Kenko Teleplus PRO 300 DGX 1.4x AF Teleconverter

[Fortkentdad]

+

The Kenko 1.4 will be with my 200-500 most of the time.
Yes it works on others but I get the best shots with the 200-500+1.4.
May be times when it makes sense on other lenses, but the most benefit seems to be on the long lens.

 

[Elliot87]

I've just picked up my Kenko Teleplus Pro 300 1.4X TC. I should have had it last Friday but for some reason UPS delivered it to a hospital instead of the camera store, wtf is that about?!?
Anyway I've just had a quick play shooting sparrows and a pigeon in my garden. First impressions are that this and the 200-500mm will be a very good combo in good light. IQ still looks very good to me and the biggest degradation I think will come from higher iso and/or slower shutter as a result of going from f/5.6 to f/8. If the light is there that won't be a problem I don't think but it's cloudy here at the moment.

Here are the first couple of shots I've compared, more to come. First shot is with the TC at 700mm (1050mm 35mm equivalent), second is shot at 500mm (750mm) and cropped to match as closely as I can. The only other editing is some sharpening in Lightroom.

It will be difficult to see much difference on here I know but I think one thing that stands out is the background looks smoother with the TC Edit: I had forgotten both were shot at f/8, had I been at f/5.6 + 500mm the difference of depth of field wouldn't be so noticeable if at all.
Honestly the shutter speed was too slow here so I think that might have hurt sharpness in both, especially at 700mm.

 

[Elliot87]

Here are another two to compare. The settings are different as the light was changing but both were shot at the same distance from the bird, neither cropped and both with very very similar post processing. The 1/80sec was possible because I used a beanbag for support.

No TC 500mm 1st

700mm with TC

 

[Fortkentdad]

Here are another two to compare. The settings are different as the light was changing but both were shot at the same distance from the bird, neither cropped and both with very very similar post processing. The 1/80sec was possible because I used a beanbag for support.

Looking good.

I like this combo and use it a lot.

 

[Fortkentdad]

Well I have a new camera to play with.
Put the Kenko and the 200-500 on my D7100 and went bird hunting.

First - someone had asked about noise when focusing. On the D610 (and D90 and D5100) there is a very little noise - had to listen for it. But on the D7100 it is much louder. I don't know if this is a bad thing or if it is just noisy. Certainly is disconcerting. 3

I also found that the D7100 with this TC is not nearly as fast to autofocus. I was shooting at mid day on a mainly sunny day. Light was not much of an issue. I missed many shots due to the failure to lock on focus. Maybe I need more practice with this camera but the settings and buttons are almost identical to the D610.

I did find that the images are much larger than the ones from my D610 - because I almost always crop the image afterwards and end up with less mega-pixels. But apparently size matters - well for pixels anyway and even though the D7100 may have more pixels - those pixels are smaller and tighter packed than the D610's pixels. Confused - yeah me too.

Bottom line - it does work - and did give me some great shots.

 

[Blacktop]

Well I have a new camera to play with.
Put the Kenko and the 200-500 on my D7100 and went bird hunting.

First - someone had asked about noise when focusing. On the D610 (and D90 and D5100) there is a very little noise - had to listen for it. But on the D7100 it is much louder. I don't know if this is a bad thing or if it is just noisy. Certainly is disconcerting. 3

I also found that the D7100 with this TC is not nearly as fast to autofocus. I was shooting at mid day on a mainly sunny day. Light was not much of an issue. I missed many shots due to the failure to lock on focus. Maybe I need more practice with this camera but the settings and buttons are almost identical to the D610.

I did find that the images are much larger than the ones from my D610 - because I almost always crop the image afterwards and end up with less mega-pixels. But apparently size matters - well for pixels anyway and even though the D7100 may have more pixels - those pixels are smaller and tighter packed than the D610's pixels. Confused - yeah me too.

Bottom line - it does work - and did give me some great shots.

View attachment 226532View attachment 226533

I also had the same issues on the D7100 with this TC as you, before I sold the D7100. Very noisy with the TC and very hard to get a focus lock, especially while tracking.
I have none of these problems when attached to the D750, except the focus slows down some, which is expected using a TC.

 

[canuck257]

Does anyone know if this TC works with the Nikkor 70-300 VR?

 

[Bikerbrent]

It works on my Nikon 18-200 as along as I make sure not to zoom it too wide. Also works great on my Sigma 150-600. So I would say there is a good chance it will work on your 70-300 as well as your 200-500. However, with a 200-500 why would you want to use it on the 70-300?

 

[canuck257]

I'm thinking of using it on the 70-300 for my wife. I already have the Nikon 1.4 TC for the 200-500. The Nikon does not work on the 70-300.

 

[Blacktop]

Does anyone know if this TC works with the Nikkor 70-300 VR?

Yes, it does work. However AF is slowed down quite a bit. The IQ doesn't seem to suffer much

Sent from my VS985 4G using Tapatalk

 

[Fortkentdad]

Does anyone know if this TC works with the Nikkor 70-300 VR?

I can try it with the Nikkor DX 55-300 (but I'll look carefully first to see if there is risk of contact with the optics at 55) +

I have tried it with Tamron's 70-300 - works but sub-optimal - will try it with the D7100 to see if that makes any difference.

I'm also thinking I'll pull out my ancient lenses and see if the Sigma 100-300 works well enough, or an old push-pull Nikon 70-210.

When I get some more play time with this camera and T.C.

