anyone used a nikon 2x TC mk3?

robmac

robmac

Suspended / Banned
Messages
1,779
Name
rob
Edit My Images
Yes
thinking about pairing it with a nikon 400mm 2.8 VR.
 
Does it really add anything on an 'older' lens (non-'F', without the electronic diaphragm and fluorite coating)?
Most reviews I've read say there is no noticeable difference to the MkII.
 
markyboy.1967 said:
One of only 2 lenses i would bother adding it to and the other us a 300 f2.8
Click to expand...
I used one with the 300 f2.8 vr1, I was impressed with the quality considering it was a 2x teleconference. It's something I've missed since selling the 300 f2.8 and 2x mk3 teleconverter, it was a nice combo for birds in flight when I needed the extra focal length.

gramps said:
Does it really add anything on an 'older' lens (non-'F', without the electronic diaphragm and fluorite coating)?
Most reviews I've read say there is no noticeable difference to the MkII.
Click to expand...

With the 2x teleconverter I've always heard the mk3 was much better than the mk2, whereas with the 1.4 teleconverters it seems the consensus seems to be there isn't much between the mk2 and mk3 (only price). I thought only the newer 1.4x mk3 had been designed with the electronic diaphragm in mind. It's worth noting the 1.4 mk3 teleconverter isn't compatible with older D lenses whereas the 2x mk3 teleconverter is.
 
Last edited:
Ive used it and returned it, simply not worth the extra money. the 1.7x was the better choice for me
 
I had the same experience as Gary but a friend uses it on a new 300 f2.8 and gets excellent results.
 
A mate uses the 400 F2.8 & 2Xtc mk 111 to V good effect. He tried the mk2 first, but wasn't impressed.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top