Lens Size Comparison & 300mm VR f/2.8

Discussion in 'Lens Lust' started by bravocharlie, May 25, 2005.

  1. I have spent considerable time deciding on the 300mm VR f/2.8 lens. One of my primary concerns was size and hand holdability. Lacking on any of the forums was a comparison photo showing side by side the difference in size. Below is a photo that hopefully will help some with their decision. In summary, the 300mm VR lens is very hand holdable and I'm pleased with my decision.

    [​IMG]

    300mm VR f/2.8 on D2x
    [​IMG]
     
  2. Brew

    Brew Guest

    Holy smokers look at the size of that 500 :shock: :shock: :shock:
     
  3. GeeJay

    GeeJay

    Jan 26, 2005
    Florida
    THanks for these comparison pictures... had no idea the 500 was THAT BIG :!:

    Would you feel comfortable handholding the 300VR most of the time or would you just do it on occasions when convenient... and would you rather have it on a tripod? I'm interested in it for birding but mainly to handhold with the D2X..

    Also have you found a good case for it that would hold your camera attached to the 300VR?

    Thanks and best to you,
    Gaye
     
  4. One of the primary reasons I chose the 300mm VR over the 200-400mm VR was because of its size and balance. The 300mm VR lens is perfectly balanced (i.e. the weight isn't as forward as it is on the 200-400mm VR). Therefore, it is very easy to handhold.

    Until you get something in your hands it's hard to read specs and try to visualize how big or small something is. In this case, the 300mm on the D2x looks good, feels good, and is very manageable. Frankly, it is not a whole lot longer than the 70-200mm VR; it is however larger in diameter.

    As for the case:

    First, the case that comes with the lens (CL-L1) is well designed and the lens fits like a glove either with the hood on or reversed.

    Second, and to answer your question, attached to the D2x with the hood on (not reversed) fits like a glove in the CL-L2 case (not included, I already owned one).

    Third, I mounted the 300mm VR to the Wimberley Side Kick. Because of the distance between the camera body and the ball head (not as long as the 500mm) vertical panning is limited. However, by elminating the Side Kick and mounting the lens directly to the ballhead, it is smooth as silk and not too bulky or cumbersome.

    This lens and camera body combination in my opinion is a clear winner. And, as usual Mr. Reznick was right again.
     
  5. Steve S

    Steve S

    Feb 1, 2005
    SE Florida
    Great size comparison

    That 500 really does dwarf all the rest of them. I'm still looking for that elusive used 500 f4 AFS II, but still no luck so far. Thanks for those links, btw!
     
  6. jkamphof

    jkamphof Guest

    Doh....I salivated all over my keyboard!!!

    Geez, that's a sweet selection of lenses there and the 500 is truly a monster.....One day......one day ;)
     
  7. GeeJay

    GeeJay

    Jan 26, 2005
    Florida
    Hi Charlie,

    I really appreciate the time you took to answer some of my questions. You settled some of the issues that have been bothering me about the lens/camera/case combo.. Thanks very much.

    Best to you,

    Gaye
     
Loading...
Similar Threads Forum Date
Lens Lust comes in all sizes Lens Lust Nov 19, 2013
New Nikkor 24-85 mm VR Lens Size Comparison Lens Lust Jul 2, 2012
135 f2 DC vs. 200 f2 LENS SIZE Lens Lust Oct 25, 2011
Question - 400/2.8 lens hood size Lens Lust Oct 11, 2011
Lens size comparison pictures Lens Lust Jan 20, 2009