Nikkor 300mm f/4

Scuderia1

I was hoping for some friendly advice..

I recently traded in a Nikkor 18-300mm to Adorama because I upgraded from a D5100 to a FF body.

My goal was to purchase the 300mm f/4. I talked to multiple sales reps at Adorama who insisted the gray market version of this lens + 3 year Mack warranty was the best option when compared to the Nikon USA version of the lens. I took their advice. I am still within the 30 day window where I can return the lens.. I was hoping for some guidance. Was this a smart move? Why or why not?

I don't plan on re selling the lens even if a VR version comes out UNLESS the optics take a step forward. So I'm not overly concerned about resale value. I also figure I can pay for an upgraded collar with the money I'm saving..

PB_PM

Personally I wouldn't buy a gray market lens, since Nikon can refuse to service them.

Msmoto

The savings is about 17% so I can see how this is attractive. 

One can also look at a Nikon refurbished lens, which I have been told is actually equal to or better than a new one as it is calibrated, fully refurbished in all respects.  It would be of course serviced by Nikon in the future. And the money is less than an imported (gray market) lens.

PB_PM

Good point Msmoto. I think my 300mm F4 focuses more accurately than when it was new, since I dropped it and had it repaired (for all intensive purposes it was refurbished, due to the damage) by Nikon.

shawnino

Question re: refurbished glass (with bodies, age/shutter count fairly easy to discern): 

I have this rather annoying thing on some Nikkor lenses, a number 10 inside a circle of arrows. I take the symbol to mean it's not warrantied for 10 yr., but should last that long or longer. Before buying say, refurb AF-D glass, is there an easy way to tell within a year or so how old it is (serial numbers? Mini style differences?)? Or does the clock "restart" after refurb anyway so that's moot? 

I'm thinking the 10 yr. thing is conservative. I've seen glass in the field older than I am. But I've been reluctant to consider refurb copies of lenses that haven't been updated in a very long time. Answers? Opinions?

PB_PM

The symbol has nothing to do with the 5 year warranty on Nikkor lenses, it has to do with the recyclable materials in the lens.

BTW: The original factory warranty only applies to the original owner. Referbs tend to have their own warranty, you'd have to check with Nikon to find out how long that lasts.

shawnino

The symbol has nothing to do with the 5 year warranty on Nikkor lenses, it has to do with the recyclable materials in the lens.

So the literal age of refurb glass, in and of itself, should not matter?

Thanks

Msmoto

For serial numbers and the range of dates for manufacture of most Nikkor lenses:

http://www.photosynthesis.co.nz/nikon/serialno.html

shawnino

For serial numbers and the range of dates for manufacture of most Nikkor lenses:

http://www.photosynthesis.co.nz/nikon/serialno.html

That's brilliant. Thank you.

Fozzyffp

I bought a refurbished camera/kit lens from adorama. the nikon warrenty on each part was only 90 days from the sale. could you add the mack warrenty to the refurb?

tcole1983

I got my 300 F4 used in like new condition.  Been great so far.  Gray market the thing I would be most afraid of is not being able to get it repaired.  I can do without a warranty, but not without being able to get it fixed if something happens. 

adamz

AFAIK once You get the grey market lens from either B&H or Adorama, than if something happens within the warranty period they will help You. After the warranty ends, You surely can find 3rd party service centers if sth will happen to the lens.

adamz

as for the lens collar , it's a must IMHO. had this lens with both original and kirk photo collar and the second was much sturdier.

PB_PM

adamz that sounds like a great idea, but remember that Nikon USA is no longer providing parts to third party repair centres, maybe not such a good idea.

Scuderia1

Thank you everyone for the advice.

I really, really pride myself on taking care of equipment. But You never know what could happen down the line. I think I'm going to return the gray market and pay the extra $200 for the Nikon USA version. I don't think I could live with not being able to get it repaired if something would go wrong.

Thanks again!

Golf007sd

Thank you everyone for the advice.

I really, really pride myself on taking care of equipment. But You never know what could happen down the line. I think I'm going to return the gray market and pay the extra $200 for the Nikon USA version. I don't think I could live with not being able to get it repaired if something would go wrong.

Thanks again!

+1

kyoshinikon

All based on price.... I got a used 300mm f/2.8 manual focus for $300... At that price who cares about a warranty!

Also I warn you do NOT use a 3rd party repair center....  I had to take my 1st 17-35mm in for a second repair and not wanting to pay the $400ish I went to a 3rd party guy in pasedena. (the fix was a stiff zoom) He messed up my zoom aperture and AF and gave it back to me saying that it was too hard to fix didn't even get y deposit back... It was so messed up I just got another 17-35mm off ebay...  

Tabazan

Er, a 300 (Fx) prime to replace a 18-300 (Dx) ?

Why not a Sigma zoom instead ? In that price (and quality) range Sigma zooms are quite competitive ... if Q.C. has done its work.

