Take your photography to the next level and beyond...

  • NEWS
  • REVIEWS
  • INSPIRATION
  • COMMUNITY
  • COMPETITIONS

Why not join for free today?

Join for Free

Your total photography experience starts here


PRIZES GALORE! Enter The ePHOTOzine Exclusive Christmas Prize Draw; Over £10,000 Worth of Prizes! Plus A Gift For Everybody On Christmas Day!

To use converter or not?


geniehawk e2
8 181 England
2 Dec 2007 11:24AM
At the moment I have a Nikkor AF VR Zoom 80-400mm f/4.5-5.6D and also a Nikkor AF-SVR Zoom 70-200mm f/2.8G IF-ED which a bought as the 80-400 didn't seem fast enough and at the time I had some spare cash to spend! Now I am wondering if I would be better to sell the 80-400 and invest in a converter for the 70-200 to save weight and space in the bag. If so, which convertor is the best for use with this lens without losing any of the functions.? Hope some Nikon user will be able to help on this.

Thanks

Jeannie.

Join ePHOTOzine for free and remove these adverts.

Ade_Osman e2
11 4.5k 36 England
2 Dec 2007 11:31AM
Buy a Siggy 50-500 Jean....LOL...

Seriously though, I'd be more inclined to keep the F2.8 lens if you want to use a converter, remember that you will double up the F rating by using such a device. ie. The VR lens will become a F9-F12, whilst the F2.8 will become a F 5.6 I think......Although I'm not sure of the complexities of it all I'm sure someone will put you and me straight, but I'm sure this is how it works!

Ade x
geniehawk e2
8 181 England
2 Dec 2007 11:37AM
Thanks Ade, hope you and Sue are OK.
Seriously though I think I had better stick with Nikon, can't take the flack if I changed over! I have been told that I can't use a convertor with the 80-400 and maintain all it's functions so hoping someone here can put me right. (Even though the other halfsays thats impossible).
scotdiver e2
11 260 1 Scotland
2 Dec 2007 11:43AM
I have the 70-200 and was just thinking about how to get up to 400mm as well Smile I've gone back and re-read Thom Hogan's Review and I'm fairly sure I'll be adding the 2x converter to give me a 140-400 F5.6 zoom.
csurry
12 9.2k 92
2 Dec 2007 11:49AM
Jeannie, I have owned both lenses and my take on it would be to go for the 1.7x convertor.

OK, so you don't quite get 400mm, but the 1.7 loses a lot less quality than the 2x.

Ditch the 80-400 it is dire if you need quick AF, whereas the 70-200 even with convertor seems lightning in comparison.

HTH
Cheryl
scotdiver e2
11 260 1 Scotland
2 Dec 2007 12:05PM

Quote:
Ditch the 80-400 it is dire if you need quick AF...



Cheryl
Looking at your recent portfolio though, it's all 200-400mm shots.

Do you still prefer shooting with that lens rather than the 70-200 + convertor combo?

Just a wee bit confused.
Rob
csurry
12 9.2k 92
2 Dec 2007 12:14PM
For in flight shots, depending on the closeness it would be the 70-200 or 300mm.

The lens to which you refer is the 200-400, not the 80-400 of the OPs question. There's a big difference in price and performance.

The reason I mainly use one lens is purely down to portability. Or rather the lack of it. I can't carry much else in the bag once the 200-400 is in it, but quite often take the 70-200 + 1.7x. Why? Well if pushed I can hand-hold that combination. Which for erratic flight is vital.

Hope that clears up any confusion. Also lighter to carry just 70-200 + convertor than 70-200 and 80-400.
geniehawk e2
8 181 England
2 Dec 2007 12:21PM
Thanks Cheryl, thats exactly the info I needed! Hopefully I can sell the 80-400 to finance the converter.

Jeannie.
csurry
12 9.2k 92
2 Dec 2007 12:48PM

Quote:Thanks Cheryl, thats exactly the info I needed! Hopefully I can sell the 80-400 to finance the converter.

Jeannie.



And a whole more Smile
geniehawk e2
8 181 England
2 Dec 2007 2:42PM
Think I will have to give that some serious thought....what to buy...such a big choice out there -Smile

Sign In

You must be a member to leave a comment.

ePHOTOzine, the web's friendliest photography community.

Join For Free

Upload photos, chat with photographers, win prizes and much more.