Using the 300PF for close-ups?

[ColinM]

The previous f4 A-FS model had a reasonable reputation for shooting at close range.
Obviously not intended to compete with dedicated macro lenses, but a fair second best.

Can anyone advise if the more recent PF version produces similarly good results at close distances and has a similar close focusing range?

I have a trip this summer where it would help not to include my 105 f2.8 for weight & size reasons. I’m seriously considering the newer 300mm PF and this might help with the decision.

[Frank Fremerey]

As you know I use the 300PF a lot on 23mm extension, a full AF-S contact through created by Dr Lens ... see dedicated threads and my ecosystem thread...

[Roland Vink]

I haven't heard much about how the 300PF performs at close range, nothing bad at least.

Note that while the new lens focuses a little closer than its AFS predecessor (1.4m vs 1.45m), the it does not frame as tightly (magnification 1:4.1 vs 1:3.7). In other words the older lens gives slightly higher magnification with greater working distance. The difference is not huge but it might be important in some situations. For tripod shooting, I would favour older lens, but for hand-held use the 300PF with VR wins.

Also, the older version has a manual aperture ring, so it can easily work with extension rings like the PK-13 if you want to increase the magnification. The 300PF is all electronic so you would need a third party AFS extension tube. Not all IF lenses behave well on extension. The other route is to use a high quality closeup lens, like the Canon 77mm 500D.

[ColinM]

Frank - thank you, I should have remembered
Roland - actually I’d prefer to take the 300mm for wildlife.
Being able to use it close would be a bonus and I won’t take a tripod or monopod. But I also don’t want the extra weight & bulk of the 105 f2.8

[Bent Hjarbo]

I have inspired by Erik rebuilt  my Kenko Teleplus Pro 300 (2x), it gives 43,5mm extension.
The attached photo taken close to near limit with the 300 PF and my D500
Just for inspiration, it may be possible to get even sharper pictures with better support and techniqe
Changed D800 to D500

[Frank Fremerey]

I have inspired by Erik rebuilt  my Kenko Teleplus Pro 300 (2x), it gives 43,5mm extension.
The attached photo taken close to near limit with the 300 PF and my D800.
Just for inspiration, it may be possible to get even sharper pictures with better support and techniqe

Bent: yes, 43mm is possible but IQ loss is significant. With the 23mm of the deglassed TC14E the results are very near the unextended quality of this exceptional lens.

[Asle F]

Note that while the new lens focuses a little closer than its AFS predecessor (1.4m vs 1.45m),

But the new lens is 7.5cm shorter, so at 1.4m is will have 2.5cm more space between the lens end the subject, than the older lens at 1.45m.

I have no experience with the D, but I have good experience with the PF with and without Canon 500D closeup lens.

[Roland Vink]

But the new lens is 7.5cm shorter, so at 1.4m is will have 2.5cm more space between the lens end the subject, than the older lens at 1.45m.

Yes, that is a good point. But sometimes the overall distance between the photographer/tripod is more important than the space between the front element and subject. Especially when the subject is in a hard to reach place, it may not be physically possible to get closer.  The difference between 1.4m and 1.45m is only 5cm so it won't be significant in most situations, but there could be some edge cases where it makes the difference.

[Akira]

Note that while the new lens focuses a little closer than its AFS predecessor (1.4m vs 1.45m), the it does not frame as tightly (magnification 1:4.1 vs 1:3.7). In other words the older lens gives slightly higher magnification with greater working distance. The difference is not huge but it might be important in some situations. For tripod shooting, I would favour older lens, but for hand-held use the 300PF with VR wins.

That would suggest that the actual focal length at the closest setting of PF is shorter than that of AF-S.  So, the magnification factor of PF should increase more when the same extension tube is added to the lens.

[ColinM]

Would any of you care to share the results of these different combinations?