NikonGear'23
Gear Talk => Lens Talk => Topic started by: aerobat on May 29, 2016, 10:19:47
-
Dear fellow NikonGear members,
I've been looking into purchasing the compact 300mm PF.
I've only had the chance to handle the lens for a few shots last year but not since then.
What are your experiences after using it for several months?
Have the VR issues been fully solved?
Looking forward to hear your recommendations.
Cheers Daniel
-
Daniel, the 300mm 4E PF VR is my most used lens and I own it for about a year now.
Coupled with the TC-14E III I use it for nature photography, capturing birds and close ups of larger insects. I am already happy with the results wide open @f/5.6 of this very portable combination.
On the VR issue you will not get one answer as experiences vary a lot, also depending on what camera you use and if grip or tripod collar is attached (your can read more in the "Technical aspects of.." thread).
For me personally when I used a D7100 the issue was not completely solved after the firmware update (improved a bit). Now using a D500 (without grip and tripod collar) I think the issue is solved for me.
-
Super lens.
Why?
1) It is small and lightweight
2) It is unintrusive
3) great IQ, very good VR
4) It takes exteners well (1.4III).
The most important point, and the point I have to very probably exchange my 200-500 for is is the transportability.
I shot birds with it in Scotland, swapping lenses with Chris Dees. I got many more keepers than I got with the 200-500 ... I see I am no zoomer.
-
I've used it for 11 months and it has been my most used lens during this time. It's fun to shoot with, and produces good results although it has its own characteristics/pecualiarities. I find it shines photographing subjects in rim light, and when the subject is colourful. In low contrast, dull light I don't like the results too
much and prefer conventional optics for such situations.
I find the autofocus a big improvement from its prefecessor (the 300/4D AF-S) and I now can safely use it for sports with great results.
Of the VR: my lens does not exhibit the anomalous VR performance (softness, double image) at 1/125s+-2/3stop. I find the hand held sharpness is decent in most shots at 1/50s but it steadily improves towards faster speeds. Yesterday I noticed my concert shots were slightly blurry at 1/500s but as I switched to 1/1000s they became consistently excellent. Admittedly the subjects were musicians and not perfectly still. Even for stationary subjects I see better consistency of sharpness at fast shutter speeds than slow (hand held). I normally use a tripod for static subjects though, and hand hold the lens for people/action. I just checked a few shots at 1/100s with and without VR at night indoors and turning VR on improved the sharpness dramatically.
However, others have shown that there are problem combinations of camera/lens samples that produce distinctly bad results at these intermediate shutter speeds. I would take a pragmatic approach to this and buy from a dealer which allows you to pick and test until you find one that works correclty with the cameras that you have.
I love this lens because it allows me to include a long focal length in my kit with minimal weight and bag space penalty. It is not perfect but it's a fun lens to work with and I rarely leave it out of the bag. In low contrast light, low contrast subject matter such as skin tend to be rendered "milky" for lack of a better word. I don't like this aspect of the lens but I've learned to use it in circumstances where it shines. I guess that is the trick with any lens. The 200/2 II by contrast produces more 3D and contrasty faces even in soft light, while maintaining very high sharpness of fine details, but it weights 4x that of the 300/4 PF ... so it has become a much more difficult decision to use it in my day to day shooting than the 300 PF. :) I think the images from the 200 are better in soft, dim light but for the right subject matter the 300 PF absolutely shines as well (more contrasty/colourful subject matter and light are needed for that, however).
I have thought about getting the f/2.8 version for many years but never got around to it. Nowadays I am quite happy with the f/4 PF as it is so practical and fun to use. However it is good to keep in mind that if you want the very best image quality especially in low light the f/2.8 is no doubt better. Somehow this no longer bothers me. ;) One of the advantages of the 300 PF is that you can use it pretty much anywhere and people don't pay attention to it.
For nature photos I've used it for close-ups of flowers and other detail shots, and it works well for that. I have used it for some deer photos but was unfortunately not close enough for frame filling shots with FX. I think for long distance the sharpness is good but the contrast loss due to atmospherics may limit the resulting quality.
-
I would love a 300/4 PF for my Sony cams. :)
-
Thanks a lot Arend, Frank, Ilkka and Bjorn,
My usage would also be shots of prop driven aircraft wich are usually taken at 1/250s in order to show a part prop disc.
So VR in this regime is important for me. And I would use it on my D750.
Close-up capabilities are very welcome.
Otherwise I've only got fast primes. The 200-500mm is also on the short list but I fear it wouldn't be used much due to size and weight.
