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

funtagraph

@Photobug, I didn't imply you said "all zoom lens". And please, man, don't ever try to tell me what I need to do or where I should go to - I don't do that to you and I expect the same.

Vipmediastar_JZ

So i decided to chat with Nikon USA. I asked them about the 2.8 light gathering of the F4 lens and the chat guru said that it was true.

He claims "it has to do with the construction of the lens. lens elements effectively compensate CA and ghosting when combined with ordinary glass lens elements"

I have a copy of the chat or go to nikon usa select the lens and start a chat and ask if the f4 lens collects light at 2.8 if you get somebody that doesn't know ask them to invesigate.

Don't kill the messenger.

funtagraph

Yeah, it's kind of funny - the metering between 70-200 + converter and 300/4 without was the same time at the same aperture. So, I had reason to conclude "no, it's not collecting more light" because I couldn't see the data. But this weekend I was very often surprised about unexpectedly short shutter times without or with TC. It's really made for handheld shooting and I'm looking forward to gather more experience

Photobug

Some one is getting way to close to "personal attacks". Enough said.

jimo

My 300mm arrived last Monday and I have been itching to use it. Today it was clear and sunny at my house so I grab my camera and took off. After getting to the beach I found out that I was still very foggy out but I wanted to test the new glass out. In the dark fog it's slow to focus but manages well enough. I really wanted to see how it would preformed with my TC-20E III. I thought that it did OK for shooting in the fog.

The below photo was taken with just the AF-S NIKKOR 300mm f/4E PF ED VR:



This was taken with the AF-S NIKKOR 300mm F/4E PF ED VR and a TC-20E III

dissent

Looks good to me Jim. Congrats on the lens.

Jetranger

The 300/2.8VR is my most used lens, so I know how much people will want this lighter version. It lets in half the light, so it should be half the weight and half the size. If you want to travel light, this would be a great choice I would think, but I have never seen one. I would be interested in knowing how they functioned with the TCs.

4thebirds

My 300mm arrived last Monday and I have been itching to use it. Today it was clear and sunny at my house so I grab my camera and took off. After getting to the beach I found out that I was still very foggy out but I wanted to test the new glass out. In the dark fog it's slow to focus but manages well enough. I really wanted to see how it would preformed with my TC-20E III. I thought that it did OK for shooting in the fog.

The below photo was taken with just the AF-S NIKKOR 300mm f/4E PF ED VR:

This was taken with the AF-S NIKKOR 300mm F/4E PF ED VR and a TC-20E III


jimo,
That photo of the gull looks pretty good considering it was wide open with a 2X teleconverter... Hand held? VR on or off? Thanks for sharing, and it would be great to see more examples.
Dave

jimo

Dave:

Yes it was hand held with VR ON and it was a dark and very foggy morning too.

4thebirds

Hey,
Has anyone heard any details about new shipments for this lens? Am I right that only a tiny number were shipped around the officially announced release date, and now it seems back-ordered worldwide with of course ZERO explanation from Nikon. Nikon should tell us "what's going on," IMHO. They HAD to know they'd get a few orders for this.
Dave

Photobug

In my last communication with B&H in NYC, they had not confirmation date on delivery and shipping to customers. It would not surprise me if this is on major back order for months once the testing and reviews are published.

Vipmediastar_JZ

The main blog on this site mentioned a defect. I dont remember what it was but its there. Could explain the back order. Also a camera and lens rental company received their first lens off centered.

funtagraph

@Vipmediastar please don't make it look worse than it might be. Roger wrote of one copy they got first and that was indeed decenterred, while the second was okay. And even the decenterred one was a great performer in the center and up to the resolution number of it's predecessor. So, let's not create the next "issue" before more people report in. I guess you didn't mean it that way, I just hesitate to become part of the misinformation side of the internet.

As I wrote, I'm not entirely happy with the lens but until one proves me right I put all the "not as sharp as expected" shots on my lack of technique with long FL, maybe too high expectations. It's a kind of stupid comparison but I do miss the "Wow" I had when I saw the Sigma Art lenses first.

What I can say, sometimes are Newton rings visible in blurred lights. Kind of a strange aberration.

BVS

The review on Camera Labs indicated a problem with the VR when used between certain shutter speeds. Says he tested two copies and both had the issue:

http://cameralabs.com/reviews/Nikon_Nikkor_AF-S_300mm_f4E_PF_ED_VR/

funtagraph

@BVS thanks for pointing that link. Now, mine appears to be the third copy with the same behavior. That explains a lot…

Not so nice for this price.

Now I look even more forward to getting the Sigma 150-600 Sports. I reordered it after I got the 300/4E PF

Vipmediastar_JZ

@funtagraph I'm actually looking forward to getting that lens and no I didnt mean it like it's perceived. I replied to the inquiry of the possible back order.

Now that I have had my coffee here is the link http://nikonrumors.com/2015/02/14/weekly-nikon-news-flash-302.aspx/

and a shorcut to the text

VR issues reported with the new Nikkor 300mm f/4E PF lens: some could not get sharp images with shutter speeds in the range of 1/200s and 1/160s when VR is on. This could be an isolated incident or a defective batch. More information available here and here.

