Nikon 300mm lens dilemma

ohkphoto

ohkphoto

Snow White
The crane and geese will be arriving at the Bosque soon and I need to make a decision about a lens.

This past year, I've used the (rented) AF-S 300mm f/4 with a teleconverter (2X) but found it obviously limiting when the light would start to go . . . the birds come in to roost at sunset, and I lose 2 stops with the teleconverter.

I recently discovered that Nikon made a 300mm IF lens (10-15 yrs ago???) AF-I 300mm ED IF 2.8
that will also work with a teleconverter without losing AF. I can't rent this lens (nobody carries it) so I can't test it out; but it has great reviews.

Each lens is in a similar price range: $1000 -$1500. What I really want (AF-S 300mm 2.8) is TOTALLY out of my budget at $6000.

Have any of you out there used one or both (AF-S 300mm f/4; AF-I 300mm ED IF 2.8)
and if so, what were your preferences and drawbacks of each lens.And finally, what words of wisdom do you have to offer? (robbing a bank is out of the question!)
 
S

SamSpade1941

Senior Member
Helene have you looked at the Sigma APO ? They have a lens in that range and are very high quality. Extremely sharp and fast focusing. I rented one last year to photograph the Elk with it worked wonderfully. Just a suggestion
 
S

Sambr

Senior Member
I have the 300mm f4(latest version) I use it exclusively with the Nikon 1.4 TC I use this combo a lot seems to works great both at sunup and sunset for me that's my favorite times to shoot wildlife. Have a look at the last few posts especially "bighorn & d800" I have tried the 300mm 2.8 VR in fact I had bought it, however for the price and the weight diffrence I was not really getting that much better IQ, so I returned it.
 
G

gqtuazon

Gear Head
salvatore said:
I have the 300mm f4(latest version) I use it exclusively with the Nikon 1.4 TC I use this combo a lot seems to works great both at sunup and sunset for me that's my favorite times to shoot wildlife. Have a look at the last few posts especially "bighorn & d800" I have tried the 300mm 2.8 VR in fact I had bought it, however for the price and the weight diffrence I was not really getting that much better IQ, so I returned it.
Click to expand...

Very interesting observation Sam. You are the second person who have mentioned similar experience between the 300mm f2.8 and f4. Thanks.
 
P

Photowyzard

Senior Member
Helene,

I have the 300 f4 and a 1.4 TC and this combo is stellar!

If you want a little more reach for the same money as the 300 f4, I concur with Sam on the Sigma 150-500. I personally don't think it is as sharp as the 300, but a very, very close alternative for pretty much the same money. It is light, bright and versatile.

If you put a 1.4 on that you will have good reach and it should still be somewhat suitable for early and late day light, assuming no cloud cover. At 700mm you have f9, not that bad, or f6.3 at 500mm with no TC of any kind.

I have frequented many trade shows and have chatted up a number of people at Nikon and they all say the same thing to me.... 300 f2.8 and the 1.4TC as the ideal, value for the money, combo. There is no getting around this lens as one of the best options. I have never tried it personally, it is too expensive for my taste and if I had to spent this kind of money, I would just save longer and get a 500 or 600mm. You can bet an old 300 f2.8 is the bargain to go for, if you can get your hands on one cheap!
 
ohkphoto

ohkphoto

Snow White
Here is the Sigma 150-500 mm f5-6.3 DG APO OS and it is razor sharp.These have a well deserved reputation for clarity and sharpness, if I had the $$$ I would own one its a awesome lens.

Sigma 150mm-500mm f/5-6.3 DG APO OS Lens for Nikon DSLRs 737306
Click to expand...

Thank you for the link and the info, SamSpade :) I had not thought of this lens. I had tried the 50-500 . . .liked it well enough but found that it was too much of a range . . .it seemed unnecessary. But the 100 - 500 might be worth checking out.
 
ohkphoto

ohkphoto

Snow White
I have tried the 300mm 2.8 VR in fact I had bought it, however for the price and the weight diffrence I was not really getting that much better IQ, so I returned it.

Read more: http://nikonites.com/telephoto/7818-nikon-300mm-lens-dilemma.html#ixzz260rMLe4p
Click to expand...

Sam, thank you for your feedback. I've wondered if I could even lift the 2.8 300mm . . . probably just as well that it's out of my reach.

Your pics with this lens are fabulous. Does the AF work with the teleconverter? Have you ever tried using it with 2X aspherical converter?
 
ohkphoto

ohkphoto

Snow White
You can bet an old 300 f2.8 is the bargain to go for, if you can get your hands on one cheap!
Click to expand...

Thank you, Photowyzard! I have sadly discovered that with Nikon, anything 2.8 is not cheap! ha-ha
I appreciate the feedback!
 
Pierro

Pierro

Senior Member
Unfortunately, the 150-500 sigma is soft-ish at its max ap of F6.3. Really, f8 is optimum sharpness, and not at 500mm either. Its best backed off to 450mm or less. I'm on my 2nd 150-500 now i'm a Nikon user, and you have to be prepared for compromises. I tried TC's with it too and the IQ is pretty horrendous , plus the damn thing hunts all over the place for way too long, even in good light.

Forget TCs at all if you decide on this lens and stop down to f8 at full zoom, but back off from 500mm to around 450mm for the best way to get decent pics
 
S

Sambr

Senior Member
ohkphoto said:
Sam, thank you for your feedback. I've wondered if I could even lift the 2.8 300mm . . . probably just as well that it's out of my reach.

Your pics with this lens are fabulous. Does the AF work with the teleconverter? Have you ever tried using it with 2X aspherical converter?
Click to expand...


Thank you Helene :) Yes the auto focus works fine with both the 1.4 & 1.7 TC I haven't tried 2x TC yet :)
 
ohkphoto

ohkphoto

Snow White
Pierro

Pierro

Senior Member
Why thanks Helene - to get better, which of course you can, ya have to spend a lot more. Also, you're considering weight, and this bad boy weighs in at 1910g ( 67.4 oz. )

A used example over here in the UK from a private seller would be around £550 - probably cheaper over the pond , maybe ?
 
ohkphoto

ohkphoto

Snow White
Also, you're considering weight, and this bad boy weighs in at 1910g ( 67.4 oz. )
Click to expand...

Well, I guess if this guy can do this, I can learn to "schlepp" around a "big boy" (this guy even has to wear kneepads . . . poor thing)

photographers_47.jpg
 
Pierro

Pierro

Senior Member
Jeeeeeez - he needs help !

Yep, that 150-500 Siggy should be no problem for you. Its a lightweight compared to many
 
Top