Teleconverters Nikon AFS TC-14E II and AFS TC-20E II

  
 
 
Soon after the purchase of the new AFS Nikkor 70-200/2.8 VR with the vibration reduction function I decided on buying both Nikon teleconverters for AFS lenses – the AFS TC-14E II and the AFS TC-20E II, again after reading quite good internet-published reviews by independent reviewers. I can only use them with the new zoom lens, since my two other zoom lenses (the 17-35/2.8 and the 28-70/2.8) are not optically compatible, but then who would go and mount a teleconverter on a wide-angle lens?! Also, they are not compatible with the other Nikon AF lenses because of the little cam on the inside wall of the bayonet of the teleconverter it does not fit any other lens but the AFS. It is possible to “amputate” the little cam, but this makes the warranty void. Both teleconverters are larger (longer) and heavier than the half-priced Tamron, which is especially true for the AFS TC-20.
They are optimised for use with telephoto lenses, which is why their front lens element juts out forward above the front bayonet plane and can only be used with lenses that have their rear lens element set quite deeply (i.e. telephoto lenses). The Tamron is much more universal, the front lens element is shifted somewhat inwards and can be used with virtually any lens. Both Nikons are equipped with a chip that calculates the effective f-stop, while the Tamron only has contact points linking the lens with the camera without giving any information to the camera of its presence in the system.

Naturally, I was immediately wondering how the original AFS teleconverters cope compared to the Tamron. I have made several tests, using both film (the Ektachrome 100 Elite, which I mostly use in land photography) in the Nikon F100 and the digital Nikon D100. I have made photographs with a tripod with the VR function of the 70-200/2.8 off and from hand with the aid of the VR function. All three teleconverters were used with the AFS 70-200/2.8, the Tamron also with the AF 300/4.

I photographed a newspaper page lit with a 1000 W halogenous floodlight. I used the aperture at wide open and the next two f-stops with the shutter speeds ranging from 1/500th to 1/60th of a second.

Marks:

N14 = Nikon AFS TC-14 II
N20 = Nikon AFS TC-20 II
T14 = Tamron SP AF 140F-FN

>= slightly better, almost no difference
> better
>> significantly better

My results are, as follows:

Quality of shots with use of tripod:
300 >= (200 + N14) >= (200 + T14) >> (200 + N20) >= (300 + T14)

Quality of shots from hand:
(200 + N14) >= (200 + T14) > (200 + N20) >> 300 > (300 + T14)

Optically speaking, the only relevant shots are the ones made with the use of the tripod, but speaking practically, the hand-held camera results show what happens when one cannot use the tripod (photographing from a boat or a car with the engine running) or when, due to the nature of the motive, one hasn’t the time to mount the tripod. The results are mostly in line with my expectations, the only surprise was the optical quality of the relatively cheap Tamron, which is almost level with the Nikon AFS TC-14. The good results of the teleconverters combined with the AFS 70-200/2.8 are mainly consequence of the high optical quality of the lens itself. The zoom lens combined with the 1.4x teleconverters gives similar results in picture quality to the 300/4 prime lens, what is quite incredible. Only the 2x enlargement of the picture with the Nikon TC-20 shows significant deterioration in quality. What is also interesting is that the zoom lens combined with the 2x teleconverter gives even better results than the 300/4 with the 1.4x Tamron teleconverter! The new AFS 300/4 is said to be of higher optical quality compared to the old model I use and its results with the teleconverter are said to be better as well.

In the hand-held camera shots with the AFS 70-200/2.8 VR and with the VR function on, the story is completely different - the zoom lens is, with any combination of the teleconverters, the absolute winner compared to the 300/4.