On Sat, 18 Jul 1998 22:14:35 -0400, "John R." wrote:

>Well, thanks for the responses to the 80-200/2.8 posts. I took the plunge
>and bought the Nikon 80-200/2.8 along with a FM2n and a couple Nikon lenses.
>I am part of the Nikon family now! I promise I won't switch camera systems
>anymore. Who will it be next time? Lieca? Contax?...
>
>Anyhow, I have another 80-200 question. If I buy a quality 2x converter for
>the 80-200, will my results be similar to the Tokina ATX 400/5.6 or the
>Sigma 400 in sharpness and contrast? I have grown quite fond of the Tokina
>and if I buy it in the Nikon version, it would be my third one! (which is
>why switching camera brands can get so expensive). If I could get the same
>quality images with a good 2x converter, It would certainly give me more
>room in my bag.

Ah, yes, but good as that Nikkor is (it is up there with the best primes in its range...), and good as it is on Nikon's expensive
TC14/14B/14C (1.4X...;-) converters (still as good as good primes
from about f4...), that lens is not particularly good on 2X
converters, alas - which would make the lower-quality 400mm primes
you mentioned look better in comparison. BTW, Nikon's older-version
(non-macro) 500mm f8 mirror is surprisingly good, even on the TC14/14B
converters - I use this for really long lens work when speed isn't
critical. Look it up on my web page Nikon list, under "I babble"...
(there are a lot of photos shot with it on my web page, also).