Venerable Nikon AF 300mm f/4 IF-ED

Woodyg3

Senior Member
Contributor
So I'm thinking that as much as I like my 18-300mm Nikkor, I'd love a super sharp 300 for bird/wildlife/sports. There are used AF 300mm f/4 lenses in pretty good shape out there in the $600 range. (The newer AF-S version is hard to find used, and nearly as expensive as a new one when/if you can find it. )

Downsides: No VR, maybe a little slower AF, crazy drop in filter system.

If there are some of you out there who are using or have used this old lens, I'd appreciate any input you might have.

I could just suck it up and buy the new AF-S version for over twice as much cash. I might get faster AF and would have a front mount filter option instead of the silly drop in gizmo.

I've also thought about the new Tamron 150-600 when it becomes available for more reach and the convenience of zoom. I wonder if the Nikon 300 wouldn't be sharper, though, even when cropped to match the 600 end of the Tamron. :confused:
 

pedroj

Senior Member
I shoot it...It does a very good job, tends to hunt a little if you loose focus...Couple of surfing shots below...

saltwater_24_sep_021.jpg



saltwater_24_sep_078.jpg
 

Attachments

  • saltwater_24_sep_022_thumb.jpg
    saltwater_24_sep_022_thumb.jpg
    4.1 KB · Views: 675

STM

Senior Member
You simply CANNOT go wrong with a 300mm, f/2.8 ED-IF AIS Nikkor. 1 stop down at f/4:

 
Last edited:

STM

Senior Member
Thanks for that link. I was thinking AF, but this is something to consider.

The depth of field is so shallow and the image so contrasty that focusing is very easy even with the focusing screens on most DSLR's which were never intended to be used for critical manual focusing.
 

iamntxhunter

Senior Member
I own the AF-S 300mm (newest version) and I bought the grey market one from B&H. I had ordered an older version from Amazon and didn't really like the filter set up and focus was slow. Tbe AF-S is the was to go imo.

I can handhold some shots but not below 300 shutter speed and even some of those wont be good because of blur. For what I use it for I usually don't need a tripod because I shoot higher shutter speeds but in low light it is a must if you dont want to crank up your ISO.
 

pedroj

Senior Member
Were your pictures taken with the Nikon AF-S Nikkor 300mm F/4 IF-ED lens? If so, how does the lens perform in low-light? I am considering this lens for the upcoming football season to use with my D7000. Thanks.

Sorry no, These were taken with the AF Nikkor 300mm F4 IF ED lens...It's a very good lens, Doesn't have the focus motor but on the D300 focuses pretty quick in good light..
 

kamaccord

Senior Member
Sorry no, These were taken with the AF Nikkor 300mm F4 IF ED lens...It's a very good lens, Doesn't have the focus motor but on the D300 focuses pretty quick in good light..


Oh well. You have taken some extremely sharp photos with your lens. I'm searching for a 300mm lens that is good in low-light and trying not to break the bank in the process. I may have to just break down and get the F2.8
 

aroy

Senior Member
The new AF-S 300mm F4 is good wide open. SO if you can shoot at F4, go for it. On newer sensors even ISO 800 is quite
 

nzswift

Senior Member
Just discovered this post... Here is a shot wide open with the old 300mm f4D lens really close to its minimum focus distance... Can't see any reason to upgrade.

corn.jpg
 

downunder

Senior Member
I have this lens and I would be very surprised if you find much difference in the AF speed compared to the AFS version. Mine is very fast to focus in normal light. On my cameras, if you use the focus limiter on this lens I would say it is probably as fast to focus as the AFS version. I use it on the D300 and D700. So if faster focusing speed is your main concern, this lens is a bargain compared to the AFS version. Of course the AFS has other advantages but AF speed is not a major one in my opinion.
 
Top