Nikon Z Teleconverter Sample Variation
As I mentioned on the first page of this review, I’ve tested three copies of each teleconverter in the lab to gather Imatest data. My thought was to buy three copies of both teleconverters, then keep the best one in order to test any future Nikon Z lenses on the same TC. (After all, I didn’t want to realize years later that I had been testing lenses with a decentered teleconverter and giving them low marks for performance.)
To perform this test, I decided to put three copies of each TC on the best-performing Nikon Z lens that I have on hand, which happens to be the Z 70-200mm f/2.8, specifically at 70mm. The performance of that lens at 70mm is so good that I could be sure that any sharpness issues I found in my tests would be the fault of the TC, not the lens.
With that out of the way, here are my results from three copies of the 1.4x TC:
That’s very uniform performance across all three copies! Copy #3 is arguably a touch sharper overall than the other two, and it’s the one I kept for future lab tests, but the difference is so small as to be unimportant. I’ve never seen such low sample variation among copies of a teleconverter. This is a really excellent result by Nikon.
Here’s the 2.0x teleconverter, again with three copies tested on the Z 70-200mm f/2.8 VR S at the shortest available focal length:
This turned out to be just as uniform as the 1.4x TC results! I could hardly believe my eyes when I saw such a result. This time, copy #3 is a bit better in the corners, while copies #1 and #2 are a bit better in the center, although the differences overall are pretty slim. I ended up keeping copy #3 because of the slightly higher uniformity across the frame, but it was a close call. Well done to Nikon here!
On the next page of this review, I’ll deliver my verdict on the two teleconverters and weigh the pros and cons. So, click the menu below to go to the following page, Verdict.
Table of Contents