Home News Buyers Guide About Advertising
 
 
 
   

View Poll Results: Should i fork out for the Nikon TC-E17ED?

Voters
4. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes, it is the best telephoto for the FZ-50.

    2 50.00%
  • No, stay with your Tcon 17.

    1 25.00%
  • I remain neutral.

    1 25.00%
Multiple Choice Poll.
Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 25
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Lincoln.ne.us
    Posts
    91

    should i get the Nikon TC-E17ED?

    your opinions plz.
    Panasonic/Leica/Lumix FZ-50K (28-Sep-2006)
    Panasonic/Leica/Lumix FZ-20K (15-Mar-2005 - 28-Sep-2006)
    Canon AE-1 (05-May-1980 : 1-Feb-05)
    Nikon TC-E17ED, Olympus Tcon 17
    Canon 100mm-300mm

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Los Altos, CA
    Posts
    2,635

    I voted...

    I have both lenses, and prefer the TC-E17ED, because it brings back the sharpness of the original lens, something which I think the TCON-17 struggles with a little more. You can get sharp images with the TCON-17, but your "hit rate" will improve with the Nikon. It (the Nikon) also gives a little more mag., like a true 1.7X vs. the TCON's 1.6X, and I'd venture to say it loses less light than the Oly. It's a brighter lens.
    Let a be your umbrella!

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    65

    How Big of a Fork

    Quote Originally Posted by Riddick51 View Post
    your opinions plz.
    How much is the Nikon? I have a TCON-17 for my FZ3 and pictures come out on the soft side.

    I selected it over the TCON-14b because it was (a) less expensive - I'm in the learning phase; (b) light - wanted to minimize weight on long day hikes; and (c) has a bit more zoom for wildlife.

    Although the TCON-17 has been useful as a learning tool the images are too soft for my taste and I would prefer a crisper lens.

    Here are some examples shots after sharpening with Elements.

    Marmot - hand held shot: f/5.2; 1/80; ISO 200; full zoom
    http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=5036196

    Nuthatch - steadied with a tripod: f/2.8; 1/800; ISO 200; full zoom
    http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?p...117924&size=lg

    Pine Cones - tripod using 10 sec timer: f/3.7; 1/40; ISO 80; full zoom
    http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=4668353

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    65
    Forgot about this shot - nice and crisp. But it was not at full zoom and could have been taken without the TCON.

    Nitro - steadied with a tripod: f/4.6; 1/320; ISO 100; 304 mm equivalent (counting TCON magnification)
    http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?p...634391&size=lg
    Last edited by pappekak; 10-31-2006 at 06:44 PM. Reason: clarification

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    western pa
    Posts
    2,334
    Dang I wish all my shots were soft like those.....
    .






    Gene
    http://grc225.zenfolio.com/
    http://imageevent.com/grc6
    one of these days I'll understand!

    Panasonic FZ20 & FZ30,FZ18
    D50 -- D80

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Yukon, OK
    Posts
    315
    I need one of those!!! Those pics look great to me.
    Minolta X370, 35mm, 50mm; Vivitar 28-80 zoom; Auto Spira-Tel 200mm, 300mm; JC Penney 80-200 zoom;12mm, 20mm, 36mm extension tubes, 2X & 3X teleconverters
    Sony Mavica FD-83
    FZ-20; 62mm Pemaraal Adapter; TCON-17; Hoya SHMC UV; Kenko Circular Polarizar; Tiffen ND 6, Sky 1-A
    Vivitar 2800-D flash; Spiratone Tripod

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    65

    Soft vs Crisp

    Maybe I'm being too critical, but I think the tree bark in the Nuthatch photo
    http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?p...117924&size=lg

    is much softer than this action shot taken with a bare FZ3:

    Flying Dog - hand held: f/2.8; 1/640; ISO 200; 340mm equivalent
    http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?p...668005&size=lg

    I mean look at the detail of the left tennis shoe or the dog's fur vs the bark on that tree.

    And this out of hand held action shot vs something steadied using a tripod. Both were prefocused. Both were shot in burst mode. Both had the stabilization set to 2.

    To me the TCON-17 just leaves something to be desired.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Los Altos, CA
    Posts
    2,635

    Question For your next trick, can you buy a TC-E17ED?

    They are out of print from Nikon, and VERY hard to find, harder every time someone buys one of the scarce ones remaining in stock. Got a source?
    Let a be your umbrella!

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    65
    Quote Originally Posted by John_Reed View Post
    They are out of print from Nikon, and VERY hard to find, harder every time someone buys one of the scarce ones remaining in stock. Got a source?
    From Shene's site the lack of chromatic aberration looks great.
    http://www.cs.mtu.edu/~shene/DigiCam...Test-Long.html

    If anyone is interested in trading a new TC-E17ED for my used TCON-17 let me know ;-)

    Also, the B&H photo site indicates that the Nikon has a proprietary rear mount. Not sure what you use between it and an FZ.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    461
    Quote Originally Posted by pappekak View Post
    Forgot about this shot - nice and crisp. But it was not at full zoom and could have been taken without the TCON.

    Nitro - steadied with a tripod: f/4.6; 1/320; ISO 100; 304 mm equivalent (counting TCON magnification)
    Interesting. "Pro" forum writers usually advise against the use of tele lenses when the on-board lens would make the trip, as you noted.

    The unaided Leica lens (because Leica says its a Leica), when given the chance, will make that shot every time, all shooting conditions being optimal.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •