Thinking about selling.
- Thread starter Blacktop
- Start date
Don Kuykendall_RIP
RIP :(
I still like my 70-300 with my D750. I use it still on occasions when my wife is using my 150-600 especially
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I would sell my 70-300mm too but it is now my wife's go to lens for wildlife and I like having her company more than the money I'd get for it. Otherwise I would sell it and probably put the money towards a 1.4x TC too. The extra reach would be great for some kingfishers I can see from a hide but they are usually a bit too far off.
I'd also like to try an extension tube on the 200-500mm to see how it would do as a macro alternative. As you've found it is already a pretty good flower lens without one.
Danno
Senior Member
I have been thinking about a macro lens for a while as well. It is one of the lenses missing from my bag. With the D7200 I have been going back and forth on the 85 2.8 and the 105 2.8 lenses. I borrowed a 105 from a friend and used it on my D3200 and it worked pretty well. Just takes me a long time to decide. Fortunately for me it takes a while to save as well
The 200-500. I've been e-mailing back and forth with a Flicker user who has the same setup (D750+200-500) and is getting good results with the TC14-EII attached. He says the focus slows down a bit(naturally) but the IQ doesn't seem to suffer. Judging by his shots, I would agree.
https://www.flickr.com/photos/134125121@N08/27037044000/in/photostream/
I have been thinking about a macro lens for a while as well. It is one of the lenses missing from my bag. With the D7200 I have been going back and forth on the 85 2.8 and the 105 2.8 lenses. I borrowed a 105 from a friend and used it on my D3200 and it worked pretty well. Just takes me a long time to decide. Fortunately for me it takes a while to save as well
I have it narrowed down to a Tamron 90mm (non VR) or the Tokina 100mm. I'm still deciding which one has a nicer bokeh. I'm leaning towards the Tokina at the moment
The ATX m100 tokina?
What made you rule out the Sigma 105mm? Assuming it was ever in the running. When I do buy a new macro I really want it to have VR so I'm unlikely to go with either of those but price and any discernable difference in IQ could make me have a rethink.
I've just realised that I'm being stupid, forgetting that a teleconverter won't change the minimum focusing distance, so will effectively get me the results I thought I might need extension tubes for, whilst being a whole lot more useful in general.
Very nice photos from that Flickr user.
Just be aware the 1.4ii isn't weather sealed although the 1.4iii is weather sealed. For me, the lack of weather sealing wasn't a deal breaker. If you are really close to your subject while shooting macro, the photos will be sharper if you use a tripod and manually focus in Live View. VR may not be necessary in all situations, but it is definitely nice to have.
If you are looking for a macro to couple with a teleconverter, just be sure they are compatible. I have the Nikon 105mm f/2.8 macro, but if you look at this chart (first one on the list), it says the AF won't work. You will be better off finding a teleconverter made by the same company that makes the lens...and even then, you want to be sure the converter will work with a particular lens.
http://www.nikonusa.com/en_INC/IMG/...eleconverter-Compatibility/EN_Comp_chart.html
If you are really close to your subject while shooting macro, the photos will be sharper if you use a tripod and manually focus in Live View. VR may not be necessary in all situations, but it is definitely nice to have.
If you are looking for a macro to couple with a teleconverter, just be sure they are compatible. I have the Nikon 105mm f/2.8 macro, but if you look at this chart (first one on the list), it says the AF won't work. You will be better off finding a teleconverter made by the same company that makes the lens...and even then, you want to be sure the converter will work with a particular lens.
I agree that using a tripod and manual focus will give best results but for the type of macro I like doing, butterflies and other skittish creatures, most times a tripod isn't all that practical to carry or shoot with.
Like Blacktop the TC would be for my 200-500mm. It is already pretty decent for close ups on butterflies but a teleconverter and my D7100 should make it even better, providing IQ isn't degraded much.
I'll have a look at that chart though, I'd quite like to try a 2X TC on my 55mm f/2.8.
Danno
Senior Member
Wow, those are pretty inspiring shots. I can see where you would be looking at the TC14-EII. I like it. Causes me to pause and think a bit as well. Thanks for sharing the added details. Also, thanks for the other lens to add to my list to consider... I was not in a rush anyway. Might as well add a couple more to consider...
Teleconverters tend to be made for telephoto lenses far more than normal, macro, or wide angle lenses. You might want to check out a set of extension tubes instead. Kenko and Vello make them, but you should check to be sure there won't be any compatibility issues.
I want to try it more to increase my working distance from the subject really. It is often too difficult to get close enough to a butterfly with 55mm. It is a super sharp lens so shouldn't be hurt too much by the TC and will effectively become 110mm f5.6.
I have basic cheap extension tubes, everything is manual but they still work well enough for the few £ they cost.
You will need to be careful when trying to use a teleconverter on a lens that isn't listed. Some lenses have bulbous rear elements that can get damaged if the rear element hits the glass on the teleconverter. And even if it fits, it doesn't mean it would work. You could always call Nikon and ask to be sure.
Yes.