NIKON f.2.8 VR2 70-200 with telephoto lens

Dscarinci1

1

11 Apr 2011 - 1:52 PM

• Options
  • Report Error / Abuse

0

I like to shoot moving animals and sports and I am looking for a lens that will get me close--300mm up to 500mm. I am particular about sharp photos. The NIKON 200-400 is beyond my price range at over $6500 and the reviews I've read about the $1000 Tamron 200-500 and the Sigma 150-500 are not very good for autofocus speed & sharpness beyond the 200mm range. I've been budgeting to reach for the NIKON f2.8 VR2, 70-200 because the reviews are uniformly excellent about its sharpness, speed and overall quality. For a $2300 lens, I guess I would expect that. So here is my thought: For an additional $500, I could get the NIKON 2X teleconverter (TC-20E111) which will work with the autofocus of my D7000. Even after adjusting 2 stops for the use of the teleconverter, I'm still at the most open aperture of either the Tamron or the Sigma.

Would this setup give me a sharper image quality than I would get if I bought the Tamron or Sigma zooms? I would think so, but I'd love to know what people think or whether there are any test results or camparisons. Am I also correct that the addition of a teleconverter would not redude the speed of the autofocus? Are there any other drawbacks to using the teleconverter on the NIKON f2.8 VR2, 70-200 that I am not thinking about.

I would appreciate all opinions. Thank you.

thewilliam

3

11 Apr 2011 - 2:57 PM

• Options
  • Report Error / Abuse

0

The 1.4x converter generally gives good results.

LeftForum

2

11 Apr 2011 - 3:40 PM

• Options
  • Report Error / Abuse

0

It really is "horses for courses", Donald.

I use the Sigma 150-500mm zoom on my Nikons and it is pin sharp all the way through the range. The AF is possibly slower than on my Nikkors (e.g. the 24-70mm that is my "standard" lens) and the OS system (Sigma's equivalent of VR) rarely gets used because its noise annoys me. But, then, I rarely use VR on those Nikkor lenses that have it anyway.

I can't compare the Sigma to a Nikkor 70-200mm plus teleconverter because, quite simply, I don't have the latter combination but the Sigma is certainly as sharp as any Nikkor lens that I have as far as can be detected within the range of my usage - generally A3+ prints from perhaps a 50% crop of image area. At higher magnifications maybe some difference would be discernible but, to me, it is irrelevant. Also, of course, if it is "reach" that you are after, the Sigma gives you a pin-sharp 500mm while the Nikkor plus 1.7x converter only gives you 340mm.

I have used the Kenco 1.7x converter with my Nikkor 70-300mmVR lens and, unlike Peter with his better quality Nikkor, I did think there was a degradation of image quality.

So, my advice would be to decide what course you want the horse to jump, and then take your camera into a shop and try it with each of the combinations that meet that horse's requirements (even shots of the top of the building opposite from the door of the shop should give you some indication of whether your quality requirements are being met once you take your card home and examine the images at the greatest magnification you are likely to use in real life.)

.

Dscarinci1

1

28 Apr 2011 - 5:56 AM

• Options
  • Report Error / Abuse

0

I ended up buying the Nikon 70 to 200 lens with a 1.7 Nikon teleconverter. It was expensive, but the lens is truly amazing. There is just no comparison for quality here.