nerwin
Been spending a lot of time on here!
- Joined
- Jan 31, 2015
- Messages
- 3,990
- Reaction score
- 2,415
- Location
- Vermont
- Can others edit my Photos
- Photos OK to edit
Now that I finally own the 70-200 f/4 VR, its time to decide on which teleconverter to buy.
Just a little disclaimer, I understand that teleconverters won't give me the same image quality like the 200-500 5.6 or the Sigma 150-600 lenses would. I don't shoot that range all that often, so I don't see the reason to spend that kind of money right now. A teleconverter is small enough to fit in my bag easily and it's there when I need it.
Okay now that we got that out of the way, here is my dilemma.
I have no interest in the 2x TC.
So I have narrowed it down between the 1.4 & 1.7 TCs and from my research, the 1.4x will have little to no effect on the awesome performance that the 70-200 f/4 has, besides losing the 1 stop of light. It will give me 280mm at the long end and since the lens has very high image quality and that my D610 is 24mp, I could easily crop to 300mm and still have very high IQ than my 70-300 VR could ever manage to produce. I also could easily crop to 340mm that the 1.7 TC would give me and probably get away with it, I could even crop to 1.5x (I don't try to crop beyond 1.5x) and that would give me 420mm equivalent and the image quality would probably still be pretty decent.
Now with the 1.7x TC, I'll get to 340mm with a lost of 1.3 stops of light (I think) and a slight dip in the image quality, I think someone said it was like 17% lost of sharpness but it will still produce better quality images at 300mm than the 70-300 VR can do. Now what I find a little intriguing is that if the full resolution image quality is very good at 340mm, I could could crop to 1.5x and get an equivalent of 510mm! That's a HUGE number, but the question is, could I get away with it in a pinch?
So the question remains, is it worth to get the 1.7x TC and sacrifice the image quality to have the flexibility to crop to 510mm when needed to? Or am I just better off to go with the 1.4x TC and still retain the high quality from the 70-200 f/4 and miss out on the ability to crop down that far?
I really cannot decide which one would be better for me. It's tough.
Just a little disclaimer, I understand that teleconverters won't give me the same image quality like the 200-500 5.6 or the Sigma 150-600 lenses would. I don't shoot that range all that often, so I don't see the reason to spend that kind of money right now. A teleconverter is small enough to fit in my bag easily and it's there when I need it.
Okay now that we got that out of the way, here is my dilemma.
I have no interest in the 2x TC.
So I have narrowed it down between the 1.4 & 1.7 TCs and from my research, the 1.4x will have little to no effect on the awesome performance that the 70-200 f/4 has, besides losing the 1 stop of light. It will give me 280mm at the long end and since the lens has very high image quality and that my D610 is 24mp, I could easily crop to 300mm and still have very high IQ than my 70-300 VR could ever manage to produce. I also could easily crop to 340mm that the 1.7 TC would give me and probably get away with it, I could even crop to 1.5x (I don't try to crop beyond 1.5x) and that would give me 420mm equivalent and the image quality would probably still be pretty decent.
Now with the 1.7x TC, I'll get to 340mm with a lost of 1.3 stops of light (I think) and a slight dip in the image quality, I think someone said it was like 17% lost of sharpness but it will still produce better quality images at 300mm than the 70-300 VR can do. Now what I find a little intriguing is that if the full resolution image quality is very good at 340mm, I could could crop to 1.5x and get an equivalent of 510mm! That's a HUGE number, but the question is, could I get away with it in a pinch?
So the question remains, is it worth to get the 1.7x TC and sacrifice the image quality to have the flexibility to crop to 510mm when needed to? Or am I just better off to go with the 1.4x TC and still retain the high quality from the 70-200 f/4 and miss out on the ability to crop down that far?
I really cannot decide which one would be better for me. It's tough.