Refurb 1.7x TC & 300mm PF

[hark]

Pics or it didn't happen. :beguiled:

Here is one of the last images I shot this afternoon with Sport VR which is my preferred choice of VR. Cropped slightly. I was reasonably close - hence the slight crop. But being close means there is a shallower Dof - so definitely a good test. The only sharpening done was the default of 40 in Camera RAW. I did my usual post processing: Camera RAW, PCC to remove any unwanted spots, then The NIK Collection (EFEX Pro).

But as I mentioned in my last post, lowering my shutter speed back to 1/1000" will be the real test.

 

[Needa]

Fingers crossed.

 

[hark]

Ugh. This problem still exists. I took some photos of ducks at a nature center - shutter speed as slow as 1/800" with excellent results using both Normal VR and Sport VR. Then I went elsewhere and came across a vulture. Several of those vulture images are heavily front focusing while a few are fine. It makes no sense. But the ones that heavily front focused were in Sport VR as were all of the vulture images. So not sure if Sport VR is the issue; however, I don't think that problem has occurred with Normal VR.

Plus yesterday I mentioned how the Normal VR always had a tendency to make the image jump in the viewfinder - you can go to this post and view images 4, 5, and 6 to see how the duck wasn't in the same position for consecutive images:

https://nikonites.com/other-photography-equipment/44655-refurb-1-7x-tc-300mm-pf.html#post739587

But yesterday (after having removed stuck cotton fibers from a lens contact), Normal VR worked fine. Yet today it was acting up, too. This is such a pain to diagnose. :indecisiveness: And I haven't removed the lens or TC since removing the cotton fibers.

 

[hark]

Here are a few samples from this afternoon. No Shake Reduction was utilized. With all these, the focus point was on their faces - and possibly recomposed once focus was achieved (and yes, the BBF was first locked then let go to recompose).

These first two were pretty good as far as sharpness goes. Subject here is somewhat dark with low contrast. No complaints on this one. Very slight crop from the original image.

Another subject that is somewhat dark with low contrast. Still no complaints. A little more of a crop was done here. Faster shutter speed with wide open (f/6.7 is wide open with this TC).

For some reason, the following image looks to have back-focused. When I support the camera/lens, I try to hold it at the tripod foot or on the hood without touching the focus ring. This back-focusing is new for some reason. Simply used the jpeg SOOC and resized for the forum. No additional editing was done. No cropping.

Quite often when it misses focus, it seems to front-focus like in this image. Simply used the jpeg SOOC and resized for the forum. No additional editing was done. No cropping. Any comments and/or suggestions will be appreciated. I tried to maintain a consistent shutter speed (one that I tend to use regularly) when possible.

 

[Needa]

Only one thing left an exorcism. ::what::::what::

My mind keeps going back to everything was ok until you removed the lens and TC. I have nothing helpful though.

 

[hark]

Only one thing left an exorcism. ::what::::what::

My mind keeps going back to everything was ok until you removed the lens and TC. I have nothing helpful though.

That's when it all started. I removed the lens with TC attached while the camera was turned on and the VR was still set to Sport. I am pretty sure the camera was in standby, but I always try to remove lenses when the camera is off. That was simply an oversight on my part. I'm just trying to narrow down whether it is solely the Sport VR (although Normal VR has had its own issues ever since I purchased the lens used). But for some reason, the AF is also affected at times. That too wasn't an issue even for photos lacking contrast. Yet I can take low contrast images of ducks and geese without any problems then suddenly the AF goes haywire.

I need to stay in Normal VR with this lens and TC to see if it ever happens. So far I'm not aware of it being a problem. It's just that consecutive images change the framing when using Normal VR (so I know there is some type of problem that always existed since owning the lens). If I send the lens out for repair, I want to be sure that all the issues are addressed. If it's possible to continue using the lens in Normal VR without the AF problem, then I will do so without sending it in for repair.

 

[hark]

Took more photos today only to have the focus missed on just about all of them. So I read this article on cleaning the contacts:

https://www.nikonimgsupport.com/eu/BV_article?articleNo=000006511&configured=1&lang=en_GB

Following the article, I used a disposable lens cloth wrapped around a plastic citrus stick and cleaned contacts on both ends of the TC as well as the rear of the lens. It removed some grey grime from the lens' contacts even though I previously cleaned those contacts with a microfiber cloth. When I have time, I will add a little bit of rubbing alcohol to another clean lens cloth and clean the lens contacts again. The TC didn't show any grime.

 

[hark]

I think I can put this to rest for now. It's definitely an issue with the lens despite cleaning the lens contacts with rubbing alcohol.

