Jump to content

Recommended Posts

 

Sorry coming late to this, I am also considering a t/c for my Nikon 70-200mm f2.8G.

 

Some useful testing from Nasim Mansurov from Photography Life, produced some IQ figures as follows:

 

No t/c = 100%

1.4 t/c = 95%

1.7 t/c = 83%

2.0 t/c = 74%

 

I read this to be that a 1.4 t/c results in no noticeable degradation.

 

https://photographylife.com/image-degradation-with-nikon-teleconverters

 

You say in another thread that you are using a D810. I would bet (figuratively speaking) that you would get better results cropping using the 70-200 without any converter than full frame with any one of these 3 attached and still have an image that could be used for almost any general purpose including printing large.

 

 

 

That is even possible with the D750 but to a lesser extent.

 

Allan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

You say in another thread that you are using a D810. I would bet (figuratively speaking) that you would get better results cropping using the 70-200 without any converter than full frame with any one of these 3 attached and still have an image that could be used for almost any general purpose including printing large.

 

 

You are quite possibly correct MDM, particularly with the 1.4 t/c. However looking at the 2.0 t/c, would it not be correct that if I cropped an image by 50% in PP, the image IQ would therefore drop by 50%?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't know how you are quantifying image quality but a half frame image from a D800/810 will be more than 4800x3600 pixels and will easily print up to >A3+ size without any upsizing at 240ppi. I routinely do portraits with the camera horizontal and crop in post - far more stable with a heavy telephoto lens than hoiding the camera vertically.

 

Similarly a quarter frame image will be over 3600x2400 and will easily print up to A4 size without any upsizing at 240 ppi. You can crop even further and still get a decent A4 print. For web or news use, you could go a lot further. It's important to use good lenses and technique (focus, camera shake etc) of course. Put a teleconverter behind a Nikkor 70-200 on a D810 - no way - it's heavy enough and you will almost certainly degrade the image - not to mention the expense of the converter.

Edited by MDM

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was thinking about sharpness. However I now realise that cropping would reduce the overall total image size & total pixels, but would have no effect on the actual sharpness of the remaining part of the image. You may well have saved me from buying a teleconverter!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was thinking about sharpness. However I now realise that cropping would reduce the overall total image size & total pixels, but would have no effect on the actual sharpness of the remaining part of the image. You may well have saved me from buying a teleconverter!

 

 

If you need to improve sharpness do as some others do on this forum. Reduce the long side of the image to 3000.

 

Allan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I use a Nikon 2X teleconverter (an AF-I version I picked up on e-bay for $75) with the AF-S 70-200mm f/2.8 II for my newspaper work all the time, and even with a D800, I can't see a lot of image degradation.  Certainly not enough to notice if you were going to go to print.

 

That said, I don't even think the 24-70 is compatible with teleconverters.  The one I have goes right into the back of the lens, so I would think there would be serious issues with not having enough clearance for the rear element.  Nikon has a list of compatible lenses of the teleconverters, so check that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I use a Nikon 2X teleconverter (an AF-I version I picked up on e-bay for $75) with the AF-S 70-200mm f/2.8 II for my newspaper work all the time, and even with a D800, I can't see a lot of image degradation.  Certainly not enough to notice if you were going to go to print.

 

That said, I don't even think the 24-70 is compatible with teleconverters.  The one I have goes right into the back of the lens, so I would think there would be serious issues with not having enough clearance for the rear element.  Nikon has a list of compatible lenses of the teleconverters, so check that.

 

It would be interesting to see a direct comparison of the same image at the same size with and without the converter. I would have thought that for news use - web or print - the cropped version without the converter would be at least sufficient if not better (as well as lighter and cheaper). I wonder the same about the difference between a cropped image from a D800/810 and the equivalent D500 or other DX camera. I've not seen a comparison.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here are some shots I did over the weekend.  They're just newspaper stand alone photos, nothing too fancy.  The shots of the climbers are with the 2x teleconverter with a Nikon AF-S 70-200mm f/2.8 II and a Nikon D3.  The guy on the beach is with the 70-200mm without the teleconverter.  It's January in Canada, so the ISO is up in the range 1250.  https://www.dropbox.com/sh/1w9hk589doe3a8a/AAAbYtUyM3s3UcPaayGvOWTVa?dl=0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just to add to the last post, the shot of the two climbers, and the guy on the beach, are both heavily cropped.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.