A difficult one. Anyway I always gravitate to primes.
Cheers Daniel
-
The small, neat size is a strong argument for the 300 PF. It is really wonderfully small and easy to carry around. Plus it focuses pretty close for a 300 mm lens.
On the other hand, the PF design does impart its own character to the rendition and Ilkka has given a precise summary of this aspect. Thus the 300 PF is not a universal solution and may happily coexist with a 300/2.8 or similar.
The 200-500 becomes quite unwieldy to hold when it is extended towards 500 mm and a tripod is highly recommended. Personally I tend to shoot my 300 PF from a tripod as well, but that is just me and the way I operate.
-
Thanks Bjørn for your feedback. Yes a tripod is certainly the best stabilization one can have. It's more the aviation stuff which will include panning a fast aircraft which would require VR or maybe a monopod. Basically I want to get to approx 400mm and had following lenses in mind:
- AF-S 300mm f/4.0 PF & TC
- AF-S 70-200mm f/4.0 & TC
- AF-S 200-500mm f/5.6
I like both smaller lenses for their compactness. The 70-200 would probably be a bit short. I prefer the isolation & compression capability of the 300mm.
And the big gun would probably not be used enough to justify its purchase.
Cheers Daniel
-
A 300 PF coupled with a newer model of the TC14E would serve your purposes well, I guess.
-
A *fantastic* portrait lens, especially outdoors, given the FL... and excellent VR at 1/30s, or above 1/200s, so I do not care much about the rest.
Summer coming back, I anticipate more outdoor portraits :)
-
Reflecting what others write, it has become one of my most used lenses after I got it 8 months ago, and basically go everywhere I carry a DSLR. VR on my copy works well in the problematic range (D7100, D5100 and more briefly D40x IR-720nm/D200; the latter bodies allow only wide open use). What has not been mentioned yet is the almost complete absence of longitudinal fringing/purple fringing in blown highlights, a big advantage for me when using it for night sky imaging on a tracker and other high contrast subjects.
-
What has not been mentioned yet is the almost complete absence of longitudinal fringing/purple fringing in blown highlights, a big advantage for me when using it for night sky imaging on a tracker and other high contrast subjects.
True. And that's one of the reasons I like it for portraits : no disturbing artifacts. Other reaons being high sharpness but slightly mild contrast, and the very smooth bokeh. Plus, the AF seems magically attracted by the nearest eye...
-
Although you've already been given some good advice, quite a few people seem to be enjoying this lens
See here for more examples
http://www.lebryk.com/the-nikon-300f4-for-sports/
-
Today I gave back my 5.6/200-500 and ordered the 300PF. I also had to see my orthopaedist because I did not care enough about handholding the D500 with 200-500 on my left arm for long times per day and many days.
That set me back 200 Euro, 150 loss on the big lens and 50 for the orthopaedist. Lesson learned and a rental for 10 Euro per day is not too much.
My Conclusio:
The 300PF is a lens to take everywhere everytime. It is small and light weight and a great performer
The 200-500 is the right lens for sitting in a chair in camouflage on a great vantage point with a stable tripod, a gimbal head and watch and wait while drinking some tea and eating some cookies over many an hour.
-
Today I gave back my 5.6/200-500 and ordered the 300PF. I also had to see my orthopaedist because I did not care enough about handholding the D500 with 200-500 on my left arm for long times per day and many days.
That set me back 200 Euro, 150 loss on the big lens and 50 for the orthopaedist. Lesson learned and a rental for 10 Euro per day is not too much.
My Conclusio:
The 300PF is a lens to take everywhere everytime. It is small and light weight and a great performer
The 200-500 is the right lens for sitting in a chair in camouflage on a great vantage point with a stable tripod, a gimbal head and watch and wait while drinking some tea and eating some cookies over many an hour.
Just do some workout at the gym. ;D
BTW I ordered yesterday a Sigma 150-600 Sports
-
I need a new doctor to get rid of the cortisone.
Then I can do more sports without risking my bones.
-
As Frank and other said, it is so small and convenient, mixed with good performance, that there is no need to think about: Shall I take it with me, or not?
Some images from the last weekend in May. Original D5 images, no processing, just resized. All handheld
rgds,
Andy
-
Fantastic images Andy. Many thanks for all the good advice guys.
I broke down and bought it today. :)
Had to try it tonight but it was already getting dark. So had to use flash.
