Kenko V Nikon teleconveters

K

Kev

Messages
301
Name
Kevin
Edit My Images
Yes
I've read a couple of off the cuff comments that there is little or nothing to choose between the IQ on the Kenko Pro300 and the Nikon tc's in both the x1.4 and x2.0.
There has been no real detail behind the claims just the bald comment that the Kenko is as good, does anyone have experience with these they'd like to share?

I'm tinking I'd like to get a x1.4 and a 2.0 tc for my 300mm prime but the price difference is huge and for something I'd not use much it seems a pity to get the Nikon if there is nothing in it.

cheers
Kev
 
Well I owned or have owned both, and there is no difference, certainly with the 1.4x. I don't think either of the 2x's are worth owning or inflicting on any lens.

I did actually test this out one day when I was bored, I may still have the NEFs from these two on a 70-200 VR.
 
Thanks PD (y). That's definitely answered the question. I can see a Kenko 1.4 and eventually a Nikon 1.7 comin into casa Kev soon

Kev
 
There might not be much in it iq wise, but fit wise the Kenko is awful. I was always frightened my 80-200 was going to drop off due to the less than perfect fit. The Nikon tc that I replaced it with, by comparison feels as if it is part of the lens.
 
Flash In The Pan said:
There might not be much in it iq wise, but fit wise the Kenko is awful. I was always frightened my 80-200 was going to drop off due to the less than perfect fit. The Nikon tc that I replaced it with, by comparison feels as if it is part of the lens.
Click to expand...
That might depend on the lens. All the Nikons feel a little loose on my 200-400, with the 1.7 being the best but not perfect. On my 600 the 1.4 seems far more sturdy.
 
Could be, as I had the Kenko on the 80-200 and the Nikon on the 70-200. The only "comment" I've ever read that said they were comparable in quality was written by the seller I bought my Kenko from though :cautious:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top