Give me one reason....

Joined
Jan 13, 2013
Messages
10
Location
Toronto,Canada
to not pick myself up a Nikon 300/f4 AFS while on sale from my local shop??

I have read the sample threads on here, and would be adding it to the mix with my 24-70 sigma, 70-200vr2 nikon and 50 1.4d nikon.

Have flexibility of shooting it on a D90 or D700. I shoot primarily automotive with a passion for drag racing.

Thoughts ?
 
Joined
Jan 14, 2011
Messages
967
Location
Netherlands
Do you need more reach? Yes or no? If you don't I'd leave it there and save the $1200.- for something else.
 
Joined
Sep 6, 2006
Messages
2,476
Location
Lompoc, CA
I'll give about 1200 of them if you don't really need it. A TC-14 on the 70-200 is really good, more flexible and a whole lot cheaper.
 
Joined
Dec 16, 2012
Messages
573
Location
Louisville KY
may also consider an older 300 f4 AF (the original ED version), not unusual to see them under $400

focus is slower, and switching AF is a pain, but optics and build are great, it does a lot better than a TC on my 2.8 telephoto zoom, and fits into the budget nicely

Now if they ever add VR, I might decide it's worth the update
 
Joined
Mar 16, 2008
Messages
2,001
Location
Oregon
If money is no object. Get it. Otherwise, a 1.4 TC on your 70-200 will change it to an f/4 98-280mm lens.
 
Joined
Jan 13, 2013
Messages
10
Location
Toronto,Canada
Do you need more reach? Yes or no? If you don't I'd leave it there and save the $1200.- for something else.

I have wondered that myself sometimes. Sometimes I feel that a little more reach wouldnt hurt, also heard other folks say that when it comes to motorsports telephoto primes 'shoot differently' than zooms.

just wanted to see if anyone had any real world experience.
 
Joined
Apr 29, 2011
Messages
514
Location
The Netherlands
I'd save up and go for the new 80-400 VR, so you will have more difference in usability of your kit.

But, if the cash is burning a hole in your pocket...
 
Joined
Mar 14, 2009
Messages
2,303
Location
Cambria, CA
I would get it.....I did and never looked back. It's a fabulous lens, and if you do need/want that length (and can afford it) and don't mind the size and absence of VR, there is none better, IMHO. I always use it on a tripod so those issues are irrelevant to me.
 
Joined
Jan 13, 2013
Messages
10
Location
Toronto,Canada
may also consider an older 300 f4 AF (the original ED version), not unusual to see them under $400

focus is slower, and switching AF is a pain, but optics and build are great, it does a lot better than a TC on my 2.8 telephoto zoom, and fits into the budget nicely

Now if they ever add VR, I might decide it's worth the update

i have thought about this option as well but wondered how much slower the focus would be on the body drive vs the af-s when it comes to motorsports.

thanks for the suggestion!
 

Butlerkid

Cafe Ambassador
Administrator
Joined
Apr 8, 2008
Messages
24,753
Location
Rutledge, Tennessee
Real Name
Karen
But what about the 300/f4 compared to the 80-400 at 300mm??? Probably very little difference....
 
Joined
Dec 4, 2011
Messages
703
Location
Beachside!
Go for the 300! Just a great lens, and if you really need the 400 then you can add a TC later and keep that extra money in the pocket :smile:
Gary
 
Joined
Mar 15, 2009
Messages
7,507
Location
Los Angeles, CA
The only reason NOT to get it is if you want a 300 2.8 :wink:

I've had a 70-200 VRII + TC-14 & 17 and a 300/4. No contest, the 300/4 has better IQ, and faster to AF. It also balances better on the body than the 70-200 VRII with TC.
 
Joined
Jan 13, 2013
Messages
10
Location
Toronto,Canada
Go for the 300! Just a great lens, and if you really need the 400 then you can add a TC later and keep that extra money in the pocket :smile:
Gary

The only reason NOT to get it is if you want a 300 2.8 :wink:

I've had a 70-200 VRII + TC-14 & 17 and a 300/4. No contest, the 300/4 has better IQ, and faster to AF. It also balances better on the body than the 70-200 VRII with TC.

I think i might just go for it... the sale is only $70 bucks off, so I am going to squirrel some $$ away and pay cash. and at about 3x the price as awesome as the 2.8 would be, I think it would be cause for divorce lol.
 
Joined
Jan 13, 2008
Messages
5,331
Location
New Mexico
I'm a refurb., grey guy whenever possible....my last 2 were $899/$959 respectively.
For THAT price (under $1000) NOTHING touches the IQ at f4, even better at f5.6 Just sayin'


Handheld SOOC 100% crop :eek:
D8H_8836_zpsc11abfdb.gif
Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)
 

Latest threads

Links on this page may be to our affiliates. Sales through affiliate links may benefit this site.
Nikon Cafe is a fan site and not associated with Nikon Corporation.
Forum post reactions by Twemoji: https://github.com/twitter/twemoji
Forum GIFs powered by GIPHY: https://giphy.com/
Copyright © Amin Forums, LLC
Top Bottom