Nikon New AF-S NIKKOR 300mm f/4E PF ED VR

funtagraph

Just to put a little bit of sense against this "you need a collar" panic:

There are a couple of lenses heavier and nearly as long as the new 300/4 coming without any collar and I don't read much about broken mounts.
There are cameras like the D4/s or D800/E/810 with grip and load a weight of 1.4 kg - nearly double the lens weight. Forces are active in both directions, so even if the levers for the point of gravity might be shorter for the bodies or those other heavy lenses without collar, I wouldn't worry too much about "too much tension" on the mount. They are designed to withstand it. Mounting the camera/lens combination only with the collar means, this collar has to deal with the additional forces I'd eventually add by pushing buttons and turning wheels. I can' t avoid a little bit of additional force when handling the controls.

The collar for the 70-200/4 and this new 300/4 is the same RT-1, overpriced and useless in terms of more stability at least for the 70-200. That's because the mounting tube of the lens is made of plastic and is very flexible. I expect this new lightweight lens has the same issue. I bought that collar and tried the 70-200 with and without. The collar free pictures from a sturdy tripod/head always were sharper at least on a D800. The newer bodies do show less shutter vibration, therefore the collar won't do so bad like with D800. But still, "expensive and unnecessary accessory" remains my verdict.

So, to me the only reason using a collar with those two lenses is the easy switch from landscape to portrait orientation.

spraynpray

If you look at image 4 of 4 on the blog, you can see the halo effect as opposed to the normal starburst effect. -You pays your money and you takes your choice. If I were able to buy the new 300 I wouldn't be using it for landscapes so I wouldn't mind.

NSXTypeR

If you look at image 4 of 4 on the blog, you can see the halo effect as opposed to the normal starburst effect. -You pays your money and you takes your choice. If I were able to buy the new 300 I wouldn't be using it for landscapes so I wouldn't mind.

Are you talking about the one with the Chrysler building at night?

This might be one of my "reach" lenses- kind of like when applying to colleges. I don't need to go to Harvard, but it sure would be nice to get a diploma from there.

autofocus

Won't there be more stress on the lens mount if you mount the tripod to the lens. It seems the weight of camera is greater than the lens itself. If you try to balance the rig with the foot you may run into a problem with it being to close to the camera. I see all the posts about the weight of camera and battery mount being heavy. That seems like a lot of stress on the lens mount. I wouldn't mount my 24-70 to a tripod with a heavy camera hanging off of it if that were even possible.

Hammie

The documented weight of the new 300mm lens is equal to or less than all of the FX bodies. It is also less weight than the 14-24 and 24-70 2.8 lenses.

300mm Lens = 755g
14-24mm = 1000g
24-70mm = 900g

610 = 760g
750 = 750g
810 = 880g
D4S = 1180g

Not sure what the tripod mount would gain anyone.

Vipmediastar_JZ

@Hammie thanks for the post. I don't think my 14-24 is heavy and to me that is a good weight and the 300mm beign less heavy I'm already happy. The only lens I complain about is the 70-200 2.8 and that is 3.39 lb.

I know that 2.8 would probably be better or even the 200mm f2 but I like what this is offering. I almost got a 300mm ais for the DF but I'm glad I didnt.

Also, according to nikon they will update their software to better handle the halo effect.

Photobug

From my perspective, hand-holding a lens for a shot time is fine...hell I can hold my 300 2.8 for a few shots at a time, but for any long duration of shooting, say at a sporting event or anything that has to do with fast moving objects for a few hours, it is then that having a your lens on a tripod or monopod a God send. It is for these types of activities that I think a collar will come in to play be it this lens or any long focal length lens.

+1 @Golf007sd Totally agree.

spraynpray

Not sure what the tripod mount would gain anyone.

I don't honestly believe there would be a problem stressing the lens mount with any of the lenses you listed but there is the point that mounting the 300 by the camera body instead of the lens foot will mean more movement at the end of the lens if any vibration does occur.

haroldp

Canon's 'DO' lenses are fresnel and have been in use for about 8 years.

If someone gets around to it, I am intensely interested in a comparison of the new 300/4 and tc-14 eII or III with the 80-400G, both at f5.6 and 420 /400 mm respectively.

.... H

WestEndFoto

Cable release with mirror up will address that. The only thing left to worry about will be wind and seismic activity.

manhattanboy

This might be one of my "reach" lenses- kind of like when applying to colleges. I don't need to go to Harvard, but it sure would be nice to get a diploma from there.

