Z9 + 500 f4 G + 20TC III

[RockvilleBob]

I had good success using the 1.7TC so I bought a 20TCIII. Here's a test I did to compare cropping vs TC. If I did the test correctly cropping is the winner with this combination
The first image is a side by side with the 1000mm (500 +2TC) on the left and just the 500 on the right.
The focus point was the hydrant white circular sign using spot focus
The second image is the 1000mm on the far left and to its immediate right is the 1000mm image scaled to the height of the paper. The 500mm image is on the far right aand to its immediate left is the 500mm image scaled to fit the height of the paper.
The result is two larger images with the 1000mm image on the left and to its right the 500mm image scaled to the same size
I do not know if the methodology is right but in this case, in this light (not that great but OK) the 500mm image looks better to me.
Both images were process using the camera profile I made some time ago for the Z9 with the 500. Perhaps a profile for the Z9 with the 500 and 2x would improve the colors and contrast but I still feel the detail of the 500 is better. The focus speed using the 2x was very good.
When I made the object of the 500mm hydrant I chopped off the valve nut on the top - I don't think that makes a difference.

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

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

 

[Nimi]

I had good success using the 1.7TC so I bought a 20TCIII. Here's a test I did to compare cropping vs TC. If I did the test correctly cropping is the winner with this combination
The first image is a side by side with the 1000mm (500 +2TC) on the left and just the 500 on the right.
The focus point was the hydrant white circular sign using spot focus
The second image is the 1000mm on the far left and to its immediate right is the 1000mm image scaled to the height of the paper. The 500mm image is on the far right aand to its immediate left is the 500mm image scaled to fit the height of the paper.
The result is two larger images with the 1000mm image on the left and to its right the 500mm image scaled to the same size
I do not know if the methodology is right but in this case, in this light (not that great but OK) the 500mm image looks better to me.
Both images were process using the camera profile I made some time ago for the Z9 with the 500. Perhaps a profile for the Z9 with the 500 and 2x would improve the colors and contrast but I still feel the detail of the 500 is better. The focus speed using the 2x was very good.
When I made the object of the 500mm hydrant I chopped off the valve nut on the top - I don't think that makes a difference.
View attachment 33888
View attachment 33889

Tripod?

 

[RockvilleBob]

Tripod?

On a tripod with a gimbal shooting like I would shoot birds: at 1/3200 sec and no VR but the lens was not "locked down". I shot 4 or 5 images at 10 fps and picked the best looking at them in Bridge comparison view. Perhaps a closer result would have been if the lens was locked down but that is not how I would shoot BIF or wildlife. I may try this again with this TC along with the 1.4 and 1.7.

 

[NorthernFocus]

If I understood your explanation your methodology is sound. And I agree in this case the cropped 500 image looks better than the 2x TC image. In my informal testing with DSLRs I came to the same conclusion with the 2x TC. Same result with 1.7x. With the copies that I have and the lenses I've used for comparison only the 1.4x beats cropping. Haven't tried comparing yet with mirrorless AF.

 

[Steve W]

The colour on the 2x TC isn’t too bad but the sharpness is wanting. Makes me feel like the specs need a clean..... that said, I think the 2x TC image is a bit better than what comes out of the D810 or D850.