Nikon's New 300mm f/4 Looks Impressive
- Thread starter Rob Bye
- Start date
Wouldn't argue with that after seeing your results,wonder why no one has them in stock though,unless demand is just too high.
I think the firmware delay has seriously affected delivery. It took me quite a while to get one but suddenly she was available.
Bengt Nyman
Senior Member
Deliveries of this lens have essentially stopped. The reason is apparently some sort of VR resonance resulting in blurred images at exposures between 1/60 and 1/125 sec. I was hoping to find some data on how this lens performs with teleconverters, in hope of replacing my excellent but slow focus Nikkor 300mm f/4 D. The wait continues.
That has been solved some months ago. They updated the firmware and delivered again.
There's a review on photographylife that tested the lens + TCs. I'm not impressed when connecting the 2x but that has more to do with the loss of light.
https://photographylife.com/reviews/nikon-300mm-f4e-pf-ed-vr
Last edited:
Bengt Nyman
Senior Member
European dealers and I are still waiting. Using a D800E or D810, do you think that the 300mm PF VR + TC17 and some cropping, is a better choice than using the TC20 ?
The problem with the TC2.0 isn't just the quality loss but the fact AF works at f/8 which really is too slow for anything that moves. For static shots it would matter less but 500$ is a lot for only that. The TC1.7 isn't much better when it comes to that. It's also pretty slow.
If I would buy a TC for the lens, I'd get the 1.4. The quality isn't much lower than without the TC and you still got a decent focus speed. The lens is pretty sharp and I can easily crop to 100% which is quite some on the D810. It should not be much different with the TC1.4.
I never tested it but I suspect that in the end cropping the TC1.4 outclasses the increased reach of the 1.7. The 2.0, even when I got it, I'd not advise at all. At least not when you want to use it on anything that moves.
Bengt Nyman
Senior Member
No doubt there is some quality loss using TCs. I keep asking Nasim to use his Imatest capability to quantify it.
Of course a TC spreads and thereby reduces the light received by the sensor. However, why would that impair the AF speed compared to a non TC lens at the same effective aperture ?
I presently use the 300 mm f/4 D with the TC14 and crop to reach. I'm on a waiting list for the 300 mm f/4 PF VR.
My problem is that the TC14 III lacks the mechanical aperture connection, forcing you to shoot at lens aperture f/5.6.
The 300 mm f/4 PC VR would certainly solve that.
Of course a TC spreads and thereby reduces the light received by the sensor. However, why would that impair the AF speed compared to a non TC lens at the same effective aperture ?
I presently use the 300 mm f/4 D with the TC14 and crop to reach. I'm on a waiting list for the 300 mm f/4 PF VR.
My problem is that the TC14 III lacks the mechanical aperture connection, forcing you to shoot at lens aperture f/5.6.
The 300 mm f/4 PC VR would certainly solve that.
Last edited:
The cam always does AF the lens at the widest aperture but by putting a TC between, you extend the lens and in that affect the shape of the light hitting the sensor(AF). That results into something similar as shooting at a different effective aperture, all negative effects included. Most cams automatically adjust the minimum aperture when connecting the TC. Mine directly switches to f/8 for the TC2.0.
The speed of your AF depends on how wide the angle of light is. Which is why all fast lenses have massive front elements.
Here's an image representing what an f/8 lens does and how it affects focus. The same happens by extending the lens when using TCs.
Here's the rest of the article on AF:
Understanding Autofocus, Clarkvision.com
Last edited:
Bengt Nyman
Senior Member
Thanks for the link to the article.
I believe that the key part of the article explaining the speed of AF has to do with the reduction of incoming light resulting from the use of the TC:
"One way to compensate is to integrate the signal longer on the AF sensor so that there will be enough signal-to-noise ratio for a decent signal to determine focus, thus slowing the system down."
It's the amount of light too but the angle seems to be most important when it comes to speed. Up to f/2.8 because anything faster than that does not translate in faster focus. Don't ask me why.
Bengt Nyman
Senior Member
Try this: The angles are synonymous with a more divergent light beam, resulting in less light, and consequently longer AF integration time required.
