Wildlife is the heart of my photographic addiction

[Ian stuart Forsyth]

Common Snipe shot with the D800 200-400 F4 II and 1.7tc

[afx]

The green leaves that contour the body are a nice addition.

cheers
afx

[Lance B]

Very nice, Ian. Love the pose, great detail and it is best to click on the image and see it large for full impact.

[Ian stuart Forsyth]

Thank you both

[Ian stuart Forsyth]

Shot with the D800 and the 200-400

[Anthony]

These are very nice, but the watermark is rather intrusive.

[Jan Anne]

Hi Ian, how is that 200-400VRII & 1.7TC combination working for you?

I used to own the MKI version of that lens and really didn't like with TC's, curious if the MKII is different in that regard.

[Ian stuart Forsyth]

Hi Ian, how is that 200-400VRII & 1.7TC combination working for you?

I used to own the MKI version of that lens and really didn't like with TC's, curious if the MKII is different in that regard.

I find you have to pay close attention to AF correction with regard to using the mark II with the tc, I find that the 200-400 has a shift around the 20m distance where I need to use a different focus correction than I would need to use closer than 20m, using the 1.7 tc only magnifies this problem.
Once I correct for this I find the 200-400 handles the TC rather well 
Bellow the 200-400 II with the 1.7 wide open F6.7

 I just picked up the 1.4 III and I find it better than the 1.7 and AF is hardly hampered see my next post

[Ian stuart Forsyth]

Some photos taken with the D800 200-400 II and the new 1.4 III

[Ian stuart Forsyth]

Another BIF series

One of these days I will nail a full set as they enter the water

[Andrew]

You are the master!

[Erik Lund]

Very nice captures! The 200-400mm is indeed very nice. But many people has stated strange issues with sharpness and also converters like the ones you mention... There must be something about it

Meanwhile, when it works it works

[Ian stuart Forsyth]

You are the master!

thank you

[Ian stuart Forsyth]

Very nice captures! The 200-400mm is indeed very nice. But many people has stated strange issues with sharpness and also converters like the ones you mention... There must be something about it

Meanwhile, when it works it works

I was not happy with the 1.7 until I found out that with the 200-400 I would see a shift in the focus plane for different subject distances and also when changing the Fstop.
Once I figured this out and apply the correct AF correction for the condition at the time of shooting I found them to work very well on the 200-400
I will also add that the new 1.4 III seems not to have that much of a shift

[Jan Anne]

I find you have to pay close attention to AF correction with regard to using the mark II with the tc, I find that the 200-400 has a shift around the 20m distance where I need to use a different focus correction than I would need to use closer than 20m, using the 1.7 tc only magnifies this problem.
Once I correct for this I find the 200-400 handles the TC rather well 

Thanks for clarification Ian, I remember the Mark I having the same issue of becoming soft at long range. Not sure though if the word was out back then (2009) that it was caused by focus shifts but that would explain a lot about its performance quirks with and without TC's.

I usually shot within 20 meters anyway where it performed perfectly and instead of using TC's I switched between a D700 and D300 if less or more focal length was needed.

Great images btw