Best quality lightweight 300mm+ lens for Nikon

Amp34

Amp34

Suspended / Banned
Messages
2,859
Edit My Images
Yes
With the announcement of the 70-200 f/4 it has got me thinking about quality long lenses again. I currently have the 70-300 VR and it was bought as a stopgap really a couple of months ago after changing systems. It's fine in good light but wide open at 300mm it's pretty poor and focusing is pretty slow compared to Canon L lenses. That leads me on to what to replace it with.

I need the equipment to be as light as possible but able to get to at least 300mm in one way or another.

Aside from the 300 f/4 which doesn't have VR I'm thinking the other options are the two VR 70-200s. What is the f/2.8 (Mk1 - I'll buy used) like with TC's attached? I understand it is very sharp without them but how much IQ does it lose with them on. Same with the 300 f/4, what is that like with a 1.4/1.5TC on?

Are there any other options I should be looking at?
 
you dont need vr on the 300mm f4 and one was just sold on here at a giveaway price

300mm f4 with tc1.4 is the only Nikon choice and what most of us use.
 
Amp34 said:
Aside from the 300 f/4 which doesn't have VR I'm thinking the other options are the two VR 70-200s. What is the f/2.8 (Mk1 - I'll buy used) like with TC's attached? I understand it is very sharp without them but how much IQ does it lose with them on. Same with the 300 f/4, what is that like with a 1.4/1.5TC on?

Are there any other options I should be looking at?
Click to expand...

300 f4 is sharp wide open, even with the 1.4 or 1.7TC fitted, lack of VR has never been an issue with me, but I tend to have it on a tripod or monopod.

D300 + 300/4 + 1.4TC f7.1
80-022a.jpg


D300 + 300/4 + 1.7TC f7.1 (ISO3200)
161_120.jpg
 
The 300 f/4 with a 1.4 TC is great, but I sold mine for a sigma 120-400 OS. It was as sharp, faster AF, longer reach and has an incredible OS system.
Certainly worth consideration.
 
TCR4x4 said:
The 300 f/4 with a 1.4 TC is great, but I sold mine for a sigma 120-400 OS. It was as sharp, faster AF, longer reach and has an incredible OS system.
Certainly worth consideration.
Click to expand...

That's interesting. Never considered the 120-400 for a bit of extra reach. I love the 300 f.4 with or without a TC.

Have you a couple of images at extremes you could post?
 
Ill have a look. I dont have it anymore. Still annoyed I sold it.
I cant get onto my Lightroom at the moment as my main drive crashed the other day and I dont have a spare drive to download the backup too, so Ill see what I have on Flickr.
I dont shoot test charts or anything, so it will be real world shots...


Camera Nikon D700
Exposure 0.013 sec (1/80)
Aperture f/5.6
Focal Length 400 mm
ISO Speed 800


Pallas Cat by TCR4x4, on Flickr


Camera Nikon D700
Exposure 0.005 sec (1/200)
Aperture f/5.6
Focal Length 400 mm
ISO Speed 400


DSC_4574 by TCR4x4, on Flickr

Camera Nikon D700
Exposure 0.02 sec (1/50)
Aperture f/5.6
Focal Length 120 mm
ISO Speed 400
Exposure Bias +1/3 EV


DSC_4491 by TCR4x4, on Flickr

Im sure I'll have more once my lightroom is back up and running
 
Thanks for those. Real world examples are what I wanted to see.

Hmm shall have to go and find one to try I feel.
 
VR isn't essential but it would be very nice to have. I also begrudge a little the price of the 300 f/4, it's almost as much as the IS version of the Canon... I was very close to putting in an offer on the one sold the other day though, until I realised I was just a little too late.

Anyone compared the 70-200 f/2.8 and a 1.4/1.7/2xTC to the 300 f/4? What is it like focus and sharpness wise? The lens I would love would be a 120-300 f/4. I know Sigma used to do a 100-300 f/4 so maybe in the future they will being out a new one...

The Sigma 120-400 doesn't look to bad but it's still a little soft at the long end (which I invariably use tele zooms at...) so I think I'll give that a miss at the moment.

EDIT: I'm currently thinking of doing a safari/tour in spring next year so something that covers that will be important (lot of walking and camping involved).
 
Last edited:
Amp34 said:
The Sigma 120-400 doesn't look to bad but it's still a little soft at the long end (which I invariably use tele zooms at...)).
Click to expand...

The pallas cat image is at at 400mm wide open.. 1/80th handheld through a wire fence... In what universe is that image soft?
 
It's only a small image but it does look fairly sharp, the reviews aren't great though compared to other lenses like the 300 f/3's for example.

I have to say I'm starting to err towards the Sigma 120-300 f/2.8... It doesn't fit my remit at all regarding weight but it could be a stunning lens to use with a couple of teleconverters for the extra length I wouldn't get close to any other way... The fact a new one is coming out soon should mean I have the choice between that or the slightly cheaper "older" OS version... What's the 120-300 like to lug around all day with lots of other bits and pieces?
 
Click through to Flickr to see the slightly larger image.. If I get time I'll post up a 100% crop too. It's sharper than my 300 f/4 was.
It's also considerably lighter than the 300 f/4!
 
TCR4x4 said:
Click through to Flickr to see the slightly larger image.. If I get time I'll post up a 100% crop too. It's sharper than my 300 f/4 was.
It's also considerably lighter than the 300 f/4!
Click to expand...

We must be talking about different lenses here... The 120-400 is 300g heavier than the Nikon 300 f/4 and close to a kg heavier than the Canon 300 f/4 (which I owned for 2 years).

I'd be interested in seeing a 100% crop image though, you can never really tell with just small images.:)
 
I dont bother looking at spec sheets so I dont know what the listed weights are. The Nikon Af and AF-S 300 f/4 which I had were both all metal, and felt considerably heavier than the plastic sigma 120-400.

Here is a 100% (ish) crop. I had to do it from the JPG, as I cant access my RAW's at the moment due to a HD failure, so its actually not as sharp as it could be.

Remember this is ISO 800, 1/80th second f/5.6 handheld...at 400mm


pallascatcrop
 by TCR4x4, on Flickr


In comparison, this is the 300 f/4, handled but at 1/1250th and ISO 200, stopped down to f/5.

I think the sigma in the extreme circumstances did amazingly well.

Camera Nikon D700
Exposure 0.001 sec (1/1250)
Aperture f/5.0
Focal Length 300 mm
ISO Speed 200


100% crop by TCR4x4, on Flickr
 
The picture of the bluetit alone would persuade me which lens to get, it looks super sharp.

HOWEVER, the ability of the Sigma is truly superb, wish I had the spare cash for either at the moment.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top