Teleconverter for Sigma Lens on Nikon Body

Hey,
I'm shooting a Sigma 170-500mm lens but would like a little extra range. Does anybody know if any teleconverters work with this lens and a nikon body? I've already tried a Nikon 1.7 . Thank you.

Save your money. A teleconverter will do a poor job if put on that lens.


Kent in SD

What are you shooting that you need the extra focal length? Your combination is already at 750 mm, which for most situations suffices. Adding a teleconverter to a zoom lens, especially one like you have, simply isn't going to give you better results than what you already saw with the Nikon 1.7 (a first rate converter).

The reason I ask is that a lot of shooting, especially animals and even small birds, involves stalking technique, behavior knowledge and occasionally some luck rather than lenses. Your question is actually fairly common. Most of the big wildlife photographers whose work you have seen over the years, got their shots with film (no conversion factor) and a 500/600 prime and maybe a 1.4 converter. The key edge they have isn't glass, it is in knowing the animal behavior.

First, I ment that I have tried the nikon 1.7 and was unable to get my lens mounted. All I'm using is the Sigma lens. Second, I'm trying to shoot Some diving ducks on the Mississippi river, I know where they are and when, unfortunately it's in the middle of the river. I would set up in a layout blind (I'm also a hunter) but that would be problematic because of all the barge traffic. I was hoping to get a little range for the birds that do come close enough to the docks to get some good pictures. Thank you for your help.

Ryan

I think there is a tab built into that converter so it can't be mounted on a non-AFS lens. If you try to force it, you will damage it.


Kent in SD

Tried but no luck. I removed a rubber band but didn't make a difference. So nect question. What is the cheapest lens that will work with a nikon teleconverter and have autofocus capability and is 400mm or higher? Any suggestions?

Why not try Sigma's 1.4x teleconvertor. I use one with my Sigma 400mm lens on a Nikon D200. Doesn't autofocus, but the image quality is still acceptable.

The "cheapest" 400mm lens? ROFL!!!!!! Sort of like asking, "What's the cheapest race car I can buy that will go over 200mph?"
There are two lenses that will work with a 1.4x or 1.7x Nikon teleconverter and still autofocus. One is the excellent Nikon 200-400mm f4, and the other is the fantastic 400mm f2.8. I'd love to have that one! The 400mm f2.8 is $7,000 new, so I suppose you're going to rule that one out as "cheapest?" You are in luck though. The 200-400mm f4 VR can use the 1.4x and seems to be the cheapest at $5,000. So there you go!

http://tinyurl.com/24zm9s
http://tinyurl.com/2woo2v


There is another lens out there than can use a 1.4x converter. This is the Nikon 500mm f4 P. They are no longer made but can be found on eBay. They have no autofocus but with the P designation I believe they will at least meter with the D80 (I have a D80.) These are great lenses and are absolutely cheap!!!! Can be had on eBay for less than $2,500. You are aware that when you start getting up to 400mm lenses, you need a really first class tripod, I assume. I'd budget a minimum of $500 for head and tripod. Mine is medium quality and is ~$900. It will hold a 500mm f4 or 400mm f2.8 well enough to get sharp images though.

Your cheapest option, if you are dead set on using a teleconverter, is to dump the D80 on eBay and buy a used D200. These have really dropped in price since the D300 came out. They will meter with AiS lenses. Still manual focus but at least will meter. That gives you another option--the excellent Nikon 400mm f3.5. You can use a 1.4x on it with ease, and the lens seems to go for just under a thousand bucks on eBay.

I have the Nikon 80-400mm VR which I regularly use on my D80. I've tried both a Tamron SP and Nikon 1.4x on it, and honestly--forget about it! If you think you need something longer than a Sigma 50-500mm, you're going to have to start shelling out some cash just like everyone else has for solid tripods, solid tripod heads, and pro quality fast glass. A used D200 + 400mm f3.5 + Nikon 1.4x + $500 tripod is the cheapest combo I've ever heard of. Hate to be the bearer of bad news, but I'm being honest.


Kent in SD

Thanks for all the info Kent. Looks like I'm going to be on the lookout for the 200-400mm lens.

Perhaps this is echoing Kent, but I agree that the Nikkor 500 f/4P is a great lens for that extra range. Both my TC14B and modified TC14EII work well with it. Of course it won't AF, but with the focus confirmation LEDs in the viewfinder this is not much of a problem. (Even with my longer AF lenses, I will manually "trim up" focus if I think the subject may have moved.)
I cannot express too strongly how important is "long lens technique". George Lepp had an article about this very subject and told how his early long lens photos were unsharp. He thought that the problem was with the lens, but then he noticed he had a few photos which were fine. He realized the his problem was not the lens, but his technique, and eventually was able to refine his methods to regularly obtain sharp photos. I don't wish to elaborate here, but I can guarentee that if there is any weak link in your methods, it will show up!