My Brief Encounter with Nikkor TC-200
I had been looking for this teleconverter (or TC-201) for a while. I've bought a Kiron MC7 2x Teleconverter as a temporary substitute.
Finally I received a very friendly offer of this teleconverter. To be fair, I have to say
that TC200 is not bad at all. It is a small but really useful piece of glass, but just
tested to be almost identical in terms of optical quality to my $20 Kiron's. So I
decided to return it to the seller.
I believe that TC-200 is optically the same as TC-201, except that TC-200 is
AI-type while the TC-201 is the AIS type. This is a 2x teleconverter which works with
(mechanically fits to) almost all Nikkor lenses of AI type or later, and is intended to
use for lenses shorter than 300mm). I have no further information about its
specification. (From Nikon literature, TC-201 is 7 elements in 5 groups construction.)
I intended to used this TC with Nikkor AF-Zoom ED
80-200mm f/2.8, as well as with Micro-Nikkor 55mm f/2.8 AIS for some close-
up works. So I tested both, at two apertures, and making a side-by-side comparison
with Kiron MC7 2x teleconverter. I shot a "brick wall": an MIT's office building across a
small parking lot from my office, about 35 meters away. The camera is supported on
tripod, the lens is supported on the heating
radiator which happen to have the same height as the windowsill.
With Nikkor 80-200/2.8 AF (non-D), I tried f/2.8 (wide open) and f/5.6
(one of better apertures of the lens) at focal length of 200. At f/2.8, edges are very
soft, the center portion is OK. At f/5.6, edge sharpness improves a little bit, but still
quite soft (and at f/11, the lens itself has begin to deteriorate its sharpness). Overall,
contrast is quite low. Between the two TCs, TC200 renders slightly better (consistent
with other Nikkors) colors, and the exposure is accurate. Kiron's 2x TC is slightly
sharper and of higher contract, but needs an exposure compensation of 2/3 stop.
When used with Nikkor AF-Zoom 80-200/2.8, the drawback is that the
combo is extremely difficult to use. If the combo is only supported by a tripod socket
on the camera, the heavy lens is extended farther away from the supporting point,
thus any camera shake will be greatly magnified. The shutter speed probably need to
be at least 1/250 or faster.
With Micro-Nikkor 55/2.8 AIS, I tried both distant focus and close focus.
With distance focus, I tested f/2.8 and f/5.6 (marked). The images were also
compared with the Nikkor 80-200/2.8AF set at approximately at 110mm (actual data
showed 125mm), and at f/5.6 and f/11 respectively. Overall, the results with TC are
very decent. Images with Kiron's TC is very subtly sharper than with TC200. But the
image with the zoom (without converter) is definitely sharper and more contrasty.
As for the close focus, I tried the lens fixed with PK-13 extension tube, then
the TC. The TC is closest to the camera body so that the magnification obtained by TC
is the smallest. No any noticeable difference between the images by the two TC's.
In conclusion, I think this TC-200 is good and useful, and at a decent price
(as compared to Nikkor's TC-14x). But it is not that great either (as it can be
challenged by a $20 third-party TC). The combination with the two lenses tested can
generate sharp images for 4"6" prints if used with great care. I've upgraded my Kiron
MC7 2x Teleconverter from "temporary substitute" to "my 2x TC".
Back to my Photo Gear page
Last updated: August 26, 1997.