Nikon lens and teleconverter

Okay, naive purchase. I thought since I owned a nikon and nikon lens that I could extend my reach with a teleconverter. So, I went out an got a 1.7 nikon teleconverter. Since I have a 70-300mm, wow. I can now reach out further and for those closer shots, get in tighter on the subject. A win win. NOT. Seems I should have looked at the nikon site to see that teleconverters are not compatible with all of their lens. So - here is my question - is there a second/third party supplier that has an adapter that will allow me to use the teleconverter with all nikon lens? To be clear, I would like to attached the 1.7 to the camera body, add the adapter, then add the lens. Yup, not perfect but until I come up with the funds for a nikon compatible lens, best I can think of. Besides just not using the 1.7! Thanks in advance.

Mike, you might consider selling the 70-300 to help fund the Nikkor 70-200 f4 which is compatible with your converter.

I bought the 70-200, and it’s my most-used lens. It is tack sharp, and with internal zoom, it’s length does not change, so the balance is not upset. Worth every penny.
–P

Always have to be careful to verify that a teleconverter you are considering is compatible with the lens you are wanting to marry it to. I have used a Nikon 1.4 tele married with the Nikon 300mm f/4 prime on a cropped sensor body in the past which gives you a 720mm focal length at f/5.6 max. But it can be a challenge for speed if you’re shooting BiF. If I recall with a 1.7 tele you lose 2 full stops.

@mike6 I don´t think there is one TC that fits all…sorry your combination doesnt work out.

The only help i could offer is this Nikon Compatibility Chart for their own TCs.

AF-S Teleconverter Compatibility

regards

Denis

Preston, Why the f/4 and not the f/2.8? Cost? I would think the 2.8 would give you a greater range. Thx.

Mike, the 2.8 lens is much heavier because of the larger glass and tripod collar. The f/4.0 is much easier to handle, even though I shoot most of my shots on a tripod.

Since I do landscapes, and some non-nature images, I do not need the 2.8. Most of my shots are at f8 or more.

Now, if you do a lot of low light work, and/or avian/wildlife with a teleconverter, the 2.8 may be a better solution for you.

I admit the 2.8 was tempting…until I saw the price. The f4.0 suits my needs, and only moderately broke the bank.

I hope this helps,
–P

Back
Forward