First try at a bird from my window with D750; F 4.0; 1/200s; ISO1250:
-
Good choice. :) And nice shot. :)
Harald
-
Daniel, nice. I am wishing you some good light :)
Andy , really interesting images. I bet you can really have some fun doing the PP. The kind of events I would like to cover. Closest I get is the Annual Great Escape where 4W drives go cross country in the foothills in the Monsoon. Dirty, wet and hard to shoot. Next time I think I will try and ride with the big, all wheel drive tow truck ;D
Smartphones rule, did you see any other cameras ;)
-
Andy , really interesting images. I bet you can really have some fun doing the PP. The kind of events I would like to cover. Closest I get is the Annual Great Escape where 4W drives go cross country in the foothills in the Monsoon. Dirty, wet and hard to shoot. Next time I think I will try and ride with the big, all wheel drive tow truck ;D
Smartphones rule, did you see any other cameras ;)
Thank you.
PP is super easy with the D5. I ran a batch program in NX-D and resized all images down to 1500x1000. PP done :D
I could get close to the action, but the thread was about the 300mm PF lens, so I chose those picturse from a distance
BTW, the D5 is a great camera for those kind of events. out 1500 photos, about 10 images are misses, the rest are (technically) keepers. Is a good ratio (for me).
rgds, Andy
Closer to the action - a few examples below (as always, no PP, no crop, just resized)
-
I can only say the lens is superb. I use it on the D500 and all misses are due to my lack of knowledge.
Action and birds are a completely new field for me. Steep learning curve.
-
Damn it, for each post here the resale value of my four year old 300mm AFS goes down..... :(
Meanwhile thanks for the great selection of varied subjects Andy.
I'm intrigued about the shot with lots of big earthmoving trucks - was that another off-roading sports event (real monster trucks!) or just taken at an industrial site?!
-
Andy if I may: helis and prop driven aircraft look better if the blades move a part circle. So shutter speed of 1/250s for prop A/C and even slower for helis is appropriate.
-
Again not much time was left to try the lens tonight.
This one is the view on Mount Brisen from my balcony.
A good test for far field performance D750; F 4.0; 1/250; ISO 640:
-
The 300 seem to be quite a performer. I envy the view from your balcony :)
-
Ignoring the differences in size, handling and VR, has anyone compared the optical performance of 300/4 PF with the older AFS 300/4?
-
Roland,
a few observations from Memory (haven't done a direct side-by-side comparison):
1) Resolution - handheld: PF better
2) Resolution - tripod: match, PF suffers sometimes from VR (oh, I will get heat for the AFS stock tripod collar :) )
3) Bokeh: PF better
4) Cross light: AFS some times better
5) Flare/Ghosting: PF
6) AF Speed: PF
7) D750 compatibility: PF
rgds,
Andy
-
Daniel, thanks for the reminder.
I forgot this aspect, as I was there mainly for Motocross. :)
rgds, Andy
-
a few observations from Memory (haven't done a direct side-by-side comparison):
That's quite impressive as the previous 300mm F4 AFS was already quite reasonable (especially for the price difference between it and the f2.8 version).
Meanwhile, can you tells us a little more about those big earthmoving trucks in your earlier pictures? Was that at an industrial site or some exotic sporting event?
-
That's quite impressive as the previous 300mm F4 AFS was already quite reasonable (especially for the price difference between it and the f2.8 version).
Meanwhile, can you tells us a little more about those big earthmoving trucks in your earlier pictures? Was that at an industrial site or some exotic sporting event?
Colin,
I am indeed impressed with this little 300mm telelens, which was added as the most recent to my set of 300mm lenses (love this focal range)
(http://www.pbase.com/andrease/image/140822821/original.jpg)
The AFS 300mm/2.8 VR II (my previous "standard" 300mm lens) is optically the better lens of course, but the differences aren't always as large to justify the carrying weight and size. Instead, the 300mm PF is a lens about the same size as the AFS 24-70mm/2.8 which makes it a no-brainer to put in the bag. Additionally, the lens is much better for people shots as it isn't as "present" as the larger lenses.
wrt to the earthmoving trucks:
I attended the erzbergrodeo, which is the largest motocross event in central europe. The location is a iron ore mining site in Austria, which closes it's operation during this week - hence the trucks in line.
When registration for the event starts on the web, the 1500 participants slots are sold out within 10 minutes. Over the course of the 4 days, a series of races trim the starter field down to 500 starters for the main event on sunday. The ambition of the organizers is to get only 1 rider to the finish line in the 4 hrs the race is lasting. A feat, which has never succeeded :-) This year, out 500 starters, 8 managed to get to the goal in time. About 40.000 people are attending the spectacle, main sponsor is Red Bull.
http://www.erzbergrodeo.at/view/p48/the_myth
rgds,
Andy
-
Action and birds are a completely new field for me. Steep learning curve.
