300 f/4 + 1.7 TC - thoughts?

Considering the 300 f4 plus a TC as a budget birding/wildlife rig.

Anyone have thoughts on this combo? The comments I've seen seem to be positive re pairing the 300 with the 1.4 TC but I've not seen anyone who's using it with the 1.7 (or 2.0 for that matter). I'm brand new to TCs - other than the loss in max aperture, what other effects would I expect?

Thanks for any advice,
Klaus

p.s. I'm using a D300 and I already have a 70-300VR, so it doesn't make a lot of sense for me unless I can add a TC. I'm a relatively casual shooter and unlikely to move into the high-end long teles.

From everything I've read there's no problem with the 1.4 TC (AF is fine and barely noticeable IQ loss.) There are plenty of threads around about this and 1.7 TC too. The bag is slightly more mixed here, but most still call it acceptable. Search will be your friend, but to summarize, Nikon only "guarantees" AF on lenses with a maximum aperture of 5.6 or larger, with the 1.7 TC, your max is going to be 6.3. From what I understand AF does still work, but only in "good" light (the definition of that is subjective, I've seen some shots where the photographer claimed AF where I would not have called the light "good".) I've also read that there is some more noticeable loss of IQ, but again I can only go with what I've seen posted and it looks pretty good.

I'm still saving my pennies for this combo (300 f/4, 1.4 TC, and 1.7 TC, but not all at once.) It is often called the best entry into budget birding. Having said that, I've still not completely silenced the siren call of the Bigma OS and am looking forward to the "professional" reviews this fall. Of course that lens does not take TCs, and is still f/6.3 at the 500mm end, so there's nothing to be gained there, but it does have OS and it is a zoom. (Yes, I know primes are better, but I've never quite silenced that demon either.)

Klaus, the TC1.7 works well. As already pointed out the TC1.4 is better.

I shoot the 300 f4 afs handheld and for that I need good light. The IQ is much better than the 70-300vr(in my opinion) and it takes the TCs.

To get the very best out of the lens you need very good LLT(Long Lens Technique) and/or a good support system.

I have shot the 300 f4 and 300 2.8vr head to head as has Ray(Humanoid)...$1000 vs $5000....pretty darn close in IQ given good light.

As a casual shooter I would suggest you try and use one if possible. Not a zoom so not as easy to use as a walkabout. You can't go too far wrong buying one since they hold their value very well.
Lots of samples here if you search.
Cheers,
--
Anticipate the Light and wing it when you get it wrong
Tom
http://taja.smugmug.com/

Since April i use this lens too together with the 1.4 & 1.7 TC. For some years i used a big 500/4 lens but have changed to the 300mm. It's great for walking in the fields and shoot butterflies, dragonflies and birds too. For birds i use the 1.7 TC a lot and also with open aperture (6.7) and the results surprises me everytime. AF works great till now (it was summer) but i can imagine that it it will hunt more with less light.

Sharpness and contrast is OK with a TC on the lens, only your out of focus background will look less soft. Mostly use it on a monopod...
Here are some photos of the 300mm + TC on a D300s:

1. + 1.7 at F6.7

2. + 1.7 at F6.7

3. + 1.7 at F8

4. + 1.7 at F7.1

5. + 1.7 at F10

6. + 1.7 at F8

You will love this lens....
Regards Edwin

...for your generous advice. Glad to see the 1.7x TC idea isn't totally out in left field - you can clearly get some very nice results (special thanks to those who posted samples!).

I'll likely see if I can try out both combos - as someone pointed out, the FOV difference between 420 and 510 is not all that huge, but then a lot of the advice I've seen on wildlife/birding amounts to "go as long your wallet allows"...

Thanks again everyone,
Klaus

Laagwater wrote:

For birds i use the 1.7 TC a lot and also with open aperture (6.7) and the results surprises me everytime. AF works great till now (it was summer) but i can imagine that it it will hunt more with less light.

Could you tell us the shutter speeds for these shots (esp the first few) and whether they were taken with a monopod or tripod?

