Nikon 300mm F4 IF ED.

Pistnbroke

I have an option on this lens ..the original F4 with the crackle finish...has anyone used one on a digital camera and with what results particularly wide open.
Thanks in advance

PB_PM

Two words, slowish AF. Sharpness is good for a lens of that vintage, as expected for a lens of that class.

Pistnbroke

So do I deduce PB-PM that you have no actual experience of the lens ?

framer

The 300 f/4 AFS old model would be a great choice. Faster focus, IMHO sharper than the new version and I've seen used around $600 in nice condition. I'd pass on the older screw AFD lens.

Focus speed dependent on the body that you use it on. F5 could be the fastest. Many newer low end bodies can't AF with that lens.

framer

Pistnbroke

Well I managed to get the older non AF-S for about $260 so I will let you know how it compares with the sigma 300 f4

jdb

Looks like you already purchased it, so you probably don't need another opinion on it. However, I did purchase this lens in the late 1990's and used for about 15 years. It is sharp, but the auto-focus is very slow.

heartyfisher

So pistnbroke why did you get that ol nikkor 300 f4 ? just curious... I think many of us NAS over the PF.. just wondering... wouldnt a 55-300vr or even the new 70-300 dx vr do much much better ?

Pistnbroke

Both the DX zooms you mention are rubbish finishing being useful at about 200mm.
I have the Tam 150-600 but its too heavy for the wife who loved her Tok 400F5.6.
The sigma 400 5.6 was better and the Sigma 300 f4 blew both of them away so I am just trying the Nikon 300 f4 to see if it is better than the Sigma. Hogan says the IQ is the same as the AF-S version . I seem to be able to buy and sell these lenses and make a profit .If the Sigma 300mm (£112) is better or equal to the Nikon 300 (£205) I shall sell the Nikon (for £299). We just play at bird photography when on holiday so I am not spending big $$$ but I would like a Tam G2
The later bodies drive the screw faster than the old models so slow focus is not a big issue for me ..well her ...what she don't know she wont complain about !!

heartyfisher

Cool.. i follow that train of thought :-) Shame my train goes round in circles

I had a play recently with a 55-300.. the af was slow and sluggish.. But I hear the new 70-300 dx beats the pants off the old 55-300 both in AF speed and IQ. I an eyeing a 80-400 too (second hand) but for more than 5 times the cost (and weight!) of a new Dx VR 70-300 ... hmm I am thinking I may just grab the DX VR. Do I really want a 200-500? do I ? sigh .. maybe I do ...maybe I dont? ( and my brain goes back to the 80-400, and lets do the logic round the mulberry bush again .. LOL).

Pistnbroke

I always study DXO and most zooms don't cut it wide open at 300mm. I have the 28-300 but it wont match the sigma f4 300mm even at f8. Lens expected today so will let you know.

Pistnbroke

Well a bit disappointed...discount the Tok and Sig 400 f5.6 which are inferior by a long way there is no difference between the Nikon and Sigma 300 f4s wide open or at f5.6. Tests carried out at JPEG Fine/large sharp+9 .The Nikon needed "o" fine focus and the Sigma +10. The Nikon is heavier .has a shorter hood and a non removable tripod mount . So as the Nikon represents twice the investment ( saving for a D820) its gone back on ebay.
When the AF-S version was introduced Hogan commented he was please to see the optical characteristics were retained and from all reports the P is not as sharp.
So I think further investment over the present $140 at the 300mm level is not justified.
I did try a 1.4 converter with the sig 300 but the results were worse than just cropping in.
Any comments welcome.

framer

Get your hands on the Nikkor f/4 AFS version shoot it wide open, I'd bet you would be impressed. It's my #1 travel teli when weight is a factor. IMHO works perfect with the tc14E. Full discloser I've replaced the foot with a Kirk Collar which made a huge difference when use on a tripod/monopod.

framer

Pistnbroke

don't see that Framer ..Hogan says the AFS is the same as the AF ...,Will stick with the $140 Sigma 300 f4

framer

And Tom's is always right...? BTW I like Tom but I disagree on this one. I've had both and tried the new PF and the old AFS wins. I may have a great or better than average copy of the AFS and it just perfectly tune to my D3s and D810.

framer

Ironheart

Actually I was going to suggest perhaps that @Pistnbroke got a bad one...
I love the PF on my D500, sharp as a tack. I usually don't have superbright light sources in my frame, and I use a lens hood, so no flare issues por moi. This is wide open, but by f/7 it's even sharper

Pistnbroke

Remember this 300mm is for the wifes D7100 when we go around the bird hides in the Somme Estuary. Because she cannot talk it gives double pleasure and I call it " The Silencer"

framer

FWIW I went back and read the Thom Hogan's review of the 300 f/4 AFS it was written 13 years ago. It did not say what body he tested it with, might have been an F5 w/film or at best a D2?. That age of comparison is IMHO worthless today. You need to try it on a high MP body for a current comparison.

Just my 2 cents,

framer

PB_PM

Pistnbroke said:

So do I deduce PB-PM that you have no actual experience of the lens ?

What brought you to that conclusion? I owned a 300mm F4 IF-ED. Compared to the newer AF-S versions it is slow to focus, unless Nikon has magically beefed up the AF motors in the newer bodies.

Pistnbroke

I agree with you framer these lens reviews are difficult unless you know what body its on etc etc ....Anyway I am sticking with the $140 sigma for my wifes birding ..I have the Tamron 150-600 to play with .

Mackiesback

I am able to track race cars with my old D series version, although not sure I would want to track little birds...