I agree; it's a curve that I started a few years ago and am still on the lower end of!
It's times like this that, whether you like all sports of not, the images that you sometimes see make you realise the photo skills required. For example this one from The Australia-England rugby match on Saturday has come out pretty well.
Don't know the gear used, but these guys were travelling at speed and this was an evening game so despite floodlights, low light. Remember this is a low res copy from a website....
Photograph: Matt King/Getty Images
-
No action here but great performance wide open
(https://c1.staticflickr.com/9/8592/27988453320_e305e04f1a_o.jpg)
bee & lavender (https://flic.kr/p/JDf951) by Arend (https://www.flickr.com/photos/vermazeren/), on Flickr
-
This is a very nice example of the macro capabilities of the 300mm PF.
-
Yes. Macro capabilities too. Phantastic lens.
I take it to nearly every shoot. Great gun 300/4PF
Like the 35/1.4 Ai-S, 24/1.4G, 85/1.8G
I do not use my 50/1.8G or 60/2.8G anymore. Pity.
Nor any of the other stuff. Only for money shoots. Product. Corporate.
So I keep all of this too.
300PF ... a love affair ... another one!
-
Great photos, all! This convinces me the 300 f4 PF is a must have....
Thank you
-
you can easily use the lens indoors for unintrusive moody portraits:
-
The AFS 300mm/2.8 VR II (my previous "standard" 300mm lens) is optically the better lens of course, but the differences aren't always as large to justify the carrying weight and size. Instead, the 300mm PF is a lens about the same size as the AFS 24-70mm/2.8 which makes it a no-brainer to put in the bag. Additionally, the lens is much better for people shots as it isn't as "present" as the larger lenses.
First of all, that is quite a collection of 300mms you have ... and great images displayed as well 8)
I think what you said is an important distinction, above: with people (larger subjects/sports), the 300 f/4 PF is the lighter, better, more comfortable choice.
However, for birds and other wildlife, the extra-fine detail and resolution of the 300 f/2.8 II (plus the fact it works exceptionally-well with the 2x TC III converter, giving you 900mm on a DX) makes the 300 2.8 VR II the better option for wildlife.
-
300PF on D600 wide open
-
Very decorative and delicate depiction of the Lonicera, Frank ...
-
Recently I tried one with my D750. The AF was great, the image quality was stunning and the hand-holdability was amazing.
That said, I was a bit frustrated by the way the VR works. Whenever I pressed the shutter to release, the image jumped away from the framing I had liked. I know that the VR element jumps back to the neutral position to maximize its effect at the moment of the image taking. But it means that the precise framing is impossible when the rig is handheld. It is fine for the moving subject because you can trim the image for the framing you like, but not really good for the landscapes. Yes, I admit my unstable handhold technique, but I figured it is better to switch VR off for landscapes, even shot handheld.
-
Bjørn: thank you
Akira: I gues your test sample was broken. Behaviour sounds just like that of the 105VR I once had as a loaner from NPS. Nearly unusable with VR.
-
Akira: I gues your test sample was broken. Behaviour sounds just like that of the 105VR I once had as a loaner from NPS. Nearly unusable with VR.
Frank, thanks for your input. Actually I tried the sample at a Nikon showroom in Ginza, Tokyo. Obviously it is not good to let the people try defect samples at such an official facility.
-
Frank, thanks for your input. Actually I tried the sample at a Nikon showroom in Ginza, Tokyo. Obviously it is not good to let the people try defect samples at such an official facility.
I guess switching off VR the lens behaved as expected?
-
I guess switching off VR the lens behaved as expected?
Frank, I just tried it with the VR on. Just prior to that I had read the reviews of 70-300/4.5-5.6 zooms of Tamron and Nikon at lenstip.com or photozone.de. I was interested in the different behaviors of these two very similar lenses. According to the review, the VR of Nikon (probably in normal mode) goes back to the neutral position when you release the shutter for the image taking to maximize its effect, whereas Tamron zoom always compensates for the blur at its full potential. It is thus a bit frustrating when you fine-tune the framing with Tamron, because it tries to counter-act your movement by thinking that it is a camera blur.
At the Nikon showroom, I thought the behavior of the VR of 300PF was just as described in the reviews but felt it a bit too abrupt. Your input helped me realize that the lens seems to have been a defect sample.
Thank you again.
-
Akira: I can only talk from my experience with the D500 and D600. There is no behaviour as descriped by you in my lens in neither VR-position (off, normal, sport). Most of the time I use the lens in "sport" mode.
