Does not make sense for a 36.3 sensor

This teleconverter might be great for sensors with less resolution than 36.3 MP. I tested it with a Nikon D800 and a Nikkor 300mm 2.8 VR II. It seems you don't get any additional details compared to the DX crop mode of the camera. Check out my video for details: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SCt0FogCkOQ

The more MP you have the bigger the print you can make before image degradation begins to show viewing the print close - with any lens combination, aperture and focus distance.

The DX image is smaller and needs to be magnified more for a specific size print, and a converter reduced the MP used to make the image. As a rule of thumb I find slightly better quality is available D7100 without converter with the 300 f2.8 with the D800 and Mk 1 converter when making very large prints.

For 20 inch wide prints or typical web file sizes either option produces more resolution than the human eye can resolve; so no apparent difference.

.

How about video?   Do you crop video?

I haven't yet found the limit of what you can squeeze out of the 300 f/2.8 VR-II. Every additional stage of TC magnification including stacking them reveals additional detail. Not only that, the stacked combination shows even more detail when the body is the D810 vs. the D800.

Click on the "Gallery page" link and then select "Original" scale to see what you can get on the D800. The 840mm equivalent version is direct 100% scale. The others are upsampled as appropriate to have them all match the size of the moon image.

I don't like the results on a 24MP DX sensor either with the 300mm f4E PF for example. It literally magnifies flaws that would have otherwise not been resolved.

I don't understand why you would expect any greater detail through a teleconverter. TCs often degrade the image to one extent or another. I ran autofocus fine-tuning on my TC14E III and 200-500 f5.6 and it made a world of difference. This picture was taken from about 15 feet away with that lens combination at an effective focal length of 1050mm (DX camera).

Jane79 wrote:

The very first post and already an - albeit short - review and Youtube channel promo. Welcome to the forum!

The TC-14E III is clearly better than the TC-14E II

Not what I found in side by side testing. I also don't think you'll find many reviews that say this. The II was at least as good as the III in my testing, if not slightly better. I sent back the III; not only because it wasn't any better, but also because the II was compatible with my older 300mm f/4 where the III isn't.

, and both produce significantly better results on the Nikon AF-S Nikkor 300mm f/2.8G ED VR II shooting the D800 compared to cropping.

kshiroma wrote:

I don't like the results on a 24MP DX sensor either with the 300mm f4E PF for example. It literally magnifies flaws that would have otherwise not been resolved.

What does this last sentence mean? What flaws do you think are present but not visible without the TC, but show up with the TC? My TCII is so good on my D500, I almost never take it off of the 300mm PF.

I don't understand your statement. The only reason to use a TC is to get more detail than you would get by enlarging the image without the TC.

PatMann wrote:

The only reason to use a TC is to get more detail than you would get by enlarging the image without the TC.

+1.

I know this is a dated post but a lot of people wonder what certain combos of tools will do. FWIW, here's an image taken with a D800E, a 600mm F/4E + TC-14E III. Viewing the full resolution and quality version on my computer, I'm impressed with how much detail comes through.

D800E | f/5.6 | ISO 500 | 1/400th | 850mm

just Tony wrote:

I haven't yet found the limit of what you can squeeze out of the 300 f/2.8 VR-II. Every additional stage of TC magnification including stacking them reveals additional detail. Not only that, the stacked combination shows even more detail when the body is the D810 vs. the D800.

Click on the "Gallery page" link and then select "Original" scale to see what you can get on the D800. The 840mm equivalent version is direct 100% scale. The others are upsampled as appropriate to have them all match the size of the moon image.

Thank you for this and doing the testing Tony.  What was your focusing technique like and how difficult was it with the stacked 2x?

just Tony wrote:

The 840mm equivalent version is direct 100% scale. The others are upsampled as appropriate to have them all match the size of the moon image.

You have not completed a gear list.

The 840mm is with a 2x plus 1.4 x.

To the best of my knowledge there is no way of attaching two Nikon TC-E converters directly to each other because both have a protruding front element and do not have a suitably recessed rear element to take another TC-E.

Please either clarify at least one of the converters was not a Nikon TC-E or alternatively "spill the beans" please as to how you attached 2 Nikon TC-E to each other.