Like that yeah. Thinking about it; the reason why faster than f/2.8 doesn't result in faster focus might have to do with the AF module being a certain size and the moment the diameter of the cone of light exceeds that certain size, it falls outside the module no longer playing any role in focus.
Bengt Nyman
Senior Member
I agree, it appears form the article that the PDAF described is simply not designed to benefit from light angles beyond that of f/2.8.
It is also suggested that the speed of the PDAF does suffer when the light level is compromised requiring a longer time for light integration to secure a signal with low enough noise.
Similarly, a lens which can not produce f/2.8 light angles will reduce the light available to a PDAF system designed for f/2.8, possibly explaining the reduced PDAF speed and performance when using TCs.
I also conclude, however, that a lens with a TC and a certain effective aperture should produce an AF performance similar to any other lens with the same effective aperture, and possibly totally loosing the ability to autofocus a lens, or a lens+TC, with an effective aperture beyond f/8.
Good to know, thank you.
It is also suggested that the speed of the PDAF does suffer when the light level is compromised requiring a longer time for light integration to secure a signal with low enough noise.
Similarly, a lens which can not produce f/2.8 light angles will reduce the light available to a PDAF system designed for f/2.8, possibly explaining the reduced PDAF speed and performance when using TCs.
I also conclude, however, that a lens with a TC and a certain effective aperture should produce an AF performance similar to any other lens with the same effective aperture, and possibly totally loosing the ability to autofocus a lens, or a lens+TC, with an effective aperture beyond f/8.
Good to know, thank you.
I know that when I used my TC2.0 on my 70-300mm it only hunted at the long end but that was on the D3300. When I use the 300mm & TC2 on the D810 focus becomes very slow and often hunts.
I wanted to use it for birding but those in flight are often gone before I get a decent shot in. I now only use the TC for doing macro.
I wanted to use it for birding but those in flight are often gone before I get a decent shot in. I now only use the TC for doing macro.
Bengt Nyman
Senior Member
I am having decent luck with an 800E (or 810), a 300mm f/4 D and a TC14 for 36 MP at 420 mm or cropped to 16 MP at 630 mm.
I have considered buying a D7200 to get an extra X1.5 for 24 MP at 630 mm with TC14.
Any recommendations ?
I have considered buying a D7200 to get an extra X1.5 for 24 MP at 630 mm with TC14.
Any recommendations ?
I got the D7200 for extra reach but mainly use it with the Tamron. I tried the 300mm on it and although it does take a good shot, it is not comparable with what the D810 delivers. But if I down-sample it, it does give me decent quality. I was first thinking about getting a TC1.4 but since the D7200 is only twice the price, I decided to get that one instead.
Here are some shots where I shot both at max and then compared the (down-sampled) crop vs normal.
http://nikonites.com/d7200/30415-d7200-review-3.html#post450966
It's not a 100% perfect comparison but it shows something about the quality of the D7200 vs D810.
http://nikonites.com/d7200/30415-d7200-review-3.html#post450966
It's not a 100% perfect comparison but it shows something about the quality of the D7200 vs D810.
Last edited:
Bengt Nyman
Senior Member
I have seen earlier image samples comparing D810 and D7200 with different low dollar lens setups to reach 600 mm. It's essentially a toss-up, possibly with a slight edge to the D810.
I just checked the comparisons in your D7200 review. I gather that the first shots are D7200 and the second D810 and that you used the 300 mm lens on both.
In that case I give the edge to the D7200.
I just checked the comparisons in your D7200 review. I gather that the first shots are D7200 and the second D810 and that you used the 300 mm lens on both.
In that case I give the edge to the D7200.
Last edited:
I'm currently a bit bored of birding but when I find it handier to take the D810/300mm with me and the D7200/150-600mm for the long shots. It's easier/faster than switching lenses/TC. For its price I find the D7200 quite good.
The Nikon 600mm would require me to pimp my grandmother and buy a donkey to carry the lens.
The Nikon 600mm would require me to pimp my grandmother and buy a donkey to carry the lens.