600 mm prime

[J-see]

If you want to believe that based upon Lenscore that's up to you.

Here are both MTF charts:



If you find one, feel free to share me reviews that say the opposite. This far all reviews and tests (except Lenscore) affirm the same: the new 300mm is sharper where it counts.

So either lenscore is right and everyone else is wrong or it's the opposite. I know what side I favor.

 

[mikew_RIP]

Size and weight, Yes!
Image quality, No!
PF lenses do not presently perform on par with conventional optics.
However, if the buyer is given the benefit of the savings in manufacturing cost it would offer a valuable option to conventional, large and heavy, long focal length lenses.

Not bothered with any testing results but done a fair amount of image and user opinion research and the majority say its sharper than the old one,could be the VR gives them better results but it is only results that count.

 

[Bengt Nyman]

... So either lenscore is right and everyone else is wrong ...

The only comparative optical test out so far is LenScore. I would love for it to be sharper than the old one. Hopefully DxO and LensTip will contribute to answering that question.
Unfortunately Nikon data only includes LPs 10 and 30. What counts are results closer to 40 or 45 LP/mm.

 

[captain birdseye]

i am currently using the nikon 300f4 af-s with the tc14ii converter on the d7100.
for the past two years i have been using this combo for birds, butterflys and dragonflys and find it to be very sharp, so much so that when careful technique is applied i can easily crop to the equivalent field of view as a 600mm lens and still have a great quality image.

 

[J-see]

The only comparative optical test out so far is LenScore. I would love for it to be sharper than the old one. Hopefully DxO and LensTip will contribute to answering that question.
Unfortunately Nikon data only includes LPs 10 and 30. What counts are results closer to 40 or 45 LP/mm.

If she performs worse at 10 and 30 it would be a miracle if she'd suddenly outperform them at 40 or 45.

 

[captain birdseye]

the better the technique, the better the results.

 

[Elliot87]

i am currently using the nikon 300f4 af-s with the tc14ii converter on the d7100.
for the past two years i have been using this combo for birds, butterflys and dragonflys and find it to be very sharp, so much so that when careful technique is applied i can easily crop to the equivalent field of view as a 600mm lens and still have a great quality image. View attachment 162937View attachment 162938View attachment 162939View attachment 162940View attachment 162941

Nice results, I think this is the setup I will end up going for. Having a zoom but feeling limited to only using certain parts of it is frustrating. At leasts I've found that with the 70-300mm so I doubt the 150-600mm will be any different.

 

[mikew_RIP]

Nice results, I think this is the setup I will end up going for. Having a zoom but feeling limited to only using certain parts of it is frustrating. At leasts I've found that with the 70-300mm so I doubt the 150-600mm will be any different.

If you got the lens from the same place as you got your camera its only £699

 

[Elliot87]

If you got the lens from the same place as you got your camera its only £699

I had a look on there earlier. Think they will get plenty of business from me. Thanks

 

[captain birdseye]

here are som

e more taken on a d7000 or d7100.
most have some cropping. i love the 300f4 af-s and tc14ii combo.

 

[Bengt Nyman]

If she performs worse at 10 and 30 it would be a miracle if she'd suddenly outperform them at 40 or 45.

Agreed, however, if manufacturers published MTF charts told the whole story there would be no need for independent testing.
I will wait for more test results and if they are as good as you think I will apply for a spot on the PF bandwagon.

 

[J-see]

Agreed, however, if manufacturers published MTF charts told the whole story there would be no need for independent testing.
I will wait for more test results and if they are as good as you think I will apply for a spot on the PF bandwagon.

The best part of these lenses is weight. Even if they'd develop a 600mm, you could probably shoot it one-handed.

 

[Bengt Nyman]

... The best part of these lenses is weight ...

Absolutely.
Nikon just announced new 500 and 600 mm E FL ED VR lenses with FL or flourite elements. These new top of the line lenses do not use PF or phase Fresnel technology.
With the new 300 mm PF lens I think we might be seeing the introduction of a new, semi-pro line of smaller and lighter, PF, long reach lenses.
If Nikon gives the market part of the benefit of the lower manufacturing cost of these new PF lenses we might end up with a line of very attractive long reach prime lenses as an alternative to the existing, conventional, big, heavy and expensive top of the line prime lenses.

 

[Ruidoso Bill]

The Tamron is a nice lens for its money but at 600mm she isn't fantastic.

On itself the shots are good but the moment you shoot a better lens and compare them, it becomes obvious why there are price differences among lenses.

It all depends how frequently you shoot at 600, I don't do this very often and put my money where it makes me money. I waited for the sigma sport, they lost out and I scored a Tamron for $925. I don't use it often but it is much better than my sigma 50-500 and I bought the Tamron for an upcoming Alaska cruise, this lens is not my everyday goto lens. My 14-24 & 24-70 are my money making lenses and occasionally my 70-200 is also ok but I always want my arsenal of lenses to support what makes me a living, not just for fun or experimentation. My lenses need to support what I do.

I also have a 1.4 and 1.7 and a 2.0, don't use them much. You can crop a lot at 36mp