200-500 with TC1.4 III

Just got the TC and am still trying it out. So far, it looks pretty good. I think I'm losing just a little sharpness, but overall, it may be worth it to get 700mm on my D750. The other downside is being stuck at f/8, but with the ISO performance on this camera, that isn't too bad either, if the light is halfway decent.

Here's a couple shots (processed to taste LR) of the same squirrel. Unbelievably, he sat there long enough for me to take the shot at 700mm, remove the TC and take another at 500.




200-500 + 1.4TC





[ATTACH alt="200-500 "naked" "]1618815[/ATTACH]
200-500 "naked"

I've started using a teleconverter on mine too but been only shooting sunsets so far, I must try some animals at a safari park were visiting soon.

Would like to see a crop of the second image to compare IQ to the TC shot.

There is no doubt that this is a winning combination optically. The downside is that focusing is more dicey, i.e., there is only the one functioning focus point at f8 and in less-than-good light the AF tends to hunt. But if one is ok with these limitations the combo is terrific.

Doug Greenberg said:

There is no doubt that this is a winning combination optically. The downside is that focusing is more dicey, i.e., there is only the one functioning focus point at f8 and in less-than-good light the AF tends to hunt. But if one is ok with these limitations the combo is terrific.

Click to expand...

It does hunt sometimes and I've had to switch to manual focus.

Well, I actually decided to return the TC. From the few shots that I took yesterday, it seemed like the sharpness was taking too big a hit. I attached some 100% crops from both squirrel shots. I actually shot the bare one at f/5.6, so the comparison isn't completely fair. Focus point seems a little off on the TC shot, too. I'd say these shots are fairly close, with maybe a little edge going to the bare shot.

Also, I wanted to use the TC with my macro lens, and the differences were much more obvious there. Big difference in sharpness. For $500, I don't think the increase in reach is worth is, especially since I lose a full stop of light, and I need all the light I can in the woods.


500+TC 1.4


500mm bare


TC vs bare on 105mm f/2.8 macro


bare vs TC 105mm f/2.8 macro

sh00t3r said:

Well, I actually decided to return the TC. From the few shots that I took yesterday, it seemed like the sharpness was taking too big a hit. I attached some 100% crops from both squirrel shots. I actually shot the bare one at f/5.6, so the comparison isn't completely fair. Focus point seems a little off on the TC shot, too. I'd say these shots are fairly close, with maybe a little edge going to the bare shot.

Also, I wanted to use the TC with my macro lens, and the differences were much more obvious there. Big difference in sharpness. For $500, I don't think the increase in reach is worth is, especially since I lose a full stop of light, and I need all the light I can in the woods.


500+TC 1.4


500mm bare


TC vs bare on 105mm f/2.8 macro


bare vs TC 105mm f/2.8 macro

Click to expand...

Yep, I tried this combination and it offers no benefit in my opinion. I am a firm believer that TC's should only be used for primes.

--
Bill - Beverly Hills, MI
http://billgulkerphotography.com/
https://www.flickr.com/photos/wgulker/albums

The D750 is a 24MP FX camera, right? So adding a teleconverter should be reasonably equivalent to using it on a 24MP DX camera: your 24 million pixels now cover a smaller field of view, but you get more sensor noise (because you have to use a higher ISO on the D750, or because DX has more noise than FX if you're using a DX camera).

Assuming the teleconverter doesn't introduce aberrations of its own, if the 200-500 is good enough to use on 24MP DX, it's not that much of a surprise that it's okay on a 24MP FX with a 1.4x teleconverter.

sh00t3r said:

Just got the TC and am still trying it out. So far, it looks pretty good. I think I'm losing just a little sharpness, but overall, it may be worth it to get 700mm on my D750. The other downside is being stuck at f/8, but with the ISO performance on this camera, that isn't too bad either, if the light is halfway decent.

Here's a couple shots (processed to taste LR) of the same squirrel. Unbelievably, he sat there long enough for me to take the shot at 700mm, remove the TC and take another at 500.


200-500 + 1.4TC


200-500 "naked"

Click to expand...

If you compare detail in the scleral ring around the eye, the naked 500mm shot has just a skosh more detail. if you close down the f-stop to f/9 or thereabouts, you should see a noticeable improvement in detail. I use the 1.4x TC in situations where I can shoot in the f/9 to f/11 range and not jack the ISO too high. Typically, these are situations with perched birds, static or slowly moving animals. Occasionally, birds in flight and gliding (allowing use of a slower shutter speed) are also good targets.

No TC improves resolution. That would defy the laws of optics and physics. In theory, it may be possible to maintain resolution. In practice, there is always some perceived loss of resolution as a result of aberrations and imperfections produced by a lens being at or beyond the threshold of visibiity at its native focal length, but becoming apparent when a TC is used and those flaws are magnified.

With quality optics, these imperfections are not an issue when the image is viewed in full scale. The aberrations and flaws only become apparent when viewed at the pixel level. In my experience, the 200-500 works quite well with a TC in the f/9 to f/11 range when ISO is kept manageable. It's not a broad ranging set of circumstances but there are uses.




A perched bird in good light...the perfect scenario for using a TC with the 200-500



[ATTACH alt="The great blue heron was wading and fishing in a shallow in good light. When the bird took flight, increasing shutter speed to 1/2000 combined with the aperture produced an image that freezes the motion but is "noisy." The noise can be addressed in LR and other image processing apps. The detail lost to the low exposure can not be recovered."]1618838[/ATTACH]
The great blue heron was wading and fishing in a shallow in good light. When the bird took flight, increasing shutter speed to 1/2000 combined with the aperture produced an image that freezes the motion but is "noisy." The noise can be addressed in LR and other image processing apps. The detail lost to the low exposure can not be recovered.




Another perched bird in good light scenario. The subject does not fill as much of the frame as in the first image so, the detail is not quite as good. However, taken as a whole, the image still works.



--
Bill Ferris Photography
Flagstaff, AZ

Agree. I thought the TC performed just OK on the 200-500. Maybe it would've been better stopped down, but f/8 already sucks for lower light situation. I probably could've tried fine tuning, but in reality, the better option seems to be to use DX or crop FX.

The results on my macro lens with TC with pretty poor, IMO.

Hey guys. I know this thread had been around for a while, but I just got back from my first time out with the 200-500\TC14EIII combo using the D750 and the D7200

I must say I'm quite impressed with the IQ. Definitely exceeded my expectations.

The images were processed in my usual way. - (Fairly large crop of dragonfly)


D750 - It appears that uploading here causes some softening of the image. Much sharper on my side.


D7200 - It appears that uploading here causes some softening of the image. Much sharper on my side.

sh00t3r said:

Agree. I thought the TC performed just OK on the 200-500. Maybe it would've been better stopped down, but f/8 already sucks for lower light situation. I probably could've tried fine tuning, but in reality, the better option seems to be to use DX or crop FX.

The results on my macro lens with TC with pretty poor, IMO.

Click to expand...

I've noticed the TC need fine tuning more than lens alone. Anyway I won't expect too much from a zoom and TC.

sh00t3r said:

From the few shots that I took yesterday, it seemed like the sharpness was taking too big a hit. I attached some 100% crops from both squirrel shots.


500+TC 1.4


500mm bare

Click to expand...

I would not automatically expect sharpness, even on a good tripod, at 1/80th shutter speed with a subject like a squirrel which tends not to keep perfectly still.

I would be cautious about where I aimed the AF point as the fine detail in the fur may not result in the most accurate AF.

I think sharper images with and without a TC are possible.

--
Leonard Shepherd
Some say if some of your photos are not good the camera you use is only a recording device.