-
Akira: I can only talk from my experience with the D500 and D600. There is no behaviour as descriped by you in my lens in neither VR-position (off, normal, sport). Most of the time I use the lens in "sport" mode.
Actually I thought it was strange that a fairly expensive lens with such an unusable feature had been allowed to hit the market. The VR of the particular sample was by far less usable than that of the lowly 70-300/4.5-5.6VR zoom that I tried briefly. Thanks again for the confirmation.
-
Whenever I pressed the shutter to release, the image jumped away from the framing I had liked. I know that the VR element jumps back to the neutral position to maximize its effect at the moment of the image taking. But it means that the precise framing is impossible when the rig is handheld. It is fine for the moving subject because you can trim the image for the framing you like, but not really good for the landscapes. Yes, I admit my unstable handhold technique, but I figured it is better to switch VR off for landscapes, even shot handheld.
Yeah, that is what this lens (and some others with the choice of normal and sport modes of VR; if I recall correctly, the 200-500 is one of them) do in NORMAL mode. Try SPORT mode and this jumping of the framing should be greatly reduced. In fact I find SPORT mode very useful and well implemented, whereas in these lenses the NORMAL mode is perhaps more effective in reducing vibration but it's hard to take a sequence of shots with controlled framing.
This behaviour is reported also by Brad Hill in his tests of these lenses.
For landscapes I highly recommend a tripod and no VR whatsoever.
-
Ilkka, thanks for sharing your insightful review of the behavior of VR. That makes much sense. I'll try "sports" mode next time. However, I still don't see the purpose of the "normal" mode, if ever the sample I tried was not defect. An absolute maximum VR effect?
-
I don't really know. Resetting the VR group at the beginning of exposure ensures the VR won't run into limits so easily and aberrations due to decentering are minimized. It seems the VR group travels further during the exposure or during composition in NORMAL mode and this is seen in the viewfinder. Perhaps the SPORT mode has a smaller range of travel (either hard or soft limit) so composition deviates less from shot to shot. The purpose of this would be to make it easier to capture a series of shots quickly without getting too random compositions?
-
Yes, the VR effect should be maximized. But the frustration caused by the drastic shift of the framing is extremely counter-intuitive, I would have to say...
-
I really like how this lens has worked out for my outdoor concert photography; it's very easy to use and the results are nice. Here the composition is a bit too tight - it happens. I reluctantly switched to the 70-200mm f/2.8 II for the last song of the three so that I wouldn't get any more clipped fingers. Although that lens is excellent in its own right I really like the 300 PF's special character - the hair and dress detail stand out nicely.
Joss Stone really took her audience at Pori Jazz on Friday. This is with the D5, 300/4E, 1/800s, f/4, ISO 720. I used VR in SPORT mode to stabilize the lens although I guess this is more to help with composing and focusing than reducing shake during the exposure.
-
Ilkka. Wonderful feature shot. Pity the cut fingers. Difficult to move freely under the circumstances I guess.
Yes. Stabilizing the Viewfinder is the issue. To freezzee subject movement a short time is required anyway in
very many cases.
-
I really like how this lens has worked out for my outdoor concert photography; it's very easy to use and the results are nice. Here the composition is a bit too tight - it happens. I reluctantly switched to the 70-200mm f/2.8 II for the last song of the three so that I wouldn't get any more clipped fingers. Although that lens is excellent in its own right I really like the 300 PF's special character - the hair and dress detail stand out nicely.
Joss Stone really took her audience at Pori Jazz on Friday. This is with the D5, 300/4E, 1/800s, f/4, ISO 720. I used VR in SPORT mode to stabilize the lens although I guess this is more to help with composing and focusing than reducing shake during the exposure.
. Beautiful image, as well as the lens is. I did think a lot, tried it a lot, very good lens, portable. But, finally, 300 was short for me a bit, especially I already have 28-300. 5.6 at 300, but for outdoor acceptable, even is not as stellar as this one is. So you already know what my choice was. Good luck! LZ
-
From an organ recital, under difficult lighting conditions (low light, mixed sources, some in the field, etc.). Pardon the poor framing, but I would not budge and disturb the attendance. Moreover, I was primarily there for listening myself, and also recording.
This lens is a winner, and a perfect match for the Df.
-
From an organ recital, under difficult lighting conditions
This is a wonderful image Airy.
As well as the photographic elements, I love it as a study of relaxed but focused concentration by the organist. Creates a great impression of the atmosphere in the hall/church