Telephoto adapters

[fionndruinne]

I'm wondering as to telephoto adapters. Would one of these prove useful on the end of my 18-55mm lens, or might it prove more troublesome/costly than its worth? I'm wondering as to how it might affect focus and metering, and just how much would it affect quality.

Any advice would be appreciated.

[Rooz]

i think from memory the 2x adaptor loses you 2 f-stops and the 1.4x loses you 1 f-stop. thats pretty significant for your lens. these things are geenrally desgined for lens which have a constant 2.8 stop for effective shooting. like the 80-200 nikkor for example. imo, for that kind of money, (they aren;t cheap), you should put it toward a better lens.

[TNB]

I own the TC-17E (1.7x), but that alone was not cheap. I did see a couple of used 2.0s that were selling for $59.00--which is probably because the TC-17E was released.

http://www.nikonusa.com/template.php?cat=1&grp=5&productNr=2151

[rawpaw18]

I do not believe you can use the Nikon's or Sigma's teleconverters on the
18-55. Might want to take the money and put it towards a longer lens
like Sigma 70-300 apo or Nikons new 70-300vr.

[fionndruinne]

Alright... I had my doubts, and wouldn't of course spend much on an adapter when a 55-200 (non VR) lens is only $180. This (http://cgi.ebay.com/2X-Telephoto-Lens-for-Nikon-D40-or-D50-NEW-for-45_W0QQitemZ300090541526QQcategoryZ106862QQrdZ1QQc mdZViewItem) is where I came across a teleconverter which I wondered about. Also, does anyone have experience with Merkury optics in general? Any good?

[mikeC]

funily enough, I took a coupld of photos for somebody the other day, to show the loss of quality and light when using a TC

Both pictures were taken from around 7ft away, with the lens (a sigma 70-300 D ) at 300mm

first with just the lens
http://i50.photobucket.com/albums/f311/bolerus/DSC_0097.jpg

and then with the x2 Tc added

http://i50.photobucket.com/albums/f311/bolerus/2xtc.jpg

[TNB]

and then with the x2 Tc added
7 Feet? That second photo doesn't even appear to be in focus. Today, at the race I encountered numerous people with teleconverters; however, each Nikon person I saw was using a Nikon brand teleconverter. Although I didn't ask which specific teleconverter they were using, it seemed by the length that it was the 1.7. From what I have read, I also would not recommend trying out a 2.0 (of any brand) unless it was cheap and/or one planned on using a tripod (which to me defeats the purpose of sticking one on something like the 70-200mm VR), especially since some "normal" functions may be lost.

[fionndruinne]

Good illustration, but how different would it be in a well-lit outdoor situation?

I see that my lens would probably not function too well with a teledapter, though, so I'll just save for a zoom.

I seem to recall an adapter which allows one to reverse their lens for ultra macro pictures. That seemed very odd to me. Anyone used that?

[TNB]

Here's a recent photo I took using my Nikon D200, Nikon 70-200mm, and Nikon 1.7x teleconverter from up above several stories high. Myself, I haven't checked into a "reverse" converter though I do own two Sigma lenses each with a macro switch.

http://image.rcuniverse.com/forum/upfiles/70716/Ge96279.jpg

[jcon]

Nice pic TNB! Not a big fan of Paul Tracy myself but dam, nice pic, especially from that far away!

[TNB]

Thanks. I have photos of other driver's as well though I just haven't gone through them yet. ;) By the way, Tracy took third in the race.

[coldrain]

7 Feet? That second photo doesn't even appear to be in focus. Today, at the race I encountered numerous people with teleconverters; however, each Nikon person I saw was using a Nikon brand teleconverter. Although I didn't ask which specific teleconverter they were using, it seemed by the length that it was the 1.7. From what I have read, I also would not recommend trying out a 2.0 (of any brand) unless it was cheap and/or one planned on using a tripod (which to me defeats the purpose of sticking one on something like the 70-200mm VR), especially since some "normal" functions may be lost.
The 70-300 D is a very soft lens at 300mm, all on its own (with low contrast as well). What you do with a 2x TC is actually just cropping the center of the lens you are using, and spreading that image out over the entire sensor.
This is why you have a loss of light, equivalent to 2 fstops, when using a 2x TC. And this is also why this 2x TC crop is so very soft... the lens already can not resolve enough without the TC... and then just cropping the center will just show the lack of resolving power even more.

Moral of the story: regardless of the quality of the TC, the final result is very much dependant of the resolving power of the lens you are using. The 70-200 VR is a good sharp lens, so using a TC on it will give good results.
If the lens is soft to begin with, the softness will increase a lot with any TC.

And an 1.4 TC will of course "maginify" the softness of a lens less than an 1.7x TC, and an 1.7x TC will magnify the softness less than a 2x TC. And again a 3x TC will magnify softness (lack of resolving power) of the lens even more.

[fionndruinne]

Just a thought: if I were using say a 50mm f/1.8 prime, would a tele adapter be useful (say a 2x, bringing the lens to 100mm) and good in terms of image quality at, say, f/2?

[Honest Gaza]

Alright... I had my doubts, and wouldn't of course spend much on an adapter when a 55-200 (non VR) lens is only $180. This (http://cgi.ebay.com/2X-Telephoto-Lens-for-Nikon-D40-or-D50-NEW-for-45_W0QQitemZ300090541526QQcategoryZ106862QQrdZ1QQc mdZViewItem) is where I came across a teleconverter which I wondered about. Also, does anyone have experience with Merkury optics in general? Any good?

I couldn't see this mentioned in any of the other posts.....so, sorry if I'm stating the obvious.

Most of us are using TC's that go between the camera body and the original lens. The one you have "linked" to, is a lens that is screwed onto the filter thread of your existing lens (something you referred to in your original post "useful on the end of my 18-55mm lens"....but I'm not sure others picked up on that).

[fionndruinne]

Huh... I haven't even heard of one that goes between the body and lens. Shows you how much I ken about these things.

[Honest Gaza]

Huh... I haven't even heard of one that goes between the body and lens. Shows you how much I ken about these things.

For example :

http://www.nikonusa.com/template.php?cat=1&grp=5&productNr=2151

The one that TNB referred to earlier :)