Nikon AF-S 300mm f/4 +1.4TC, or...

Blacktop

Senior Member
The Nikon AF'-S 200-500mm.
I'm at work now so I'll add more thoughts later. Just getting the ball rolling

Sent from my VS985 4G using Tapatalk
 

J-see

Senior Member
The 300 f/4.

If not needed you can always shoot without the TC and have focus at f/4 which makes a serious difference when birding (or tracking whatever) + you only need to fine-tune focus at one length while you probably require different values for the 200-500mm range.

And you can use the TC on other lenses too.
 

singlerosa_RIP

Senior Member
Since I have the 200-500, I'll plead its case. On FX, you have 200-500. On DX, it's 300-750. That's a lot of flexibility. In the 6 weeks I've owned it (shooting mainly FX since I just got the 7200), I've shot from 300-500 on a single outing. Try that with a prime. Plus, cost is $2500 for the 300 plus TC vs $1400 for the 200-500.

Also, am I the only guy who's never had to fine tune a lens? Am I lucky or blind?
 
Last edited:

nikonpup

Senior Member
i played with one for a week, (200-500mm) weight for me was large negative factor. For what i do i will stick with my tamron 150-600mm.
 

Bill16

Senior Member
Who are you kidding Pete buddy? Lol Your more of a zoom guy from what I've seen my friend! I don't think you'd like being restricted to one focal length without changing the lens! So I am voting for a Zoom for ya buddy, because I can't afford to buy this particular prime from you outright when you get frustrated, with it's lacking more focal lengths! Lol ;)
 

Blacktop

Senior Member
Since I have the 200-500, I'll plead its case. On FX, you have 200-500. On DX, it's 300-750. That's a lot of flexibility. In the 6 weeks I've owned it (shooting mainly FX since I just got the 7200), I've shot from 300-500 on a single outing. Try that with a prime. Plus, cost is $2500 for the 300 plus TC vs $1400 for the 200-500.

Also, am I the only guy who's never had to fine tune a lens? Am I lucky or blind?
I can get a nice used one for under a grand. A new one is 1400 at Nikon. You must be thinking about the 300mm f/2.8 maybe?
 

mikew_RIP

Senior Member
Unless your going to be always working in situations where you can control the distance, know subject size in advance then it would have to be a zoom for me,as i walk round i have no idea what the next subject will be or where it will be.
On the technical side you will have a 300mm f4 or a 420mm f5.6(and have to spend time juggling to change between),nothing else,with a 200-500 @ f5.6 your scope will be much improved and a converter on that if you wanted 700mm f8,with the added benefit of VR.You already know the short comings of 300mm and you have one of those so your talking most bird shots with the converter.
 

Blacktop

Senior Member
Who are you kidding Pete buddy? Lol Your more of a zoom guy from what I've seen my friend! I don't think you'd like being restricted to one focal length without changing the lens! So I am voting for a Zoom for ya buddy, because I can't afford to buy this particular prime from you outright when you get frustrated, with it's lacking more focal lengths! Lol ;)

You're making a lot of sense there buddy!:encouragement:
 

Blacktop

Senior Member
I'm liking the versatility if the 200-500mm. VR is not that important to me , but it is nice to have.
The 300mm prime is one really sharp assed lens though, even with the 1.4 TC.

This is going to take some heavy thinking about. I still have not totally ruled out the Sigma 150-600-C lens yet
 

Blacktop

Senior Member
The 300 f/4.

If not needed you can always shoot without the TC and have focus at f/4 which makes a serious difference when birding (or tracking whatever) + you only need to fine-tune focus at one length while you probably require different values for the 200-500mm range.

And you can use the TC on other lenses too.

What are you using now for a long lens?
 

mikew_RIP

Senior Member
I'm liking the versatility if the 200-500mm. VR is not that important to me , but it is nice to have.
The 300mm prime is one really sharp assed lens though, even with the 1.4 TC.

This is going to take some heavy thinking about. I still have not totally ruled out the Sigma 150-600-C lens yet

Now you add another alternative :D,all three options will work but the criteria is as far as i can see is where you will be working,on my patch i cannot see the next bush in time to know what focal length i will need for the bird.
 

Blacktop

Senior Member
Edit to the last post

Most of the time 600mm isnt long enough :D

It's never long enough. However, ever since I've seen those shots on Flickr from this lady with the 300mm+1.4, I can't stop thinking about it....Plus I'll have it on the D7100 which adds another 1.5X FOV to the equation.
 
Top