NikonGear'23
Gear Talk => Lens Talk => Topic started by: Hermann on February 10, 2016, 19:29:54
-
I've been offered a 300mm f4.5 IF-ED at a pretty good price, well below 200 €. The lens is in good shape. The reason why it's so cheap is that the tripod collar is missing. That's no real problem as a friend of mine still has a collar he kept after he forgot his lens on the roof of his car before driving off ... I also suspect the collar from my 400mm f5.6 IF-ED will fit the 300mm as well.
What I don't know is what the optics of the 300mm IF-ED are like on digital bodies. I know Bjørn's assessment, and he seems to be a bit lukewarm about the lens. I'd use it as a lightweight tele for long hikes in the mountains, for instance on the Nikon 1 V1. Just how good is it, especially wide open? If I need to stop the lens down I may as well take my 70-300mm zoom, even though I don't really trust it on trips when things may get a bit rough. The 70-300mm seems me to be a bit fragile.
Anyone have any experience with that lens?
Hermann
-
The 'lukewarm' sentiment is because there will be visible CA on a digital camera. However, with a god RAW conversion software, the CA can be removed. Thus more an annoyance than a deal-breaker.
In terms of build and robustness the 300 ED-IF leaves little to be desired. It can be used with a PN-11 attached for useful close-up work, though not by any means 'macro'. The clamshell-type tripod mount is interchangeable with the 400/5.6 ED-IF as you surmised.
-
I've had pretty good luck with this lens on a D600, both as a tele at shorter distances and as a close-up lens with PN-11 tube.
A couple examples at these ranges are:
1. A Killdeer bird on its nest where the added distance allowed an image without disturbing the bird too much (although the fanning tail indicates a certain amount of upset)
2. With the extension tube to get close to a cicada larvae (?) that had recently emerged from the ground and was about to shed (note: exif shows a different lens because I did not remember to reset it in the camera and the lens is not chipped)
Both were taken before I discovered Lightroom PP, so are essentially JPG's SOOC camera except for resizing. I guess neither of these had sufficiently contrasty areas to show much CA (or my old eyes don't see it that well :-\).
-
Hermann, I love this lens!
Ever since I bought it I haven't been using 300/2.8 AF-I that is resting peacefully in its suitcase.
It's light unobtrusive, the same weight as the new 300/4 PF.
The focusing is the smoothest I have ever experienced on any lens I have ever used.
I use it wide open all the time and I am very happy with the results.
-
Bjørn, Bill and Jakov:
Thanks a lot for your comments. I think I'll get that one. It's really a light weight alternative to bigger lenses, especially when I'm on long hikes when I carry binoculars, scope+tripod anyway, so that's quite a bit of weight already. And in many situations I don't really use the AF anyway, simply because it doesn't work (songbirds in bushes ... ).
Hermann
-
Jakov, how much do you want for your F2.8?
BillO, what is the second image????
-
One can get (0.5x) half life size out of a 300/4.5 ED-IF AI or AIS with a PN-11, PK-13 and PK-12. A lens cradle is needed which might be based on a lens plate like a Wimberley P-50. A spacer would be needed under the PN-11.
Dave
-
...
BillO, what is the second image????
Colin,
That is a periodic cicada nymph which I incorrectly identified as a larvae (I'm not sufficiently well-versed in bugs to know the true scientific name).
The nymph grows underground for many years (12-17) feeding on roots in wooded areas. This accounts for the big front legs which it uses for underground foraging and digging out its eventual escape.
At the right time, it digs out to the air and flies a short spurt to a tree during the night. Then it molts into something like a fat grasshopper. In the molted stage it is mostly known for the incessant buzz the males produce during warm summer nights.
I caught this nymph in a tree outside my RV at early dawn. It must have come up from the ground during the night. By the next day it was a dried out hulk.
-
Just got a copy on friday. (190€ including shipping, near mint)
(https://farm2.staticflickr.com/1577/24649224879_d9a994d893_b.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/DyaHMR)
It seems to be on the same quality level like the 200mm f4 Ai. CAs are sometimes visible and the bokeh is just ok. But the mechanical quality and focussing is nearly perfect. Handling overall is ok on the DF. I have to wait for better weather here.... ;)
Harald
-
I got mine as well. Also near mint, except for the missing tripod collar. A nice and small lens, ideal for carrying on long hikes, I think. The build quality is as expected very high. No comparison really to any of the modern zooms in particular.
The weather hasn't been all that nice over the weekend, so I only had a chance to get a couple of test shots to see if everything is OK. First impressions are pretty positive, even wide open. The colour fringing Bjørn mentions in his review is quite obvious though and will need to be dealt with in critical shots. But other than that I find the image quality if anything better than that of the 70-300 VR which does get pretty soft at the long end.
I'll experiment with my TC-14b once the weather gets any better, despite Bjørn's warning that the image quality of the combination isn't good enough. Even if it doesn't work that well, I wonder if the quality is good enough for record shots of birds.
Hermann
-
I've been offered a 300mm f4.5 IF-ED at a pretty good price, well below 200 €. The lens is in good shape. The reason why it's so cheap is that the tripod collar is missing. That's no real problem as a friend of mine still has a collar he kept after he forgot his lens on the roof of his car before driving off ... I also suspect the collar from my 400mm f5.6 IF-ED will fit the 300mm as well.