I have had mixed results with 300mm F4 and TC17. For close distances, it has been good:

However for distance stuff, I have struggled to get a level of sharpness I was happy (mainly sports, but generally hand-held in Summer light). I am still trying to pin down the reason for this, esp when I see your range of shots. This one (cropped) is about as sharp as I've managed:

CMalsingh wrote:

Laagwater wrote:

For birds i use the 1.7 TC a lot and also with open aperture (6.7) and the results surprises me everytime. AF works great till now (it was summer) but i can imagine that it it will hunt more with less light.

Could you tell us the shutter speeds for these shots (esp the first few) and whether they were taken with a monopod or tripod?

I have had mixed results with 300mm F4 and TC17. For close distances, it has been good:

However for distance stuff, I have struggled to get a level of sharpness I was happy (mainly sports, but generally hand-held in Summer light). I am still trying to pin down the reason for this, esp when I see your range of shots. This one (cropped) is about as sharp as I've managed:

Hi Colin, your photos looks fine to my eyes.

For the first 3 photos i had a shutterspeed between 1/160 and 1/320s and iso between 250 and 300. With all, 3 i used a monopod to carry my lens. I use the Kirk-collar and maybe that's what you're missing. The nikon-collar is the worst part of the 300mm lens.
Regards Edwin

CMalsingh wrote:

However for distance stuff, I have struggled to get a level of sharpness I was happy (mainly sports, but generally hand-held in Summer light). I am still trying to pin down the reason for this, esp when I see your range of shots.

I second that! TC-17 (and 300 f4) works much better for closer objects, the quality you might get when you shooting not too distant subject is often very, very good.

For distant subjects though, I can see quite obvious quality drop. Cropping is almost out of the question in those situations...

Veenee wrote:

I second that! TC-17 (and 300 f4) works much better for closer objects, the quality you might get when you shooting not too distant subject is often very, very good.

For distant subjects though, I can see quite obvious quality drop. Cropping is almost out of the question in those situations...

Hi Veenee, at last!

You are the first person I've come across that has echoed this opinion. I have seen so many comments from people praising the TC-17, plus lots of shots from people like Ronnie Gaubert who can obviously do magic with it.

I'd be interested to know anyone else who's had a similar experience?

If not, it's my technique or some element of AF tuning I haven't yet mastered.

I find the AF-S 300f4 + 1.7TCEII is hit, or miss... Primarily because of the much slower focusing, and light requirements (f/6.7 wide open). I haven't used it for very long distances, but have no problem taking people from about 125-150ft, without the issues mentioned above...

Compared to the 70-300VR, the 300f4 bare is noticably faster to AF, and an amount slower than the 70-300VR, with the 1.7TC. This is okay for static subjects, but because of the amount of time to AF, birds in flight are a no-go... Unless you've pre-focused, tracking a moving target is very hard to do with 500mm and nothing but a blurred view in the viewfinder. It's a little easier with more predictable sujects (e.g. moving cars).

The above notwithstanding, it's the best budget option to get to 500mm, IMO. In good light, the combo can produce very good results. Some form of stabilization is almost a must - I find that handholding 500mm is quite a bit more difficult than 300mm.

This was taken a couple of days ago, 500mm @ f/6.7 - 1/80" - ISO 640. Monopod was used (I do not have a replacement collar, as I find the stock one fine for me).

QWK SVT wrote:

I find the AF-S 300f4 + 1.7TCEII is hit, or miss... Primarily because of the much slower focusing, and light requirements (f/6.7 wide open).

At the moment, I admit my 300mm + TC17 of birds are mainly handheld and can usually only get near 1/1000th when it's really sunny, so agree with your diagnosis. I have had better results when on a monopod.

This was taken a couple of days ago, 500mm @ f/6.7 - 1/80" - ISO 640. Monopod was used (I do not have a replacement collar, as I find the stock one fine for me).

Thanks. I'd be happy with your heron.