Gear-reviews Tamron SPAF 1.4 tele-converter
Of course all the above is meaningless unless the Tamron can provide performance as good as the Nikon TC14b. I tested both the Nikon and Tamron tele-converters with my 500 f4 using Fuji Provia 100, a Nikon 801's and a Gitzo 410 tripod, shooting a page from a map. I find that this is the most practical "real world" way of testing lenses and more meaningful to me than the pseudo-scientific methods that are often used. One of the most important things to remember is to shoot at a range of different apertures and take careful notes. Then when your slides come back form the lab, label them and then turn them over before viewing on the light box. This way you don't know which image was produced by which of the lenses you are comparing, and you wont be swayed by your preconceived ideas. Using the above technique I was able to clearly identify those images shot without a teleconverter as being the best, but I was unable to tell the difference between those made with the Nikon and those made with the Tamron tele-converter. In fact on balance I marginally preferred those images made with the Tamron tele-converter. In
conclusion I would have no hesitation in recommending the
Tamron SPAF converter (the Kenko Pro is same converter in
different clothes). My only reservation would be for
applications where autofocus speed is important. The
Tamron slowed the relatively sluggish focus speed of my
80-200 f/2.8 to a point where it was useless for moving
subjects. In reality if you want autofocus speed with
Nikon then you really need their AFS lenses, or you need
to use the Canon system - which if you have the money is
in my opinion currently the best system available for
photographing birds and wildlife. |