What I don't know is what the optics of the 300mm IF-ED are like on digital bodies. I know Bjørn's assessment, and he seems to be a bit lukewarm about the lens. I'd use it as a lightweight tele for long hikes in the mountains, for instance on the Nikon 1 V1. Just how good is it, especially wide open? If I need to stop the lens down I may as well take my 70-300mm zoom, even though I don't really trust it on trips when things may get a bit rough. The 70-300mm seems me to be a bit fragile.
Anyone have any experience with that lens?
Hermann
I found my copy of the 300/4.5 ED-IF was just slightly better than my 70-300VR at the time hence I sold it. Central sharpness was about the same as the 70-300VR, but it had better sharpness off into the edges and corners. Both lenses are no longer with me.
I recently tried a copy of the /4.5 ED-IF on my A7RII and it was not that sharp at distance even stopped down.
Since then I've acquired a 300/4.5 ED AI (non-IF) and it is significantly better than the IF version for sharpness and CA, especially on today's high MP bodies (D800 and Sony A7RII for me). These are rare, but if you find one for an OK price grab it.
-
Jakov, how much do you want for your F2.8?
BillO, what is the second image????
If anybody is interested in the 300mm f/2.8 AF-I, send me a personal message with your best offer :)
-
As I believe this is the very lens Erik owned previously, I can vouch for its optical qualities.
-
I just played with it a bit in my office, and it will be going with me to Scotland, that's for sure :)
It has emotional value!
-
I'm interested in how to tell the difference between the nikon 300mm 4.5 ed and the nikon 300mm 4.5 ed if. Is there a marking on the lens somewhere? help thanks
-
I'm interested in how to tell the difference between the nikon 300mm 4.5 ed and the nikon 300mm 4.5 ed if. Is there a marking on the lens somewhere? help thanks
These lenses are hugely different in their shape. Thus telling them apart is simplicity itself. See the relevant section and illustration on Roland Vink's Nikon site. http://photosynthesis.co.nz/nikon/index.html
-
These lenses are hugely different in their shape. Thus telling them apart is simplicity itself. See the relevant section and illustration on Roland Vink's Nikon site. http://photosynthesis.co.nz/nikon/index.html
Yes, their outline is distinctive. However, they are rarely seen! I've been scanning ebay for months for the non-IF version. Haven't seen any for sale or sold.
If someone has a spare, I'm in the market. Need something just a bit shorter than the 400 P.C 5.6 I have.
-Jack
-
The 300/4.5 ED (non-IF) is among the rarer Nikkors. Less than 2000 units likely were made. Thus no wonder you won't see it for sale every day :D Patience or good connections are required for these uncommon models.
The 300/4.5 ED-IF is > 10X more common as around 35000 lenses left the factory in its time. Thus also much easier to find a nice sample of this lens than the previous non-IF ED model.
I own both models. The non-ED is the better optically speaking and the ED-IF way superior in handling. One cannot get it all in one.
-
I bought a 300/4.5 ED once, lost in shipping, never found where it went. As least I got a refund :'(
I found my copy of the 300/4.5 ED-IF was just slightly better than my 70-300VR at the time hence I sold it. Central sharpness was about the same as the 70-300VR, but it had better sharpness off into the edges and corners. Both lenses are no longer with me.
The new AF-P 70-300VR is supposed to be better than the AF-S version if the reviews can be believed (it should be better since it is 10 years newer). If you can live with f/5.6 wide open (2/3 stop slower than f/4.5) it could be a useful option, as it is even lighter and more compact. It's light enough that a tripod mount is not needed, and it has VR as well, so for hand-held shooting you may well get more keepers in spite of the slower aperture. Build quality is not nearly the same level though...
-
Looked for years for the Non-IF version. Finally found one. It's worth it. The IF-ED Ai-S is already very good, but the non-IF beats it with a comfortable margin, because wide open it's already on a top-level, ideal 'sharpness', usable 'DOF', lovely bokeh, no LoCa.
-
Hi all found this listing on ebay.ca
eBay item number:
222927262268
I think it an ed if lens by looking at serial #thanks for all your input
-
Hi all found this listing on ebay.ca
eBay item number:
222927262268
I think it an ed if lens by looking at serial #thanks for all your input
Yes that is ED-IF. The gold ring signifies ED, and if you look closely you see ED written near the lens serial number. The shape of the lens hood is the easiest indication that it is IF.
-
there is no making on the lens "IF" ?? when you say hood do you mean it looks like a 2 piece hood? What about the gold color on the rim. Does that mean it an ED If lens? thanks
-
See Bjørns link to Rolands Nikon pages, here you can see the differences.
-
Also the collar is different :
# ED IF version has a wider collar and is hinged, so you can open it to remove it.
# ED non IF isn't hinged and narrower.
However, the ED non IF version's drawback is the short course of its focus ring (less than 180° from infinity to 4 meters), hence impossibility to focus a moving subject accurately.
This is why I use a modified TC 16-A teleconverter to give AF mode to this lens and it works.
-
thanks for all the info still looking at the lens to purchase.