Once again I coupled the lens with a new TC. Lots of front focusing by several inches. Initially I used it with Sport VR. It was the first time in a long time that the image would freeze within the viewfinder. I shot several pics then switched to Normal VR. After several more shutter actuations, I went back to Sport VR. Suddenly the images within the viewfinder wouldn't freeze. This has been an ongoing issue, and obviously with a different TC, the TC isn't at fault.

The AF might also be affected, but at some point I will send the lens to Nikon for repair. It's possible there is more grime within the recessed areas of the lens contacts. I removed what I could get safely. I'm just hesitant to send anything in for repair right now - not sure if Nikon's repair center has many people working yet.

 

[Andy W]

It may take a little longer than normal:


Updated July 15, 2020
Important Notice Regarding California service Facility:
Our first priority remains the safety of our customers and employees.
In compliance with California Government mandates regarding Covid-19, we have currently suspended operations at our Los Angeles, CA service facility.
Repair services are currently available to all customers at our New York facility, including those mailing-in product, as well as walk-in / counter service.
For walk-in service, please be aware that customers will be required to observe the safety protocols in place at these facilities.
We would like to ask for your patience, as an increase in repair turn-around time is expected due to the increase in transit/delivery time as a result of COVID-19.
Please contact Nikon Customer support at nikonusa.com/support for more information. We apologize for any inconvenience and thank you for your understanding.

 

[hark]

It may take a little longer than normal:


Updated July 15, 2020
Important Notice Regarding California service Facility:
Our first priority remains the safety of our customers and employees.
In compliance with California Government mandates regarding Covid-19, we have currently suspended operations at our Los Angeles, CA service facility.
Repair services are currently available to all customers at our New York facility, including those mailing-in product, as well as walk-in / counter service.
For walk-in service, please be aware that customers will be required to observe the safety protocols in place at these facilities.
We would like to ask for your patience, as an increase in repair turn-around time is expected due to the increase in transit/delivery time as a result of COVID-19.
Please contact Nikon Customer support at nikonusa.com/support for more information. We apologize for any inconvenience and thank you for your understanding.

Thanks for this, Andy. I knew it would be possible that Nikon wouldn't be fully staffed. Guess I will either have to get out my 300mm non-VR lens to use with the TC or use the TC with my 70-200mm f/4 VR zoom (definitely the lighter weight option).

 

[BF Hammer]

Hark, all I can contribute is that I gave up on tele-converters shortly after buying my D7000 years ago. I had a 1.4x Tamron autofocus-compatible converter back in my D80 days. It never failed to function with either of my 2 D80 bodies. But using the same lens on my D7000 with that tele-converter only gave me an error code in the viewfinder. It would not work right with a D7000, but back on the D80 was no problem. They are finicky things apparently, and some sort of smarts built-in. Those electrical connectors don't appear to just pass through the signal.

So long story short, there has to be a capacitor or a diode that is limiting the required power for the focus motor and VR at the same time, or something like that. There may not be a fix other than ditching the tele-converter.

 

[hark]

I even went out one last time with the 300mm f/4 PF and the 1.7x TC, but almost everything was out of focus. So I swapped out the 300mm f/4 PF for the 300mm f/4 non-VR lens coupled with the TC. Wow, it is heavy compared with the PF.

Since there isn't any VR, I made sure to increase my shutter speed and still wound up using Shake Reduction in PCC. For now, it will simply have to do. Otherwise, I need to choose a different lens altogether.

A couple days ago, someone posted on Facebook about a Great Blue Heron that was injured. Typically we don't have too many of these birds around here so I was concerned the injured bird might be the one I've photographed in the past. The injured heron was picked up by a volunteer and taken to a Wildlife Sanctuary - haven't heard whether or not the heron lived as someone thought it might have been hit by a vehicle.

I went out in search of the heron I've photographed in the past knowing the odds of seeing it would be slim. Usually I only see it on weekends when there are fewer people and less traffic. Thankfully I saw it and was able to take some photos. This is a decent sized crop from the original as I wasn't that close.

 

[hark]

Hark, all I can contribute is that I gave up on tele-converters shortly after buying my D7000 years ago. I had a 1.4x Tamron autofocus-compatible converter back in my D80 days. It never failed to function with either of my 2 D80 bodies. But using the same lens on my D7000 with that tele-converter only gave me an error code in the viewfinder. It would not work right with a D7000, but back on the D80 was no problem. They are finicky things apparently, and some sort of smarts built-in. Those electrical connectors don't appear to just pass through the signal.

