Bengt Nyman
Senior Member
Agreed. I am very hesitant to compromise on IQ.
I would rather give up 300mm and above than producing mediocre results.
I would rather give up 300mm and above than producing mediocre results.
Nikon's New 300mm f/4 Looks Impressive
- Thread starter Rob Bye
- Start date
Although test chart results give an indication there are far more factors involved for sharp images,i have always wanted the older version of the 300 and 1.4,the size and weight would mean i could not carry them with a tripod or monopod,this would result in handheld shots at 420mm,which for me would mean higher ISO to get higher shutter speeds.
If and i say if the new lens under performs against the older version ime confident the smaller size lighter build and VR will more than compensate in my case.
If and i say if the new lens under performs against the older version ime confident the smaller size lighter build and VR will more than compensate in my case.
I have the new. If I had the old, 2k for the new would be a bit much for whatever the difference is. Even when she is lighter and shorter, I would not pay that money for a couple % better performance.
Last edited:
Bengt Nyman
Senior Member
OK. Reliable resolution or sharpness tests requires the right equipment and rigorous discipline. The idea of two homemade tests, performed by two different people to compare the sharpness of two different lenses is totally impractical. If somebody has access to both lenses and has the patience to rig up a comparative test using the same camera on tripod, with remote trigger, in live view, he or she might be able to see a difference. After all, That's what LenScore did, reporting a resolving power of 1189 for the conventional optics and 924 for the diffraction optics. Unfortunately I have not heard of any other credible comparison. I have asked LensTip, twice, if they have or would consider testing the conventional Nikon 400mm F4 lens but they have not answered. DxO has not tested the old lens but has announced that they will test the new one some time in the future. However, without comparable data on the old one we are back guessing again.
When we buy baby formula or cars we know what we get, but for some reason lens manufacturers are allowed to keep it a secret. Lens manufacturers should publish an approximate max center resolution of their lenses expressed in LP/mm and an MTF chart at max resolution and at for example 40 LP/mm.
MTF charts at 10, 20 or even 30 LP/mm are nothing but advertising material.
Zuiko Olympus, for example, publishes MTF charts at 20 and 60 LP/MM. No guessing required there.
When we buy baby formula or cars we know what we get, but for some reason lens manufacturers are allowed to keep it a secret. Lens manufacturers should publish an approximate max center resolution of their lenses expressed in LP/mm and an MTF chart at max resolution and at for example 40 LP/mm.
MTF charts at 10, 20 or even 30 LP/mm are nothing but advertising material.
Zuiko Olympus, for example, publishes MTF charts at 20 and 60 LP/MM. No guessing required there.
I could be missing the obvious but whats happened here,look at the post and the OOF area.
https://www.flickr.com/photos/johntymon/19222426628/in/pool-2734848@N25/
https://www.flickr.com/photos/johntymon/19222426628/in/pool-2734848@N25/
captain birdseye
Senior Member
well. looking at the image i would say that the photographer tried to blur part of the post in pp and did a rather bad job of it.
on the other hand if it is down to the lens i would return it.
on the other hand if it is down to the lens i would return it.
Bengt Nyman
Senior Member
I do not know if the lens is good enough. That's why I am asking/waiting for test data.
I can only tell you I'm satisfied with the lens and you can judge my shots. The reviews I read consider her slightly better than the previous but if you ask me, slightly better is not worth a 2k upgrade if you got the previous version. Unless there's a practical reason to have her, I'm of the opinion there are better things to invest in.
Bengt Nyman
Senior Member
Don't worry J-see. It has been good sparring with you. You don't have to carry the world on your shoulders, or decide for me. The future will provide clarity. And like Captain Birdseye suggested, it might be time to buy a bigger Nikon ticket to more serious birding.
Bengt Nyman
Senior Member
Hi,
What is your experience with the TC17 compared to the TC14.
I am presently using the 300f4 af-s/tc14iii combo. It is mechanically restricted to f/5.6 due to the lack of aperture linkage in the TC14iii. I am thinking about getting a TC17ii which would give me full aperture control and additional reach.
Do you see a big difference in IQ between the TC14(iii) and the TC17(ii) ?
P.S. I am aware that the light loss of a TC17 on a f/4 lens can give the AF a hard time. However, for birding against a light sky I thought it might be worth a try, if the IQ is acceptable.
Last edited:
captain birdseye
Senior Member
i have not used the tc17 with my 300f4 af-s, i have the tc14ii permanently paired to it.
the tc14ii is the converter of choice for most 300f4 users as it produces as good/slightly better results when cropped than using the tc17, it lets in a little more light, focuses more quickly and affect the lenses bokeh less.
