*Help*Lens comparison

300 2.8 vs 200-400mm

  • 300 2.8

    Votes: 1 50.0%

  • 200-400mm

    Votes: 1 50.0%
  • Total voters
    2
H

HaydenLB

Suspended / Banned
Messages
7
Name
Hayden
Edit My Images
No
Hi there, im new to photography and need help with a lens dilemma.

I own a 200-400mm F4 VRii that I use on my D500 to shoot birds and wildlife. Ive recently been offered a nikon 300 f2.8 VR1 with a TC20e iii for $1300 (Canadian).

I dont really have the budget to buy the new lens right now so I was wondering if I should stick with the 200-400mm F4 VRii or sell it and upgrade to the 300 2.8 VR1

I have a upcoming trip to Costa Rica and was wondering which one would be the better option to bring. Especially with light and weight being a big factor

Thanks for help in advance
 
HaydenLB said:
Hi there, im new to photography and need help with a lens dilemma.

I own a 200-400mm F4 VRii that I use on my D500 to shoot birds and wildlife. Ive recently been offered a nikon 300 f2.8 VR1 with a TC20e iii for $1300 (Canadian).

I dont really have the budget to buy the new lens right now so I was wondering if I should stick with the 200-400mm F4 VRii or sell it and upgrade to the 300 2.8 VR1

I have a upcoming trip to Costa Rica and was wondering which one would be the better option to bring. Especially with light and weight being a big factor

Thanks for help in advance
Click to expand...
If no one can come up with any first hand experiences, I would do a google on photographing in Costa Rica. Even places that sell photo tours might have some advice on lens choice. I think Glen Bartley, Steve Perry and Petr Bambousek all have had videos/articles where they discuss kit for Costa Rica and rain forests

Glenn Bartley Nature Photography - Bird Photos and Workshops

Bird photography, Instructional Photo Workshops and E-Book Guides by Glenn Bartley. Specializing in images from Canada and the tropics of South America
www.glennbartley.com

Backcountry Gallery

Wildlife Photography By Steve Perry
backcountrygallery.com

Petr Bambousek Wildlife Photography | Petr Bambousek | Wildlife Photography

fotografie, photography, wildlife, tropy, kolibÅÃk, focenÃ, photo, foto, canon, eos, 6d, full frame, zrcadlovka, zvÃÅata, zvÃÅat, objektiv, objektivy, maskovánÃ, photoshop, elements, lightroom
www.sulasula.com www.sulasula.com

There is a members forum at Back Country gallery, where there is a fair amount of chatter about photographing in Costa Rica

I haven't paid much attention, as I have no interest in going to Costa Rica but I am aware of them discussing low light levels being a problem and people not being able to use their first choice of lens because of it not being fast enough.

But the 200-400 isn't exactly a slow lens at f4 for this focal length, and it's a lot more practical in possibly wet conditions than changing out the TC on the 300mm to get f2/8 and of course the 300mm + TC is going to bring it down to f5.6, so it is going to be less useful than the 200-400 in terms of light gathering power.

As an aside, I wouldn't like to take newly bought equipment on a special trip.

But I would ignore all my advice other than checking out the links I'v suggested :-)
 
Costa Rica has many different places and they are not all dimly lit rain forest. I was there last year and would go for the zoom based on where we went. Cannot comment on the quality of lenses as I have never used Nikon. There are also plenty of opportunities for frogs, snakes etc so not sure what else you are taking.
Happy to answer any questions but enjoy your trip
 
HaydenLB said:
I dont really have the budget to buy the new lens right now...
Click to expand...
"Never fix what ain't broke", is always good advice.

In any case, I wouldn't give up the zoom facility for a single stop difference.
 
myotis said:
If no one can come up with any first hand experiences, I would do a google on photographing in Costa Rica. Even places that sell photo tours might have some advice on lens choice. I think Glen Bartley, Steve Perry and Petr Bambousek all have had videos/articles where they discuss kit for Costa Rica and rain forests

Glenn Bartley Nature Photography - Bird Photos and Workshops

Bird photography, Instructional Photo Workshops and E-Book Guides by Glenn Bartley. Specializing in images from Canada and the tropics of South America
www.glennbartley.com

Backcountry Gallery

Wildlife Photography By Steve Perry
backcountrygallery.com

Petr Bambousek Wildlife Photography | Petr Bambousek | Wildlife Photography

fotografie, photography, wildlife, tropy, kolibÅÃk, focenÃ, photo, foto, canon, eos, 6d, full frame, zrcadlovka, zvÃÅata, zvÃÅat, objektiv, objektivy, maskovánÃ, photoshop, elements, lightroom
www.sulasula.com www.sulasula.com

There is a members forum at Back Country gallery, where there is a fair amount of chatter about photographing in Costa Rica

I haven't paid much attention, as I have no interest in going to Costa Rica but I am aware of them discussing low light levels being a problem and people not being able to use their first choice of lens because of it not being fast enough.

But the 200-400 isn't exactly a slow lens at f4 for this focal length, and it's a lot more practical in possibly wet conditions than changing out the TC on the 300mm to get f2/8 and of course the 300mm + TC is going to bring it down to f5.6, so it is going to be less useful than the 200-400 in terms of light gathering power.

