1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Teleconverter or Lens hire

Discussion in 'Nikon Chat' started by Vulcanxh558, Jul 14, 2017.

  1. Vulcanxh558

    Vulcanxh558 Member

    Need help please.

    Ive got a Nikon D3300 with an 18-55mm A-FP and 70-300mm A-FP lens.

    My though was to hire a Teleconverter from lensesforhire when i go to Scampton in September but they have advised me their converters arent compatible. So im looking at hiring a lens instead.

    Im looking at possibly buying a teleconverter but i dont know whats compatible and i dont want the hassle of buying one to find it doesn't work and ive got to return it.

    Same with lens hire, ideally i want a 600mm lens for a couple of days (500mm min) but again im not sure whats compatible.

    Ive looked at lensesforhire and to be fair theyve been honest and helpful. If its not too much trouble can you post a link to compatible lenses please?

    Can anyone give me a bit of advice please?

    Many thanks
  2. nimbus

    nimbus Well-Known Member

    I would consider that a lens built for a job will tend to be better than another having it's capabilities stretched, your 70-300 with a 2x convertor stuck on the back will certainly deliver poorer quality than a lens of similar focal length, as well as having a dull finder image. Virtually any Nikon fit lens with a built-in focusing motor will be compatible with the camera.
    Vulcanxh558 likes this.
  3. PeteRob

    PeteRob Well-Known Member

    With a teleconverter the lens becomes slower (-1 stop with a x1.4 and -2 stop with a x2). This has an adverse effect on camera focussing systems which, broadly speaking work better with more light. Many cameras give up at F8. Introducing magnification also emphasises any weakness in the lens as well as introducing more optical elements that can degrade the image in their own right. Many zooms are optically at their worse at full extension so are not well matched with teleconverters. These days there is a lot of information exchanged between lens and camera to further assist the AF so you may degrade AF performance two-fold - lack of data and lack of light. As a generalisation teleconverters work best with fast primes.

    If you are going to hire a 600 or 500 mm F4 prime then don't expect to hand-hold it. They are very heavy. I won't say it is impossible but it takes some technique. You can't bring the camera and big lens up to your eye and start to compose a shot. You have to know the shot, bring the camera up on to it, take the exposure and lower the camera. Shooting in fact. They are best supported on a gimbal head on tripod or monopod. With a gimbal head the lens "hangs" from a point of balance so you can swing and tilt it without being aware of any weight. This is unlike a normal head where the lens sits on a point and is continuously in a state of nearly falling off. Alternatively, but less flexible, a large bean bag can take the lens weight if you have a suitable support for it.
    Vulcanxh558 likes this.
  4. Vulcanxh558

    Vulcanxh558 Member

    Thank you for the replies. Ill take on board whats been said and forget the converter. Ill look at lens hire as i really cant afford one at the moment.

    Again by whats been advised i wont be expecting amazing shots. I have a tripod anyway so ill make use of that too.
  5. Learning

    Learning Ethelred the Ill-Named

    The Nikon mount is not quite as standard as we might think. There are subtle changes on lenses which Nikon are satisfied have sufficient properties to be able to be used with teleconverters. The Nikon teleconverters have matching changes on the bayonet at the lens end. This is not Nikon being difficult; Nikon want users to make the best of their lenses. If a Nikon lens is incompatible with a Nikon teleconverter then you are better off cropping or using a longer lens.
    If you can make do with 500mm then I would suggest hiring the recent 200-500 f5.6 zoom. This is hand holdable especially if you have something to support your elbow. Traditionally one wanted faster long lenses however with the AF systems and sensitive sensors of the last few years f5.6 is perfectly fine in most situations. I bought that Nikon lens in preference to something to 600mm at f6.3. I use it on a D500.
    I suggest that you hire the lens long enough to get some practice with it before the important days.
    Remember that you fit the camera to the lens, not lens to camera; the camera hangs off the back of the lens. Also support the whole assembley by supporting the lens. The mount even on the more expensive cameras comes under great strain if you support the camera/lens combination by the camera.
    Nikon have priced the lens very aggressively seemingly to compete with Sigma and Tamron.
    The lens is capable of amazing shots once you get the hang of it.
    Again I will draw attention to
    You and others might find it useful
  6. cliveva

    cliveva Well-Known Member

    Nikon has a list of lens(on the web site), that are compatible with their teleconverters, the 70-300mm is not one. The f2.8 lens are supported.
  7. GeoffR

    GeoffR Well-Known Member

    Learning has accurately stated that the Nikon mount is not standard and he is absolutely correct.