Scuderia1

Good question, and thank you for asking!  I originally had a D5100 with kit lens (18-55mm) and 35mm f/1.8g.  I really enjoy hiking and outdoors.. and wanted to photograph deer that live in a park near me.  I purchased the 18-300mm in hopes of a "walk around lens."  Something that never needed to come off.  And I was pleased with the purchase.  For me, I noticed that most of my pictures were shot at the telephoto range (300mm).  I enjoy shooting wild life and attended a European racing event.  Again, all photos mainly shot at 300mm.  As a result, when I upgraded from DX to FX body: I am more in need of a tack sharp lens at telephoto length for what I am currently photographing: wild life and motorsport.  

I appreciate your suggestion and will definitely keep it in mind if I develop the need for a zoom.  But currently, I do not require one.  I also plan to purchase Kirk Collar and Nikon TC 1.4x

ecanedo

Any News (rumors) about the AFS 300 f/4D replacment?

shawnino

This is one of those lenses where the rumours of replacement seem constant, but, so far, nothing's firmed up.

The 200mm f/4 Micro comes to mind as another example.

If Nikon does another lens-only rebate this winter, and there's an outsized rebate on any lens, that'll be the tipoff: last March is was the 80-400, and, sure enough...

Nik0n2011

hello

i'm absolutely horny on getting the 300f4 that i sold my 70-300 1 month ago.

i'm doing a lot of internet research to understand the current lens and the possible upcoming update.

might the successor be pure magic ?

i've readed issues about the actual model :
1- bad collar (alternative +150$)
2- back element open/exposed
3- no vr
4- outdated (if you look at the features over the 100mm+ at nikon website...
http://www.nikonusa.com/en/Nikon-Products/Camera-Lenses/All-Lenses/index.page
... you will notice that of the last 12/13 lenses, from 105 micro to 800mm,
there are 2 actual lenses that need an update YESTERDAY (not even now or soon)
in facts they should/will add N(nano coating) and perhaps VR, the latest generation VR (just see how amazing it is on the fresh 70-200f4 on youtube videos)

having looked at the latest 2 patents
where it has a DOE (diffractive optical element)
http://nikonrumors.com/2013/09/12/another-nikon-patent-for-a-300mm-f4-lens-with-diffractive-optical-element-doe.aspx/

you can also see that there's a -3cm shorter in length
i have no idea about the weight*
* however the latest 18-35 and 70-200f4 have been produced amazingly light (new tech-tecnique-materials)


having said all this i would also expect a sensible/painful increase in price
some said +200$ i would guess up over the 2000$(final price, over it)

if such an amazing lens will be produced
and IF it keeps the same amazing IQ (i won't say better)
i'd expect to cost half the price of the 300 2.8, not really 1/4th / 5th

also it was introduced in 2000-1 (verify)
the other OLD lens over 105mm is the 200 f4 Micro from 1993!(?)
but this market is even smaller (long expensive macro)

now if it is 1st january 2014 or 31 december 2016 i dont know
but if something needs a refresh, this is one of the highly suspected next processed guys.



im gonna save for it, hopefully it wont cost too much and i won't have to wait more than 12 months for it
however here in Finland from now(warm winter) to the next 3-4 months, outside is terrible and theres a lot of snow, hope i can be ready for the spring.

shawnino

I think you've got it.

The easy comparison is:
current 300 => new 300 (if and when it shows)
with
old 80-400 => new 80-400

What might make this different is that whilst opinions were quite split in re: the old 80-400 (some thought it was great; others groused that it sucked in air, was spotty with teleconverters, had slow AF...), for what it is, I know very few people who complain about the existing f/4. IQ's great, plays nicely with at least the 1.4x TC, etc.

From a features point of view, I haven't heard a single consistent complaint about the 80-400. The grumpiness is from people (like me) who think it's priced too high for most amateurs and that pros will look elsewhere--but that's just my opinion. I'm sure the new 300 f/4 will be stuffed full of ED and aspherical glass, have great VR, and so on, but I agree: I think its price will nearly double.

BTW it's been some years but the most interesting photo shop I've ever been in was near the Kaisaniemi (sp?) metro stop in Helsinki. Forgotten the name, but it was long. Down the street from Molly Malone's, and if you get to that god-awful Hesburger you've gone too far. (If you're from Turku, where I'm told people cherish Hesburger, don't take that personally.)

henrik1963

Around here the 300 F4 is 1/4 of the price of the 300 F2.8. A new 300 F4 will likely be 1/2 of a 300 F2.8. Would you pay that much more for an updater version? I would not. Image quality is very good on the current one.

As to gray imports - if Adorama sells a special insurance they must know how you get your lens serviced? Has anyone had any problems with lenses from Adorama that could not be fixed?

PB_PM

I agree with others here, an updated 300mm F4 with VR would likely cost $3,000. Unless you desperately need VR, the current version is very good.

Juergen

I agree with others here, an updated 300mm F4 with VR would likely cost $3,000. Unless you desperately need VR, the current version is very good.

Would you guys please not talk Nikon into such high prices???? :-)
They are reading this forum.
Jürgen