Nikon Z* mirrorless

Anyone tried a 2x tc with the 180-600 I know it will be prohibitive on exposure but will it work
 
russellsnr said:
Not the 2x but the 1.4 thought the images using the DX option gave better results than the 1.4.
Click to expand...
I’ve already got the 1.4 but thinking about the 2x .not a fan of the Dx crop though it has its uses ,and there’s no difference in reality between cropping a fx image and using dx.
But 1200mm reach with a 45mp sensor just sounds tempting the only thing bothering me is the heat haze effect at that distance
 
Last edited:
the black fox said:
I’ve already got the 1.4 but thinking about the 2x .not a fan of the Dx crop though it has its uses ,and there’s no difference in reality between cropping a fx image and using dx.
But 1200mm reach with a 45mp sensor just sounds tempting the only thing bothering me is the heat haze effect at that distance
Click to expand...
Is your 180-600 F or Z mount? I have an AFS TC-20E iii in F mount if it's any use.
 
Last edited:
wibbly said:
A quick wander round with the new to me Z8 & ever present Z 24-120. A bit bright for how I prefer to shoot woodland, but still nice to be out and putting the Z8 through its paces!

View attachment 495957
Click to expand...
I find the Z8 tends to overexpose a bit , at least mine does it could possibly be what your encountering
 
high spring tides , blue skies and strong winds made for a fun hour this morning on the estuary a couple of redshank shots to start off
red tide by jeff cohen, on Flickr
touchdown by jeff cohen, on Flickr
 
Last edited:
So the Z 120-300mm f/2.8TC is up for pre-orders and I did have interest registered at LCE but at a pound short of £14k I'll give this a miss and look at getting the Z 400mm f/2.8 instead. For my motorsport stuff, considering where I use certain focal lengths and panning etc, a weighty lens like this doesn't make sense for me. I didn't think the rice would be so high either and I know pro's will consider it but for me it's just too much.
 
Hadge said:
So the Z 120-300mm f/2.8TC is up for pre-orders and I did have interest registered at LCE but at a pound short of £14k I'll give this a miss and look at getting the Z 400mm f/2.8 instead. For my motorsport stuff, considering where I use certain focal lengths and panning etc, a weighty lens like this doesn't make sense for me. I didn't think the rice would be so high either and I know pro's will consider it but for me it's just too much.
Click to expand...
The 400 2.8TC is superb
 
AdamSi said:
The 400 2.8TC is superb
Click to expand...
I knew it would be, it's more the TC advantage over my FL. The G version and FL are the same sharpness wise really and I know the Z mount will be the same, it's just justifying the difference from moving the FL on. It does everything I need and is pin sharp, so do I "upgrade" or keep the pennies for something else. I need try the new 70-200 as the newer 24-70 is a big improvement over the original in faster focusing and that seems to be the way with the newer 70-200. I'll decide over the winter when it's quiet.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top