    What is standard is the bayonet on both the camera and the lens, this means that it is physically possible to attach almost any lens to almost any body however, the various couplings around the bayonet may well foul either the lens or the body. Significant damage can be caused by trying to mate incompatible lens/body combinations. The manual that came with your camera contains a list of compatible lenses, but it will not include lenses manufactured later than the camera. This list is your best immediate resource to determine which lenses to consider.

    For the latest information I would suggest a Google search for "Nikon lens compatibility" which produces links to a number of Nikon resources that detail lens/body combinations that can be used.
  8. Learning

    Learning Ethelred the Ill-Named

    Actually there is a small signifcant difference in the beyonet.
  9. GeoffR

    GeoffR Well-Known Member

    Would you like to enlighten VulcanXH558?
  10. Learning

    Learning Ethelred the Ill-Named

    Three flanges on the lens have to lock behind three flanges on the camera or converter.

    On the camera all three flanges are not identical. The lower flange is about 2mm shorter than the other two.
    On the lens end of the converter all three flanges are the same length but one has a notch cut out of it.
    Most lenses will not fit on the converter because of that slightly longer flange. Converter compatible lenses have a modified bayonet that are not blocked by the longer converter flange.

    That is not the full story. There is a similar arrangement on lens flanges. Remember that the flanges on the lens have to pass through the gaps between flanges on the camera and converter when the lens is being fitted.

    Other considerations are the clearances of other parts; they may interfere before the bayonet block comes into play.
  11. GeoffR

    GeoffR Well-Known Member

    OK thank you, that is of course a difference between the teleconverter and the camera bayonet. I was thinking specifically of camera bayonets but obviously you are correct in that the bayonet isn't a standard piece of metal. I had never examined the teleconverter that closely until today as I have only the one compatible lens and, with continuous focal length coverage from 14 to 200, I never even considered attempting to mount any other lens on the converter.

    I was aware of another, minor difference, the small indentation in the flange for AIS activation is missing from later bayonets too, but that doesn't affect the actual mating of the bayonets.

    However, irrespective of the flanges, current Nikon teleconverters have an element that protrudes from the front and goes into the back of the lens, any lens without space for this element would prevent the bayonets from ever meeting. The 70-300 AF P lens that VulcanXH558 uses does not have the space to accommodate this lens element, It is present on the TC14E 111, TC17E 111, and the TC20E 111 so we can now confidently state that he can't physically use a Nikon teleconverter with his 70-300 lens even if the bayonet flanges were compatible.

    This link shows the teleconverter bayonet and the protruding element.
  12. jpgreenwood

    jpgreenwood Well-Known Member

    Ive got a D3200 and a Nikon 300mm prime F4. Its great for aviation. I also couple it with a Kenko pro 1.4TC and it works well. Ive only tried pretty much runway shots at the mo. With the reduced light , it must be similar to many of the 150-600mm zooms which operate F5.6-6.3 or thereabouts. Where in the country are you Vulcan? (nice name BTW)
  13. IvorCamera

    IvorCamera Well-Known Member

    I have a Tele-plus 1.7 pro from my film days, it was quite expensive when I bought it, it was ok with film but to be honest I have never been a converter fan, last year because I only ever take one camera and one lens with me when travelling I packed the converter and a 50mm lens as extra's and just for a experiment I thought I would try the converter with the 50mm, the lighting was very good and I was quite pleased with the results and if needed I may use this set up again.....when I was thinking about buying a converter way back I was advised never to by the 2x always buy either the 1.7 or 1.3....I settled for the 1.7......the 1.7 has been used with a old 400mm Sigma lens too with good results. Do be careful though because some Nikkor lenses are not suitable to be used with converters........and some Zoom Nikkors must not be used with a converter at all and damage to the mirror lens mount and camera can result....
  14. AndyTake2

    AndyTake2 Well-Known Member

    Mount difference be buggered.
    The OP has an AF-P Lens.
    That scuppers a lot of cameras, not just converters.

    Hiring a lens may well prove the best thing anyway - 300mm at F6.3 and a converter is going to be really dim as far as the sensor is concerned, and autofocus is likely to go up the creek.
    Besides, 300mm on the D3300 is going to be plenty. Air shows are about getting close to the aircraft, and even in flight the aircraft will be close enough for you to get a decent image.
    The last time I went to an airshow was at Duxford, using a D60 (10.2 megapixies) and a 55-200mm lens, I found myself rarely using even the 200 mm end.
    When I did I still got decent images of the aircraft at distance, - the D3300 will far surpass this ability, and the 75-300 is a nice lens.

    Unless you have something specific in mind (It is not going to be the Lancaster, Spitfire or Hurricanes of the BoBMF) don't stress about it.

Share This Page