1.7 and 2.0 teleconverters are best used with f2.8 lenses such as the nikon 300f2.8 vrii which i would love to own one day.
the tc14ii is the converter of choice for most 300f4 users as it produces as good/slightly better results when cropped than using the tc17, it lets in a little more light, focuses more quickly and affect the lenses bokeh less.
1.7 and 2.0 teleconverters are best used with f2.8 lenses such as the nikon 300f2.8 vrii which i would love to own one day.
Bengt, Why not sell the TC 1.4III and get a used TC 14E which is optically the same but will give you full function? The 1.7 is going to slow autofocus and significantly reduce sharpness. Also, I'm fairly certain the Tamron or Sigma 150-600 options would give better results than a 300 f/4 w/ TC 1.7.
captain birdseye
Senior Member
you will still lose the same amount of light with the tc14e as the tc 14ii.
what do you mean by retain full function? you will not retain f4, it will become f5.6.
so far most of the images from the tamron/sigma 150-600 lenses have been poor or mediocre. pin sharp images at 600mm are few and far between.
cropping with my existing gear gives me the results i want to see. the results from the sigma/tamron lenses do not. plus the tamron is rather unreliable on the nikon mount.
what do you mean by retain full function? you will not retain f4, it will become f5.6.
so far most of the images from the tamron/sigma 150-600 lenses have been poor or mediocre. pin sharp images at 600mm are few and far between.
cropping with my existing gear gives me the results i want to see. the results from the sigma/tamron lenses do not. plus the tamron is rather unreliable on the nikon mount.
Bengt Nyman
Senior Member
The newer TC14iii is missing the mechanical linkage required for the camera to set the aperture. I am left with only f/5.6.
The older TC14ii does have the mechanical linkage so that the camera can control the aperture.
I believe that Woodyg3 is right. I should buy a TC14ii. What has held me back is the slight trade-off in image IQ:
Review: Nikon TC-14E vs. TC-14EIII | Digital Photography Insights by Jason Odell
P.S. A couple of alternatives that I have looked at is to use a Nikon D7200 to gain 50% reach, which with a 300mm and a TC14 amounts to 630mm.
A more drastic solution would be an Olympus OMD1 with the new Zuiko PRO 300mm lens coming soon for a reach of 600mm.
I have done a lot of experiments lately fine tuning a D800E and a D810 with a 300mmF4+TC14 for birding at different distances. It is discouraging to see the required fine tuning move all over the place as a result of the object distance. At least a mirrorless setup would eliminate that problem.
Last edited:
As Bengt stated, I was refering to his problem with limited aperture control with the TC14III.
I have the Tamron 150-600, and also the Nikkor 400mm f/4 w/ TC 14E. I would not call the results with the Tamron mediocre, in fact they are significantly better than any other similarly priced telephoto zoom I've had experience with. I guess I have been lucky, but I have had only very occasional problems with the Tamron's autofocus.
I don't have a 1.7x teleconverter, but I have heard often enough from those that do that the fall off in sharpmess is pretty significant. I feel confident that the Tamron at 600mm would be sharper than the Nikkor w/ 1.7TC.
That said, I use my Nikkor 300mm w/ 1.4 TC for birding the majority of time. It is sharper than the Tamron, and focuses better. Only if I feel I need the image stabilization of the Tamron in dark situations would I rate it a better choice. (As in shooting owls at dusk or in a very shaded area.)
Bengt Nyman
Senior Member
There is definitely a hole in the market for every day birding. It will be interesting to see if Sigma or Tamron decides to offer us a reasonable 600mm prime, or if smaller format mirrorless cameras with the correspondingly shorter primes get there first.
P.S. A tip for fine focusing. I use a high resolution monitor showing an empty spreadsheet where I set row height and column width to very small numbers creating a fine line pattern. Now select a square in the middle and use the border command to darken all borders within the selected square. Depending on the focal length of the lens this gives me better visual comparison than most other targets.
P.S. A tip for fine focusing. I use a high resolution monitor showing an empty spreadsheet where I set row height and column width to very small numbers creating a fine line pattern. Now select a square in the middle and use the border command to darken all borders within the selected square. Depending on the focal length of the lens this gives me better visual comparison than most other targets.
Last edited:
I must admit ime looking forward to trying the 300 and 1.4 on my V2,giving a FOV of 1134mm
Any word when yours arrives? I read they're getting back in stock at several places.
Not yet but i may call in at the weekend,may have to wait a few weeks for the converter as the lens will clear out my toy fund
and being retired it takes longer to replace.