Teleconverters with the Nikon AF-S 70-200mm f/2.8G ED-IF VR

Has anyone tried more than one of the TC-14E II, TC-17E II or TC-20E II
with the Nikon AF-S 70-200mm f/2.8G ED-IF VR?

I have bought the Nikon AF-S 70-200mm f/2.8G ED-IF VR, but would like to
extend it a bit (I was contemplating whether to buy the

I assume there must be some degradation of quality on each of them, but
which of them causes the least degradation in quality?

Other lenses I have are the 50 mm f/1.4 and 20 mm f/2.8, but I don't
intend using either of those with a teleconverter. So for now (and the
forseable future), the only lens I will use this on will be the 70-200.

I was probably thinking of going for the 1.7x unit, to give a reasonable
increase in focal length, without making the lens too slow, but if there
are any good reasons for using the 2x or 1.4x, rather than the 1.7x, I
would like to know about them.

Dave:
Check out DPreview.com nikon forums. I have learned that the higher the
factor the more degradation. They say the 1.4 has unnoticable
degradation. I myself will be looking into getting the 1.7. I have not
received (ordered 12/23) my lense yet so I'm still in the newbe stage
also check out:
http://www.bythom.com/70200VRlens.htm It references a photo taken with
the 2.0 and says the degradation is not too bad.
jjon90
Dave wrote:
Has anyone tried more than one of the TC-14E II, TC-17E II or TC-20E
II
with the Nikon AF-S 70-200mm f/2.8G ED-IF VR?

I have bought the Nikon AF-S 70-200mm f/2.8G ED-IF VR, but would like
to
extend it a bit (I was contemplating whether to buy the

I assume there must be some degradation of quality on each of them,
but
which of them causes the least degradation in quality?

Other lenses I have are the 50 mm f/1.4 and 20 mm f/2.8, but I don't
intend using either of those with a teleconverter. So for now (and
the
forseable future), the only lens I will use this on will be the
70-200.

I was probably thinking of going for the 1.7x unit, to give a
reasonable
increase in focal length, without making the lens too slow, but if
there
are any good reasons for using the 2x or 1.4x, rather than the 1.7x,
I
would like to know about them.

Dave:
Check out DPreview.com nikon forums. I have learned that the higher the
factor the more degradation. They say the 1.4 has unnoticable
degradation. I myself will be looking into getting the 1.7. I have not
received (ordered 12/23) my lense yet so I'm still in the newbe stage
also check out:
http://www.bythom.com/70200VRlens.htm It references a photo taken with
the 2.0 and says the degradation is not too bad.
jjon90
Dave wrote:
Has anyone tried more than one of the TC-14E II, TC-17E II or TC-20E
II
with the Nikon AF-S 70-200mm f/2.8G ED-IF VR?

I have bought the Nikon AF-S 70-200mm f/2.8G ED-IF VR, but would like
to
extend it a bit (I was contemplating whether to buy the

I assume there must be some degradation of quality on each of them,
but
which of them causes the least degradation in quality?

Other lenses I have are the 50 mm f/1.4 and 20 mm f/2.8, but I don't
intend using either of those with a teleconverter. So for now (and
the
forseable future), the only lens I will use this on will be the
70-200.

I was probably thinking of going for the 1.7x unit, to give a
reasonable
increase in focal length, without making the lens too slow, but if
there
are any good reasons for using the 2x or 1.4x, rather than the 1.7x,
I
would like to know about them.

Has anyone tried more than one of the TC-14E II, TC-17E II or TC-20E
with the Nikon AF-S 70-200mm f/2.8G ED-IF VR?
I have bought the Nikon AF-S 70-200mm f/2.8G ED-IF VR,

jjon90 wrote:
Dave:
Check out DPreview.com nikon forums. I have learned that the higher the
factor the more degradation. They say the 1.4 has unnoticable
degradation. I myself will be looking into getting the 1.7. I have not
received (ordered 12/23) my lense yet so I'm still in the newbe stage
also check out:
http://www.bythom.com/70200VRlens.htm It references a photo taken with
the 2.0 and says the degradation is not too bad.
jjon90
Dave wrote:


Thanks a lot. I had seen that page before, but thanks anyway for
pointing it out.

That, and some other comments seem to suggest the 1.4x is good/v good,
but the 2x does definitely soften the image. Someone sent me an email
saying he had both and only used the 2x when really necessary, and if he
had to keep just one, it would be the 1.4x.

I must admit I was seriously considering the 1.7x.

The web pages on the 1.4 and 2x do not indicate VR works with them -
this is only stated on the 1.7x, which is the newest one. However, I
asked this on a Nikon forum and got a reply from Nikon stating that all
3 work with VR - something confirmed by others here.

Someone sent me an email saying the 1.7x degraded the image, but with
comments something like 'but not proportionally so'. At the time, I took
this as meaning the 1.7x was almost as soft as the 2x. However, now I am
wondering if he meant it was much better. I should have checked that !!

I have in fact just tonight bought the TC-14E II, TC-17E II and the
SB-800 flash gun but these are being shipped from Hong Kong, so I will
not have them for several days at least. But I will then have both.

I am interested to see if they can be used in conjunction to get a
196-560mm f8. Quality will clearly suffer even more, but perhaps it will
be preferable to a 500mm mirror lens and will have the VR. Getting a
400, 500 or 600 mm lens (non-mirror) is just out of my budget (well a
long way out of my budget actually!!)

Likewise I would like the 200-400 f/4, but again it's very expensive.

I've seen a few long telephoto's on eBay UK, but are highly suspicious
of many. One person had zero feedback, did not want you to use
'checkout' and would not allow you to collect the lens. Given he was
local, I would have taken a chance and paid cash for a big lens at a
good price, but I would not send over 1000 pounds to a complete stranger
with 0 feedback on eBay.

Dave