At 300mm, this will definitely be a "reach" lens
Preparation H is overrated. For photography you need street smarts not book smarts.

Hammie

Not sure what the tripod mount would gain anyone.

I don't honestly believe there would be a problem stressing the lens mount with any of the lenses you listed but there is the point that mounting the 300 by the camera body instead of the lens foot will mean more movement at the end of the lens if any vibration does occur.

@spraynpray That makes sense. Thanks.

NSXTypeR

This might be one of my "reach" lenses- kind of like when applying to colleges. I don't need to go to Harvard, but it sure would be nice to get a diploma from there.

At 300mm, this will definitely be a "reach" lens
Preparation H is overrated. For photography you need street smarts not book smarts.

Haha, I meant that it would be a reach for me financially, but I get what you mean too.

Photobug

Not sure what the tripod mount would gain anyone.

I don't honestly believe there would be a problem stressing the lens mount with any of the lenses you listed but there is the point that mounting the 300 by the camera body instead of the lens foot will mean more movement at the end of the lens if any vibration does occur.

+1 on vibration...that is why I am buying a lens collar.
I just don't feel comfortable mounting the camera to the tripod and having that lens stick out there with no support. Yes it's 3" shorter than the old 300mm F4 and yes it's much lighter, but it's more secure when you mounted it on a tripod. I agree with all those that say you can hold this lens on a FX or DX camera but if your shooting lots of BIF or sports you are going to want to use a tripod. And IMHO you need a lens collar...one that is secure unlike the Nikon RT-1 which has a bad reputation for allowing vibration to pass to the DSLR.

Msmoto

I suspect that if one mounts the body to a tripod, then attaches the lens with it hanging out the front, even the slightest bump on the lens could either tear out the tripod mount on the camera body or damage the lens mount severely. These things are not designed for that particular type of stress. Additionally, if damage such as described above occurred, Nikon would no doubt deny warranty coverage...

We have seen lens mounts fall off with far less stress...or at least this has been reported on the forum.

Golf007sd

Golf007sd

Our friends over at Photographylife had some sample images in high resolution taken with this lens.

I have placed them some here that I though are worthy of examination. Moreover, there are more at this link on my Flicker account: Nikon 300 F4 high resolution link.


Larger image size.


Larger image size.


Larger image size


Larger image size.


Larger image size

spraynpray

FWIW: The 70-300VR is the same weight as the 300/4, had no tripod foot option and when zoomed out to 300 was a lot longer than the 300/4 but although I never heard of one breaking the lens mount (even on a plastic bodied camera), I never liked using it mounted by the tripod mount on the camera body. That may even have contributed to it's apparent lack of sharpness at over 240mm. The little 200 f4 is much better for a tripod mount.

Snowleopard

This is what I am talking about. That is not a star burst like I would get from every other one of the Nikon lenses I own...

Msmoto

@Snowleopard

Do we get to see the image? It shows it is "Protected by Owner" on my screen.

As to this new lens.... looks to be very impressive....and unless one absolutely needs the extra f/stop should be preferred over the 2.8, especially as price is concerned. And, can go to 420mm f/5.6 with a TC-14EIII.

However, I am still waiting for the 200mm f/2 Fluorite Nikkor to be announced.

haroldp

Perhaps Nikon's plan to use software to eliminate flare, is to have the images protected and undisplayable.

... H

proudgeek

I have to say, when I think about lugging my 300 f/2.8 (and other gear) through the Costa Rican rainforest and possibly to Africa next year this lens looks VERY attractive. My only concern is the loss of that extra stop.

Golf007sd

@proudgeek: I agree. Heading to Europe in a few weeks and choosing which lens to take 200/f2 or 300/2.8 in order to save the weight. Thank God a vey close friend is travel with me, which has almost every lens, in addition to other goodies like me; thus, I only have to bring one. It is for this weight, size savings and the ability to use all of my 77mm filters that make this lens VERY attractive for me as well. Here I was thinking I had was done buying Gold Boxes....arrrrr :P

@Msmoto: hope you are saving your pennies, if and when the new 200/F2 comes out, it will put a nice ding in the pocket book. I know for a fact that the current model is just STUNNING, moreover, their are some good deals to be found out their. I just love mine and have not regret the purchase one bit.

proudgeek

I think this is a monster win for Nikon. Frankly, given the cost of the 80-400 when it was revamped, I'm pleasantly surprised that it came in at $2,000.

WestEndFoto

I see a future path here for Nikon. Professional grade lenses will have florite elements and enthusiast grade lenses will have phase fresnel elements.