Thoughts on Nikkor 300 mm f/4

[William W]

. . . had been neglecting spring chores and needed to shift my focus. . .

Hilarious pun . . . I do hope it was intended.

WW

[purplehaze]

Hilarious pun . . . I do hope it was intended.

WW

Hey, we language professionals know how to write for our audience.

[purplehaze]

Well, I succumbed. Drove down to Henry's and put in an order; it should be arriving on Thursday. Fingers crossed that it is a good copy.

[george013]

Well, I succumbed. Drove down to Henry's and put in an order; it should be arriving on Thursday. Fingers crossed that it is a good copy.

I'm curious about your findings with this type of lens.

George

[rtbaum]

Well, I succumbed. Drove down to Henry's and put in an order; it should be arriving on Thursday. Fingers crossed that it is a good copy.

I am just a bit curious......the lens in an earlier post is not the lighter PF version. The PF version will not come with a tripod mount. The AF-S NIKKOR 300mm f/4E PF ED VR weighs in at 26.6 oz, whereas the Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 300mm f/4D IF-ED weighs 50.8 oz.

By all accounts, the heavier version may be a little sharper, has a nice bokeh, but does weigh nearly twice as much. I have the PF version and like it quite a bit. The bokeh can get a little weird with a linear background.


3" gecko pair from 12' away with PF and 1.4 tc

[purplehaze]

George, I will be sure to let you know how I like it.

Yes, Randy, it is the PF version I am looking at, precisely because of the weight factor. I already have a collar for my 70-200 f/4 that is supposed to fit, but the user reviews I have read say the PF version mounts well on a tripod without. Glad to know you like your lens; I'd be quite happy to get the quality you have with the TC.

For those who are interested, here is a description of Nikon's Phase Fresnel technology, with pros and cons: https://petapixel.com/2015/01/10/clo...ns-technology/.

I am skeptical about the degree to which the software can reduce the flare issue, so I am just going to do my best to put light sources behind me.

[rtbaum]

I am skeptical about the degree to which the software can reduce the flare issue, so I am just going to do my best to put light sources behind me.

I really have not had a problem with flare. I think that most use of this lens tends to be with sun at one's back or to the side, which makes flare a moot issue.

I think that you will have fun with this lens, I use mine for 'close-ups' as often as telephoto. As you stated, there are times when getting close to some flora is a bit dicey; I remember one particularly fine stand of marsh marigold on the opposite bank of an icy, raging river....focal length was a definite asset.

[purplehaze]

Picked the lens up last night; first few shots in the fading light at f/4 and ISO 3200 pretty impressive. Can't wait to put it to work; watch this space.

[Manfred M]

Have fun with your new lens! I look forward to seeing what you end up doing with it.

[purplehaze]

I think that you will have fun with this lens

So much fun!



f/5.6 @ 1/320, 200 IS0, with Nikkor TC-14EIII

[rtbaum]

I do like this setup....I will not lie. How do you like the balance of the setup?

[purplehaze]

So far, I am quite impressed. I am able to shoot handheld quite comfortably, and at surprisingly (for me) low shutter speeds (down to a .25 sec. at least). The VR is living up to its advertising, though that was not a prime selling feature for me. With the teleconverter on, I felt I needed my monopod, but perhaps in time, I will be able to do without. The narrower field of view is certainly going to take getting used to, and I missed all of my shots of the above bird in flight. But that is the only negative, so far. I am still cropping on most of the bird shots, but I am able to get close to insects and animals and people without them noticing me, and so I think this lens is going to be expanding my horizons. I am going to take it along to an outdoor music festival this weekend and perhaps steal some souls. I will have the little Sony (18-70 mm) with me for the wider angle shots, but it would be nice to finally get some decent closeups of the performers.

Speaking of close-ups, this was shot just at the edge of the 300 mm's closest focusing distance (1.4 m).



f/5.6 @ 1/200, 640 ISO

It's a lot of money for not that much more distance, but that little bit more does make a difference and I do love me the quality of a good prime.

My brother's new dog, a rescue named Kona.



f/5.6 @ 1/400, 400 ISO

[george013]

Looks good. In the first picture the corrected focal length is mentioned, 420mm.
And in the second one a nice fall off of the sharpness.
That dog walks like a model.
How is the weight?

George

[purplehaze]

Hi, George. Yes, with the 1.4 TC, the focal length is 420 mm, and the effective length on my 1.5 crop sensor camera is 630 mm. The weight is 755 g or 1.6 lbs. It actually weighs less than my Sigma 18-35 mm.