F3 with MTF and Nikon TC-20E II to hit 300mm or 400mm?

[Jason Bodnar]

Has anyone tried out their F3 and MTF with a Nikon TC-20E II and maybe a 70-200mm or similar to reach those 300mm and 400mm tele ranges? If so how was it? Any sample clips for us? Seems the F3 could handle the loss in stops via the TC-20E in a lot of situations from what I can see, wonder how well the sharpness would be maintained?

[Alister Chapman]

Why not just get a 300mm lens? You'll get a better result than using an extender. There's plenty of 70 to 300mm lens options. I use a Sigma 70-300 F4 APO and get good results, the lens cost less than the TC-20E. There is also the Sigma 80-400 and the more expensive Nikkor 80-400. An extender will soften the image and introduce additional aberrations.

[Jason Bodnar]

Alister, I hear you. My question was coming from the fact I already own the Nikon 70-200 2.8 and the TC-20E, I am about 90days away from pulling the trigger on an F3 and MTF so I was just wondering how it worked out for anyone, how soft does the image get... Is it so bad buying glass in those tele focal lengths is a better option? All my glass is 2.8 or better and I usually need fast glass in most of my shoots so it can get costly, yet I hear your suggestion on just buying a 300 5.6 instead of using the extender. I am also looking at getting PL zooms like 17-50mm and 50-150 as I am going thru the same as a lot of people on whether to get the body and use the glass you already have via MTF then maybe add on to the Nikkor collection or start getting into some strategic PL's. Lots of options, so far I love the look of the F3. The big kicker for me is to order just the body or get the kit with the Sony branded glass...as my addditional glass purchases will be limited for a while especially PL.

[Steve Kalle]

I found MTF tests using the 1.4 extender on the 200mm L f2.8 II and the resolution dropped ~25% so I would expect the 20E II to lose as much if not more resolution. FYI, on an 8MP 20D, it went from ~2000 lines to 1550 at f4. Canon EF 200mm f/2.8 L USM II - APS-C Review / Test Report - Analysis

[Jason Bodnar]

Interesting....Thanks Steve.

[Chuck Fishbein]

I've used a Tamron 300mm 2.8 on my EX 3 with and MTF adaptor with excellent results and I doubt it will look and less sharp with my F3. First tests tomorrow. It's a manual lens with excellent glass and I picked it up for $ 650. on Ebay. The images can be seen on MTF's site.

Still, even though I prefer not to use converters, if you have used the combination with your still cameras and you were very satisfied with that, you should be pleased with the video results

[Jason Bodnar]

Nice to hear Chuck, I figured there might be some folks with EX3's that have tested this... I would love to hear how your test goes with the F3 tomorrow... with it being pretty much crazy in low light I think losing the stops with the extender should almost be a wash as compared to the EX3... Let us know after the test and if you can post some test footage.

Thanks!

[David C. Williams]

Originally Posted by Chuck Fishbein

I've used a Tamron 300mm 2.8 on my EX 3 with and MTF adaptor with excellent results and I doubt it will look and less sharp with my F3. First tests tomorrow. It's a manual lens with excellent glass and I picked it up for $ 650. on Ebay. The images can be seen on MTF's site.

Still, even though I prefer not to use converters, if you have used the combination with your still cameras and you were very satisfied with that, you should be pleased with the video results

The larger F3 sensor will use more of the outer edges of the glass than the EX3. The outer edges are usually not as clean as the centre, often less sharp and suffering chromatic aberration.

It might work very well, just that judging it from its EX3 performance will not give a completely comparable test.

[Alister Chapman]

Yes but the F3 has much larger pixels and this will help with sharpness. If the 300mm is a full frame lens then soft edges should not be an issue as the s35 sensor is quite a bit smaller than ff35.

[Chuck Fishbein]

I have also used this lens and all of my lenses, in fact, with my full sensor, Nikon D3, wide open, at extreme low light settings with fantastic results. But truth be known. If I am using a long lens like that in lower light, I am usually focusing on something that I want to isolate and that rarely sits on the edge of my frame.

I have had terrific results with these lenses, as well:
Nikon 85 1.8 AF
135 2.0 Manual
180.2.8 AF
80-200 old style (no mount)
For today's shoot I only used a 24-70 2.8 but the results were stellar!

I used to have an excellent Tamron 28-105 2.8 but it hit the sidewalk today at 9:45 am.

[Andrew Stone]

Chuck really too bad about your Tamron hitting the ground. Really too bad.

The Nikon 24-70 you were using sounds like a really good meat & potatoes kind of Nikon lens to use on the F3. Covers off most of the range one would need if you were looking for standard cinematic focal lengths.

The only Nikon zoom I have is the 17-35 2.8 so I am obviously going to flesh out my Nikon zooms (along with a few others). The one you used on your shoot is on my short, short list. Never used it though. One comment I have read is there is some barrel distortion at the wide end but it disappears when you get to 30mm. Is the distortion quite pronounced?

How does the Tamron stack up?

[Chuck Fishbein]

I agree that there is some barrel distortion, you have to watch it below 30mm,but comparing apples to apples, Nikon's 24mm prime is only a little better.
From my experience, Tamron's lenses are pretty good about distortion, especially their 14mm, but not very good wide open at 2.8. At 4.5 -5.6 they are much better.

Fortunately, I had two of the Tamron lenses, because they were great for photo shoots.
Still, that sound of lens on concrete...ouch!

[Andrew Stone]

For the utility and the price, one should be able to live with throttling the iris somewhat on the Tamron.

Chuck, is your 135 that you reference the Nikon lens with the adjustable bokeh ring? If so let us know if it works on the F3. Photographers have raved about this lens.

[Chuck Fishbein]

Sorry Andrew, Mine is the old style 135mm 2.0 and due to that, the focus rotation is much longer and easier to use manually. Some lenses present difficulty when trying to use them for anything other than their intended use. Good example is the AF-S Nikkor 70-300. 4.6-5-6 G. Leave it home.