 

[Ironwood]

I have this TC, I tried it with my D7100 and Nikon 70-300 VR, wasn't happy with the results.
I found I could get better IQ by using the lens by itself at 300mm and cropping to the same FOV.
The lure of getting 420mm for the cost of this TC was tempting, but I would have been better off saving the money. Though your results may vary from mine.

 

[Blacktop]

On the 200-500mm

If I have time in the morning, I'll take a few picks with the 70-300mm outside and post them up.

 

[Fortkentdad]

Another day another trip to Jesse Lake to shoot some ducks and anything else that moves (or moves me).

Today I packed out my 70-300mm Tamron and my 70-200 Nikkor to compare them with the Kenko TC attached.
I also shot a few BIF's of seagull in the park with the Tammy without the Kenko. Much better at BIF's without it.

Anyway. cut to the chase. This testing convinced me that the Kenko goes very well with my D7100 and the 70-200 2.8 but not so much with the 70-300 Tamron.

It works and if I really needed that extra reach it might be worthwhile but I wonder if an extra crop on the the 70-200 with the Kenko wouldn't be better than the 70-300 with the T.C. I really should do a test to compare cropping a shot with the 70-200 at 280 cf to the Tamron 70-300 at 280 (and my DX Nikkor 55-300 at 280). Next test will need to be the 280 test to see.

Anyway. Money does matter. What I saw today was that the $400 Tamron 70-300 is not as good as the $1,000 70-200 (VRI) which is not as good as the $1800 200-500mm. You know, sometimes you do get what you pay for. Pay more, get more.

Here's the proof in the pudding



Above are shot with the Tamron and Kenko

Below with the Nikkor 70-200 and Kenko

I think that will be my preferred combination.

The Tammy combo works - but the I like the Nikkor combo better.

 

[Fortkentdad]

Nikkor 70-200 + Kenko close crop vs Tamron 70-300 + Kenko close crop.

Both are good - Nikkor is better IMHO

 

[Fortkentdad]

I "crop-a-lot" especially when shooting birds at a distance.
Nice to know that with the 70-200 which only gets to 280 with the 1.4 TC I can still 'crop-a-lot' and get a good image.

I'm tempted to drop the $220 and get a Kenko 2.0 T.C. just for this lens. I do not have another 2.8 lens that would make sense but a 400 5.6 sounds good - oh wait, I already have a 500 5.6 ... mmmm

 

[Fortkentdad]

Another day another Kenko test

This time I mounted it between my 55-300 DX VR lens and the D7100.

I checked carefully first to see if there was a chance for lens to lens contact - seemed to me there was sufficient space and no danger of contact.

It was a gloomy day for a test - but maybe that's good to know what it can do with sub-optimal light. Very overcast as you can see from some of these shots.

Shooting the kitten from maybe four meters away. (oh about 12 feet for you the old school boys).


This is virtually untouched - just converted to jpg and downsized for upload limits.


This is cropped and processed.

The following give you and idea how gloomy it was today.

Looked for birds - then spotted one on the wire at the end of the driveway. In both of these images the background image is untouched (jpg-ed and sized only) while the insert has been processed. I was amazed that you could tell that the birds beak was open. In good light the birds colour may have come through. The small plane is my PIF shot - notice it froze the prop.




And finally a 'macro' shot - maybe from two meters away.

This is cropped and processed a little.




IMHO - I am like the results from this Nikkor 55-300 DX over the Tammy 70-300 (and FX lens). AF is a little slow and if I had a flock of seagulls to chase and try and shoot I might change my mind but that kitten didn't sit still for long and I was able to lock on focus pretty quickly.

It does add that extra 120mm in reach - and on a DX body that's 180mm more distance (sort of).

I might play with this a little more.

Having said that the 1.4 seems to really shine on the the 200-500 5.6e long lens and on the 70-200.

 

[Blacktop]

Here is one attached to the 50mm AF-D 1.8

 

[Fortkentdad]

I was thinking of playing around with putting the Kenko on a few other lenses, but I'm not sure of the advantage.

I could put it on a 50mm like Blacktop shows us above, but I already have an 85mm 1.8 so where is that gain?

And the same question applies to putting it on my 60, 85 or 105. Yes I get 'more primes' - I'd have a 84mm F4, and a 119mm 2.8, and a 147 2.8. But I already have all that in my 70-200 2.8.

Is there any advantage?
Of course I've I did not have the 70-200 2.8, or didn't have it with me, then it would be an advantage?

The 60 and 105 are macro's - what does putting a T.C. on a Macro do? Would it 'macro' better than the 70-200 at the same focal length?

But it is fun to play with all our toys eh?

 

[Fortkentdad]

Thinking of getting a Nikon TC-17E II AF-S Tele-Converter - one of the stores I frequent lists two copies in their used inventory for under $200. New these sell for over $400 and the new version III is $570 (on sale). Given the 1.4 Kenko is working so well I'm wondering if I gain much. It does have a shorter list of lenses with which it says it is compatible.

I'm not sure that it would autofocus on the 200-500 because I'm already at F8 with 1.4, the 1.7 would add another half stop and take it past the A.F. limit.

Alternatively I could go for the Kenko 2.0 - available from B&H for about $50 more (new). It should still A.F. on the 70-200 2.8 but not the 200-500 although it would give me a 1000mm M.F. lens (even more on the D7100).

Hmmmm What have people's experience with either of these two T.C.'s been?