As an aside, I wouldn't like to take newly bought equipment on a special trip.

But I would ignore all my advice other than checking out the links I'v suggested :)
Click to expand...
Thats a good point about the TC's in the wet conditions that I didnt think about. Ill definitely check those links out. Thank you
 
nc_killie said:
Costa Rica has many different places and they are not all dimly lit rain forest. I was there last year and would go for the zoom based on where we went. Cannot comment on the quality of lenses as I have never used Nikon. There are also plenty of opportunities for frogs, snakes etc so not sure what else you are taking.
Happy to answer any questions but enjoy your trip
Click to expand...
I will be going all over including Tortuguero, the Monteverde Cloud Forest and to Corcovado mainly. Im looking at grabbing a few shorter focal length lenses to bring with me. If you have any recommendations on focal lengths or on anything id be grateful. Thank you
 
AndrewFlannigan said:
"Never fix what ain't broke", is always good advice.

In any case, I wouldn't give up the zoom facility for a single stop difference.
Click to expand...
Thats is true and I dont want to sell the 200-400mm if there isn't much of a benefit to the 300 2.8 anyways. Thank you
 
HaydenLB said:
I will be going all over including Tortuguero, the Monteverde Cloud Forest and to Corcovado mainly. Im looking at grabbing a few shorter focal length lenses to bring with me. If you have any recommendations on focal lengths or on anything id be grateful. Thank you
Click to expand...
I am mainly into wildlife, especially birds, so most photos were taken with a 150-400 (micro4/3). You do not want to be changing lenses in many of the places so a zoom would be preferred. You may want to try borrowing / renting another body / lenses, cheaper than going to CR again!!
We did not go to all the places you mention but you will have a best, enjoy & I look forward to seeing some photos!
 
When I'm faced with similar situations I almost always choose the prime (400/2.8) + TC's (1.4x/2x); simply because it can do something the zoom can't... f/2.8. It's also going to be sharper when used w/o a TC, and probably about equally as sharp with them (at lest the 1.4x). Keep in mind neither lens is as fast as advertised, but the prime is typically closer (T/3.2 vs T/5 in this case); and that adds a little more advantage. Plus the bare 300 is a bit lighter/smaller in this comparison.

That said, I already have the lens/TC's, and that makes all the difference. Are there some differences/benefits; IMO yes. Are those differences worth a significant amount of money, IMO *no. These kinds of "upgrades" almost always lead to buyer remorse; or an "oh well" at best.

(*if money is a concern)

When it comes to seals and changing lenses I'm not usually concerned much about rain or snow; I am concerned about dust/salt/sand.
 
Last edited:
nc_killie said:
I am mainly into wildlife, especially birds, so most photos were taken with a 150-400 (micro4/3). You do not want to be changing lenses in many of the places so a zoom would be preferred. You may want to try borrowing / renting another body / lenses, cheaper than going to CR again!!
We did not go to all the places you mention but you will have a best, enjoy & I look forward to seeing some photos!
Click to expand...
I have my old D7100 so ill probably bring that and some shorter lenses i have. Hopefully I get some photos worth sharing
 
sk66 said:
When I'm faced with similar situations I almost always choose the prime (400/2.8) + TC's (1.4x/2x); simply because it can do something the zoom can't... f/2.8. It's also going to be sharper when used w/o a TC, and probably about equally as sharp with them (at lest the 1.4x). Keep in mind neither lens is as fast as advertised, but the prime is typically closer (T/3.2 vs T/5 in this case); and that adds a little more advantage. Plus the bare 300 is a bit lighter/smaller in this comparison.

That said, I already have the lens/TC's, and that makes all the difference. Are there some differences/benefits; IMO yes. Are those differences worth a significant amount of money, IMO *no. These kinds of "upgrades" almost always lead to buyer remorse; or an "oh well" at best.

(*if money is a concern)

When it comes to seals and changing lenses I'm not usually concerned much about rain or snow; I am concerned about dust/salt/sand.
Click to expand...
Yes im definitely worried about switching and regretting the decision. Like you said without already owning all the TC's it might just be a better idea to keep the zoom for now. Thanks you
 
If your 200-400 VR2 does everything you want it to do, and you are 100% satisfied with the overall performance. I would keep it. It's a versatile range.

I nearly did get one as I wanted something with a brighter aperture than my 200-500/5.6 and feeling that my newly re-calibrated 80-400 was performing better than the 200-500. Then I read about sample variation and inconsistent compatibility with teleconverters. In the end I got the 500/4 E (at much higher cost). On the D500 the longer end of 200-400 should be more than adequate for CR (I've done 3 trips there), I felt the 500 was just too long so it is now used more on the D850/Z8 (and when I do that the D500 is joined with my 70-200).

The 300 does have a great reputation, and in my shoes 'if the price was right'. But as others say...if it's not broken...
 
If your looking for actual camera lens photo comparisons the site I use is “ juza.com” it’s a Italian site with a English language section and you just do a search entering the camera and lens and or t.c combo .. it does show what’s possible with each of your choices . All you have to do is emulate it
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top