Read more on NikonRumors.com: http://nikonrumors.com/2015/02/14/weekly-nikon-news-flash-302.aspx/#ixzz3SxeZ3zSc

MaxBerlin

A friend of mine sent me an interior shot done with the 300 pf that included a high contrast transition with a window. While the lens was very sharp I did see CA in that transition area @ f5.6 if I recall. I am trying to get the file again. This would be very troublesome for birding as those images are often high contrast and while the color of fringe is easy to remove the disturbed pixels always leave trails.

manhattanboy

VR issues reported with the new Nikkor 300mm f/4E PF lens: some could not get sharp images with shutter speeds in the range of 1/200s and 1/160s when VR is on. This could be an isolated incident or a defective batch. More information available here and here.

The new lens is sharp, but it depends on what you mean by sharp.
The old 300f4 lens at >1/1500 shutter speed is very sharp and the new lens probably is too, I just haven't tested it yet at those shutter speeds. VR only does so much... it is essentially correcting for blurred focus from movement. It would be better to have no blurring to begin with, hence higher shutter speeds will likely produce better results. Anyone shooting this lens at less than 1/300 is really gambling that the VR will correct their movement. 1/300 is near my bottom for this lens and really is only used when there is no light. That may seem high for many of you, but I never let the old lens drop below 1/1500 regardless of light as the pictures would be blurry, so the VR addition is a major improvement IMHO.

Regardless of this VR controversy, what is nice, is the size/weight!!!!!!! The VR kicking on and allowing one to drop the shutter speed to say 1/500 in dim light is just a bonus IMHO and I will take that trade off over increased ISO any day.

MaxBerlin

I got the file and made this crop. There is about 4-6 pixels of CA shot at 5.6. It was on the very extreme edge of the frame so perhaps it is not an issue in the center of the frame. I'd be interested to see.

funtagraph

@Manhattanboy The VR "issue" would be less strange, if the shutter speed 1/60 wouldn't be better than 1/80 and up to 1/160. Of course, it's not as sharp as 1/800 or 1/160 without VR from a solid tripod (actually, that was the best from my current "VR bracketing")

But then, I tried the gorgeous VR of my 70-200/4 with TC17 @ 340 mm and it blew away the VR from this 300/4E PF. Altogether, the 70-200/4 + TC17II cost the same as the new 300. And the VR results with converter are better. Also, I don't see any newton rings in blurred highlights with the "conventional" zoom.

Of course, size and weight are outstanding. But I'd prefer a VR as good as the 70-200/4.

I'm looking forward to Nikon's reply.

@MaxBerlin Nikon's lenses are not very famous for highly corrected CA. Alright, some of the 6000+ $ range might be better but CA on the borders and only one stop down? I'm not too surprised...

MaxBerlin

Zeiss Apo tends to spoil one. I'd still like to see a high contrast center with the PF. A bird backlit against the sky ?

Photobug

Here is the message I got this afternoon from B&H on availability of this lens:
Thank you for contacting the E-Mail Sales Department at B&H Photo Video and Pro Audio.
I am sorry but I do not have any solid information for you on delivery dates or quantities. We have ordered but we do not know exactly how many we will actually get.
Please let us know if there is anything else we can assist you with.

Thank you for choosing B&H.

manhattanboy

Zeiss Apo tends to spoil one. I'd still like to see a high contrast center with the PF. A bird backlit against the sky ?

I'll try when I get time, maybe Friday. Having shot with the old 300f4, having any reduction in shutter speed is a pleasure. But I guess it depends where you're coming from...even a cheap motel looks good if you've been sleeping on hay
:-))

Dominique_R

I use the 70-200/2.8 VR II and the 200-400/4 VR. I just bought a 1.4x TC III. Aside from the Holy Trinity, I use the Zeiss 15/2.8, the sigma Art 50/1.4, the Nikkor 85/1.4, and the like. I still am at the D3S stage, although I recently bought a D810 to replace my trusty old D700.

Given the above and what I am used to in terms of IQ, do those of you who have tried the 300 PF think I should get one (I long for a lighter and smaller option than the 200-400), or am I likely to be disappointed by the IQ? Assuming of course the blur/shutter resonance issue is fixed, or I'm lucky and get a copy that's immune.

Thanks in advance for your thoughts.

Photobug

@Dominique_R - First welcome to NRF from another member.

You certainly have great glass and you raise an excellent question. I had set aside money for the 300mm F4 G and the RRS collar. When the new 300mm F4 PF was annouced I decided to wait until DxO, Popular Photography, and Nasim Mansurov @ photographylife.com reviews the new 300mm PF lens.

I have not owned or used the 200-400 zoom lens so can't answer your question about IQ and DR. Hopefully over the next few weeks DxO will publish their findings.

When you have time check out the review of the TC- 14 III and TC-14E II on photographylife.com. He tested it with the 400mm F2.8E FL, 70-200mm F2.8G VRII, 300mm F4D AF-S, and the 200-400 F4 G VR. The TC-14E III is on my list to buy.