Nikon's New 300mm f/4 Looks Impressive

[J-see]

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.

The D7200 does well in the comparison but it has the advantage of down-sampling to the resolution used while I had to crop the D810 shots to get to the same size. If I start to crop the D7200 more, it starts to lose some quality but it can still be cropped while I was almost at the max with the D810. When compared to a 24MP sensor, the D7200 should even do better.

As long as I can fill most of the frame, the D810 is the better choice.

 

[Bengt Nyman]

The D810 with the 300mm f/4 for medium telephoto, and the D7200 with a Tamron for super-telephoto certainly covers the range, 150 to 900 mm.
I would prefer a prime lens to get beyond 300 mm. A D7200 with a TC14 and the 300 mm f/4 would at least get me to 630 mm. But I see on other peoples samples that the 24 MP of the D7200 does not leave a lot of room for cropping.

With the D8xx cameras I think I have learned that the priorities for best image quality up to 600 mm are:
1. A prime lens that reaches as close to your goal as possible.
2. If necessary add TC14.
3. If necessary crop the rest of the way.

 

[mikew_RIP]

Dont know if this has been posted beforre by me but pictures have been added,some interesting TC 1.4 and 1.7 images

https://www.flickr.com/photos/128968528@N02/with/17076363608/

 

[captain birdseye]

Kinda surprised there isn't more interest here on this lens. If I was still shooting Fx (or Dx) I'd be very excited!

maybe most people have noticed a few things that are making them a little wary, it is overpriced for a largely plastic made in china item that has been taken off the store shelves almost as soon as it was released simply because it does not work properly.
only time will tell as to how reliable this lens is going to be.
anything made in china makes me think before purchase.

 

[J-see]

anything made in china makes me think before purchase.

That would be about everything on the market these days.

 

[mikew_RIP]

maybe most people have noticed a few things that are making them a little wary, it is overpriced for a largely plastic made in china item that has been taken off the store shelves almost as soon as it was released simply because it does not work properly.
only time will tell as to how reliable this lens is going to be.
anything made in china makes me think before purchase.

As far as ime concerned its a dream specification and ime still waiting for mine,dont care if its been made on the moon

 

[mikew_RIP]

Pricing,well i dont think it is expensive,the old one after all these years is still over £1000 and Wex in the UK have it listed at £1639.

 

[J-see]

Pricing,well i dont think it is expensive,the old one after all these years is still over £1000 and Wex in the UK have it listed at £1639.

I don't know about the previous 300mm but the current one I consider among the best of my lenses. She's very good at almost every level and I can shoot her as slow as 1/20s on my D810 and still have a hit-rate of 50%.

And she not working properly was not as if the front element dropped out upon use. Firmware had to be updated to sort out some mild problem with VR.

 

[captain birdseye]

its not that i am disinterested in this lens as its spec and size are rather appealing to me.
i love my 300f4 af-s/tc14ii combo but i would welcome the size/weight/vr advantage of the newer model with open arms/wallet when it has been out in the field for a year or so and its reliability is proven.
if performance with the tc17ii is good it could very well seal the deal for me.

https://www.flickr.com/photos/evan47/

 

[mikew_RIP]

its not that i am disinterested in this lens as its spec and size are rather appealing to me.
i love my 300f4 af-s/tc14ii combo but i would welcome the size/weight/vr advantage of the newer model with open arms/wallet when it has been out in the field for a year or so and its reliability is proven.
if performance with the tc17ii is good it could very well seal the deal for me.

https://www.flickr.com/photos/evan47/

I have seen some good results with the 1.7 but i think i will hire one before buying.

 

[mikew_RIP]

its not that i am disinterested in this lens as its spec and size are rather appealing to me.
i love my 300f4 af-s/tc14ii combo but i would welcome the size/weight/vr advantage of the newer model with open arms/wallet when it has been out in the field for a year or so and its reliability is proven.
if performance with the tc17ii is good it could very well seal the deal for me.

https://www.flickr.com/photos/evan47/

Just had a look at your images,the Blue tit has to be one of the best i have seen.

 

[Elliot87]

I have to agree with Mike, superb images [MENTION=21047]captain birdseye[/MENTION]

 

[Bengt Nyman]

I would like to see reliable test data on the image quality of this lens. Unfortunately DxO, who used to provide this kind of data, has turned their attention elsewhere.
LenScore, who has tested both lenses reports the image quality of the new 300mm f/4 to be some 20% below the old one.
LensTip has not tested the old lens but reports the overall image quality of the new 300mm f/4 to be some 10% below the Nikon 85mm f/1.4, sometimes used as a medium, prime lens performance reference.

 

[mikew_RIP]

I would like to see reliable test data on the image quality of this lens. Unfortunately DxO, who used to provide this kind of data, has turned their attention elsewhere.
LenScore, who has tested both lenses reports the image quality of the new 300mm f/4 to be some 20% below the old one.
LensTip has not tested the old lens but reports the overall image quality of the new 300mm f/4 to be some 10% below the Nikon 85mm f/1.4, sometimes used as a medium, prime lens performance reference.

Think thats been posted before,the general consensus from actual users is its as good if not better than the old one,to compare a 300mm with an 85mm would seam to lack knowledge on the testers part,the old one could have been 50% worse than the 85mm.

 

[J-see]

Think thats been posted before,the general consensus from actual users is its as good if not better than the old one,to compare a 300mm with an 85mm would seam to lack knowledge on the testers part,the old one could have been 50% worse than the 85mm.

I mentioned it before; there are MTF charts for both lenses. Compare them and you see how the one performs to the other. The charts are consistent with the reviews.

 

[captain birdseye]

i think the reason the new lens is rated at 20% below the old version may be down to its performance against strong light (fresnel lens flare), and its bokeh is said to be unusual at times.
i was talking to a guy with the new version on the d610 yesterday and he pointed this out to me. he did not mention vr issues though as his copy was 2 days old.

 

[J-see]

i think the reason the new lens is rated at 20% below the old version may be down to its performance against strong light (fresnel lens flare), and its bokeh is said to be unusual at times.
i was talking to a guy with the new version on the d610 yesterday and he pointed this out to me. he did not mention vr issues though as his copy was 2 days old.

I can't say I notice any issues with the fresnel vs light and I shoot against the light very often. Bokeh is debatable but it's not a thing you can measure so it shouldn't affect the Lenscore rating.

This is against the light:

 

[mikew_RIP]

This test reports deals with the so called issues

Nikon AF-S 300mm f4E review | Cameralabs

 

[J-see]

This test reports deals with the so called issues

Nikon AF-S 300mm f4E review | Cameralabs

We have to keep in mind it is a 300mm lens and we'll not be shooting sunsets and night-scenes too often. My 24mm sucks too when I try BiF.

 

[Bengt Nyman]

... I mentioned it before; there are MTF charts for both lenses...

And I told you then that Nikon MTF charts based on performance at 10 and 30 LP/mm mean very little for a lens that is supposed to perform at around 45 LP/mm.
I hope you guys are right, I'm still waiting for mine.