Which is Sharper - 80-200 + TC 2x or 400mm prime

[astroNikon]

So I'm looking to extend the range of my lens just for general shooting (Sun shots, planetary piggybacking on my scope and misc stuff).

I have my trusty 80-200/2.8
Would the 80-200/2.8 plus a manual TC 2x converter
be sharper than an AI/AI-S 400mm/5.6 prime ?

Or even a 150-500 Tokina manual focus lens.like this ==> Tokina at x SD 150 500mm F 5 6 for Nikon F Mount Worldwide Shipping | eBay

Sigma and Tokina also have 400mm 5.6 lenses.

AF is not needed as they will be mostly at Infinity anyways.
I'm just looking for sharpness & detail at 400mm

 

[tirediron]

A prime lens will almost always be sharper than anything with a TC, especially a 2x TC.

 

[Gary A.]

A prime lens will almost always be sharper than anything with a TC, especially a 2x TC.

Very true ... but, (the big but), is the difference in sharpness significant? If you can only see the difference between a prime and a zoom with a 2x if it is blown up to ... say 100%, then the difference in sharpness isn't significant.

Dollars to doughnuts, the prime will kill a zoom with a 2x.

Gary

 

[astroNikon]

okay

What about MF Tokina vs Sigma vs Nikon 400 primes?
excluding the more expensive f/3.5s .. only the f/5.6s

The Nikons seem to be a tad bit expensive ... so I might opt for a Sigma / Tokina / other ??

 

[Gary A.]

Nikons are more expensive for a reason, they are built well, especially the older ones and typically, they are always sharp, especially the older one.

 

[Gary A.]

Go to All Tests / Reviews and see if the lenses you seek have been tested by Hans. These are lab tests so they are very objective.

 

[Derrel]

Last test I did was the 200mm f/4 Ai AND Ai-S Nikkors (I have both, don't ask) with the Nikon TC-201 2x converter, tripod, and the 80-400mm VR Nikkor (the original model). At the same f/stop of f/8, the prime 200mm Nikon lenses with the 2x TC were sharper than the zoom was at 400mm at f/8. Test platform, Nikon D2x body. Keep in mind, the 80-400 VR is NOT a particularly great zoom, and that a $75 200/Ai and a $75 TC-201 made a usable combo with 400mm of reach, at f/8. Not "excellent"; not "very good"; not "good"--I said "usable".

Nikon's 2x manual focusing converters were really designed for use with prime lenses. The TC-200 and TC-201 are the two manual focus 2x Nikon converters that Nikon specifies as being compatible for use with non-AF-S lenses of 200mm and under. The TC-301 is for lenses of 300mm and longer.

I really think the best option is a GOOD 300mm lens, like the 300/4 AF-S and the TC14e or TC14e-II, for a 420mm f/5,6 combo. I realllllllly think the older 80-200mm lenses will suffer with 2x converters.

One of the bigger issues with old, long glass in the 400mm range is severe color fringing on new, high-MP digital SLR cameras. I have an old 400mm f/3.5 ED~IF from 1982...it's not really well-corrected enough for use on a 24 MP camera, but it was good on the D1h, and "okay" on the D2x. I think a 35+ year-old 400/5.6 design is gonna be less than stellar on 24MP APS-C for some types of subjects. Sigma's 500mm f/7.7 might be the best option, might not be. I dunno...some of the lenses we used to shoot were "fine" on 35mm film when an 8x10 print was as large as an image might ever be seen. And it kind of depends on the subject matter: good center sharpness and much poorer edges/corners is the typical full-frame TC + lens performance issue, which might be eliminated mostly on a 1.5x camera body. Birds, often shot in the center of a fairly nondescript field are one thing: stars stretching across the entire frame, rendered as point light sources? wow...a chromatic aberration and resolution nightmare for anything less than a top-grade lens.

 

[shadowlands]

I see some super super super sharp images coming out of my 80-200 2.8 with TC-201. I'm amazed. It's nice to have 400mm when needed.
And of course... 600mm in DX mode, ha!

 

[astroNikon]

Ironically, I bought a TC-201 to test. As this is going to be used first to take photos of a big gas ball in the sky, which with all the stacked NDs I still have to take at f/8 or higher I figured, why not ??

I'll get a Nikon 300 f/4 later and then test it with that too.
But considering I was able to capture Uranus/Neptune with a 70-300 - though had to ridiculously crop - I figured it could only get better. Of course, my scope should be significantly better anyways for planets.

 

[Derrel]

If you are buying a lens to use with the TC-201, then make sure the lens you plan to use will actually FIT ON the TC-201...the TC 201 will NOT mount to a good number of lenses because the front element of the converter is pretty far forward in the barrel of the converter. If a lens has a rear element that is fairly close to the back of the lens barrel, there's chance that "crash and bash" might happen on a zoom when it is zoomed, and on prime lenses, well, the lens and the TC-201 would just simply not connect. Nikon has some specification charts that detail what TC unit each lens can use. Oddly, the OLD and out of production TC-201 is still listed as being "the converter for a number of modern-era AF lenses!

 

[astroNikon]

on the bottom of Nikons TV webpage

1. The 80-200mm f/2.8D ED AF supports the TC-201 and the TC-14A (occasional vignetting) & TC-14B (AF not possible).

 

[Derrel]

Exactly...the older manual focus converters are still listed for quite a number of lenses. Some of the newer AF-S lenses MUST have a newer AF-S style converter from Nikon OR something like the kenko Pro converters, where the converter's front element is wayyyyyy back inside the converter's barrel. On the 300mm f/4 ED-AF autofocus Nikkor, I am not sure where the rear element is on that; on the earlier 300mm f/4.5 ED~IF manual focus, the rear element is wayyyyyyyyyyyyy, wayyyy up inside the body of the lens, so far in you need a tool to clean the rear element. Same with the 180 AF and AF-D models--the rear element is wayyyyyyyy up inside the barrel.

 

[astroNikon]

Hey I accidentally bought a 300/4 AF lens too. Nice condition with the 37mm filter and the front filter that comes with it. Can't wait to get that too. Though the front thread is 82mm. And all my ND filters are 77. I might just try to find an 82 step down to 77 just so I can take photos of the Sun from time to time.

 

[astroNikon]

Exactly...the older manual focus converters are still listed for quite a number of lenses. Some of the newer AF-S lenses MUST have a newer AF-S style converter from Nikon OR something like the kenko Pro converters, where the converter's front element is wayyyyyy back inside the converter's barrel. On the 300mm f/4 ED-AF autofocus Nikkor, I am not sure where the rear element is on that; on the earlier 300mm f/4.5 ED~IF manual focus, the rear element is wayyyyyyyyyyyyy, wayyyy up inside the body of the lens, so far in you need a tool to clean the rear element. Same with the 180 AF and AF-D models--the rear element is wayyyyyyyy up inside the barrel.

Is that why the TC-301s have a long "extension" that goes into the lens itself. Those TCs look weird.