 lens with a TC-20 attached. In DX mode this would be less evident.

He found the best IQ with the 2x TC and not using the internal 1.4x converter in the 400mm lens. With fewer lens elements in the picture one would expect it to result in better image quality.

 

[Kuau]

Moose Peterson is of the opinion that the Z 400mm f/2.8 lens works very well with the Z 2x teleconverter to provide a1120mm at f/8.

Nikon 400mm f/2.8 S TC VR Lens Review | Thom Hogan

Review of the Nikon (Nikkor) 400mm f/2.8 S TC VR lens for the Z mount

www.zsystemuser.com

If cost was not a concern the 400mm f/2.8, 2x Z teleconverter, and the 100-400mm f/5.6 lens would make for the ideal setup for most photographers. It is the lightest and most compact kit to provide a focal length range from 100mm to 1120mm with two lenses and a teleconverter. Total weight of these 3 items is only 10.2 lbs. For me the $15,200 cost to buy the 400mm f/2.8 is a bit daunting for what is a hobby with my wildlife photography.

This is exactly what I have the Z400/2.8 Z 2X TC and the Z 100-400 great setup.