So long story short, there has to be a capacitor or a diode that is limiting the required power for the focus motor and VR at the same time, or something like that. There may not be a fix other than ditching the tele-converter.

The thing is the TC worked incredibly well when I first got it. And it remained fine for the first month. But it appears to be a lens issue rather than the TC. So at some point I will send the lens to Nikon for repair.

 

[hark]

My intent was to put away the 300mm f/4 PF and use my 300mm f/4 non-VR lens. And while I did that for a couple of outings, the combo of the non-VR 300mm and 1.7x TC is just too heavy. So I put the 300mm f/4 PF back on my camera with the 1.7x TC.

OMGosh. I was literally 15 feet to 25 feet away from ducks today - and that means a very shallow depth of field even at f/8 or f/9. Almost everything focused without any issues (except a damselfly which was very tiny and close). But even a black duck which can cause AF issues due to lack of contrast wasn't any problem. I used both Normal VR as well as Sport VR and could tell immediately the VR locked on with both settings. In the past, there were times that the Sport VR wasn't working making the image move inside the viewfinder from my not being able to hold the combo still.

So now I will search for info on how to clean the contacts inside the front of the TC. Those contacts are recessed and are difficult to access. At least it's worth a try to get in there and clean them. I just don't know how to do that safely and carefully at this time.

 

[hark]

Here is one from yesterday's outing with the 300mm f/4 PF coupled with the Nikon 1.7x TC. No cropping was applied. I was less than 15 feet away so my depth of field is less than 1" - which is why the feathers on the far side are blurred. Was aiming to keep the feathers in the foreground in focus. Since my ISO is capped at 4000 and this was shot in complete shade from trees, it was a juggling act to keep a high enough shutter speed without underexposing the image too much. The exposure was raised a little during post. The only sharpening applied was in Camera RAW at 40.

I am happy with this because I can always apply additional post processing if desired. But this is SO much sharper than what I got the last time I was out with this combo. Obviously something with the lens works intermittently.

 

[Andy W]

Looks good!

 

[hark]

*sigh* I'm beginning to think @BackdoorArts was right. This combo of the 300mm f/4 PF and the 1.7x TC just doesn't quite cut it.

Almost everything I shot yesterday was terrific. However, today I used the combo for an eagle on a utility pole that was in the distance, and absolutely everything is very soft with front focusing. The other day I coupled the TC with my 300mm f/4 non-VR lens for an eagle on the same pole. The results were a tad better but nothing impressive.

It seems the pairing works better when the subject is closer. But when the subject is further away, somehow it adversely affects the AF system - at least for f/4 lenses.

I need to go back to pairing my Nikon 1.4x TC with this 300mm f/4 PF to identify if any AF issues are present. When I used that combo in the past, the results were stellar. It's possible the lens might not be the issue after all. Putting a 1.7x TC on an f/4 lens means it becomes f/6.7. And that might be the problem. I can't believe after all this time of not seeing any eagles then suddenly seeing one twice within a couple days left me with nothing to show for it. :beguiled:

 

[Roscoe Primrose]

I've read on other sites that the TC-17 and 300pf are not a match made in heaven....

Roscoe

 

[hark]

I've read on other sites that the TC-17 and 300pf are not a match made in heaven....

Roscoe

And unfortunately that seems to be true. While it works well in some situations, it is unreliable especially for subjects further away. What I hadn't realized is my first photos with this combo offered me subjects that were somewhat close. But when I went back through images taken after getting this TC, ones of birds flying or further away tended to suffer. At the time I must have thought it was my technique. But now it's much more difficult to find raptors that are close like they used to be. And subsequently now I'm finding most to all of the images taken from further away aren't usable.

Here are two photos - both are jpegs sooc only resized for the forum. No additional post processing was done. The first was taken with the 300mm f/4 non-VR lens. The second with the 300m PF. While I was shooting the second batch of pics (different day), the sky changed from being overcast to having a little bit of brightness. But the ones that were taken with overcast skies suffered even more with softer focus. For some reason, when the distance to the subject is further away, the lens front focuses. But that isn't the case with most photos taken at a closer distance.

In this first image, the eagle let out a pitiful screech. The crow appeared from out of nowhere and initially sat on the beam several feet away from the eagle. Eventually the crow antagonized the eagle, but the eagle didn't do anything. After a while, the crow left.

In this second photo shot with the PF a couple days later (which has VR that seemed to engage properly), the focus is much softer on all the images. Yet if you scroll up and look at the duck photo from the other day, the focus was accurate.