Nikkor 200/2 + 1.4 TCII vs 300/2.8vr

Discussion in 'Lens Lust' started by Nik Zinoviev, Sep 18, 2008.

  1. Has anyone done or seen someone do a test comparing Nikkor 200/2 + 1.4 TCII versus 300/2.8vr?

    I realize that we are talking about different focal lengths. However leaving this argument aside for a second, I am interested to know if there's any noticable difference in the picture quality and focusing speed between these two.
     
  2. I remember this exact question being posed before. I can't help you, as I have neither lens, but I bet someone can direct you to that thread.
     
  3. rich_h

    rich_h

    113
    Oct 9, 2007
    Colorado
    I debated this for a while and compared them. I didn't see much difference wide open between the 200/TC14 and the 300/2.8. For me, moving to FX made the decision. The 200MM focal length was very useful on DX but is just too short for me on FX. As a result, I went with the 300.

    I have found a noticable difference between the 300+TC 14E vs the 200+TC20E. The 300 is sharper wide open and focuses faster.
     
  4. I shoot both and can tell you the AF speed/accuracy is the same on the D300/D2x.
    On the D3 the naked 300 f2.8 VR is quicker to AF over the 200 f2 VR/1.4x combo.
    IQ with either set-up/body is virtually identical. :biggrin:
     
  5. I'm picking up my 200mm F/2 VR from Nikon tomorrow. For some reason it took them a month to fix, just for a calibration! Anyways, my 200mm f/2 better be sharper than a surgical razor when I get it back. I'm thinking of selling it now though.
     
  6. Thanks everyone! I am inclining towards going for 300VR.
     
  7. RichNY

    RichNY Guest

    The 200/2 and 400/2.8 would make a nice addition to your 600 if you don't need to handhold more than a 200 with 1.7xTC.
     
  8. I think it is a good option, but it will require more investment :) I will give it some thought.