Nikon Announces New 180 - 400 with Built-in 1.4 TC

[Dawg Pics]

I think it’s all because Canon has similar zooms with built-in TCs, so Nikon felt they had to match.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

OK, That make sense, but were pro's griping that Nikon didn't have that type lens or is is spec based on Canon's sales I wonder? I am just curious.

 

[RocketCowboy]

OK, That make sense, but were pro's griping that Nikon didn't have that type lens or is is spec based on Canon's sales I wonder? I am just curious.

Good question because like you, I always heard that a TC negatively affects IQ. I guess if a photographer is out on safari capturing wildlife, and they just can’t get it at 400mm, flipping a switch to get he shot is better than removing the lens to add a TC. But that seems pretty niche case to me.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Dawg Pics]

Good question because like you, I always heard that a TC negatively affects IQ. I guess if a photographer is out on safari capturing wildlife, and they just can’t get it at 400mm, flipping a switch to get he shot is better than removing the lens to add a TC. But that seems pretty niche case to me.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Good point.
I have a 1.4 extender to use on my 300mm lens. The sharpness is, eh, but I need to make some test shots with and without to see what difference it makes.

 

[spb_stan]

Dawg Pics There is a noticeable difference between IQ of the 3 different Nikon 1.4 TCs, The version III is pretty good but the version I had serious degradation of image quality.

This lens looks really good on paper and I am sure it is very good but if I had that money in spare change, there are others I would rather have starting with a 200 2.0 VRII as the ultimate portrait lens with the creamiest bokeh I have ever seen. A pro sports or wildlife shooter who could carry a single lens to cover the ranges needed it would be tempting. Taking two lenses on flights on carry-on would be more weight and size, so buying an extra seat on a flight for lens case saves money and hassle. Many of my flights have a 12 lb overhead limit so a D850/D5 and that lens would fit in the weight limit.

 

[hark]

Good point.
I have a 1.4 extender to use on my 300mm lens. The sharpness is, eh, but I need to make some test shots with and without to see what difference it makes.

I have the Nikon 300mm f/4D AF-S and use it with a Nikon TC-14E ii teleconverter. Even with the tele, the images are very sharp. What brand of teleconverter are you using? If it's a Kenko, I hear those aren't as sharp.

 

[Dawg Pics]

@hark @spb_stan

It is a Sigma lens with a Sigma TC. It probably need some fine tuning, results with all of my lenses haven't been great. At least I hope it is just a fine tune AF issue. :shame:
I made the purchase from a pro photographer who was downsizing. He used the lens for local school sports and such.

 

[Whiskeyman]

I don't know that much about optics, but the first thing I thought was "Why teleconverter?Doesn't that reduce the IQ?"
Maybe it doesn't matter if the optics are good?

Usually, teleconverters do somewhat degrade IQ. One reason for this is that they are designed to work with many different lenses, not just one. Theoretically, if designing a TC to work with just one lens, and thus integrally mounted, it could be better matched to the optical formula for that lens, and that should be a recipe for better IQ from the lens and TC combination. This len's (a zoom) design would be much more challenging to optimize than a prime's, but is can be better than using a detachable TC made for a range of lenses.

WM

 

[Rick M]

This is a good article on the matter, my results are about the same. If the subject is too far out, the crop or TC are almost equal. For close up work, if you can completely fill the frame, TC helps a bit, but that's not what most of us want it for. After shooting Snowy owls this year which were pretty far away, I'm selling my TC.

https://backcountrygallery.com/use-teleconverter-crop-image/