Nikon AF 300mm f/4 ED vs Tamron 150-600mm VC G2 on D810

[Jedi]

Hello, I'm thinking of buying a Tamron 150-600mm VC G2 for my D810 for photographing chamois and deer. I already own a Nikon AF 300mm f/4 and I don't know what to buy: a Tamron 150-600mm G2 or a Kenko PRO DG 1,4x for my Nikon AF 300/4: what would you do? Is the sharpness of the Nikon AF 300mm f/4 greater than Tamron 150-600mm's at 300mm on D810? Is the bokeh of the Nikon AF 300mm f/4 more beautiful than Tamron's? If Nikon 300mm was better, I would buy a Kenko Pro DG 1,4x for bigger focals for my Nikon 300mm. My Nikon AF 300mm f/4 is the first version, the AF, not the AF-S. Thanks!!!

[Roland Vink]

The amount of subject isolation, or how much the background is blurred depends mostly on the size of the entrance pupil. With the 300mm f/4 lens the entrance pupil is 300/4 = 75mm (the entrance pupil is unchanged when a TC is used). With the Tamron 150-600 f/5-6.3 the entrance pupli ranges from 30mm at 150mm to 95mm at 600mm.  The 300/4 should be able to isolate the subject from the background more than the Tamron at 300mm, but the Tamron is better from about 500-600mm. Note that the more blur does not always mean it is more beautiful, that is in the eye of the beholder and you would have to assess images from both lenses to see which you prefer.

In terms of sharpness, I would expect the 300/4 to be sharper than the zoom at 300mm. Adding a TC to the 300mm will cause some drop in sharpness which might even things up. Again it is hard to be certain without directly comparing the two lenses. The G2 has good reviews so I would expect the sharpness to be competitive.

The AF 300/4 uses the older "screwdriver" AF, which is reasonably fast but probably not as precise as AF-S type motor in the Tamron zoom. The older AF lens is noisier when focusing which could scare wildlife away. AF performance is likely to be worse with a TC attached.

The Tamron has VC (or VR in Nikon terms) which should be very useful for hand-held shooting. The ability to zoom and frame the subject is also a good feature as you could zoom out to show the deer in its environment and then zoom in for a head shot.

Note I have not used either lens but for the purposes you describe, my feeling is the zoom would give better results.

[Jedi]

Thank you! I love the blur of the Nikon AF 300/4 and I'm searching for an AF lens quite sharper than Nikon AF 300/4, but not so expensive like Nikon AF 300/2.8 (first version, unless motor) used. Does it exist? 

[Roland Vink]

The newer AF-S 300/4 is sharper and focuses much closer which can be useful. The latest AF-S 300/4 PF VR is sharper still and also focuses very close. It is very compact and light, and with VR it is excellent for hand-held shooting. I believe they both worth with TCs quite well.

[gryphon1911]

The 300/4 PF does excellent with the TC14E-III.  I use it quite a bit and have no complaints.

Flickr Album Nikon 300/4PF + TC14E-III
https://www.flickr.com/photos/gryphon1911/albums/72157678953977012

[Jedi]

In this topic I have asked a council about a not expensive lens and the 300/4 is an expensive lens; if I had money to buy 300/4 PF, I would buy an used Nikon AF 300/2.8, which is much better than 300/4 PF. I'm looking for a lens quite sharper than Nikon AF 300/4 first version, but I can't spend money for a Nikon AF 300/2.8 or Nikon AF-S 300/4E PF VR. The only one choice seems to be the Nikon AF-S 300/4, is it true? However, it is OT, because the main topic is "Nikon AF 300/4 ED vs Tamron 150-600mm VC G2 on D810".
Your councils are still precious!! 

[Roland Vink]

In your original post you stated that you wanted to photograph chamois and deer. If you are mostly doing handheld shooting, then consider the size and weight of the AF 300/2.8 lenses. Technically it is better than the 300/4 lenses but for practical purposes it may be too big and heavy. It may be fine for short periods, the extra stop in speed enables you to use faster shutter speed for models without VR. But it must be heavy for extended times, these lenses are about double the weight of your AF 300/4. A smaller lens like your 300/4 or a lens with VR may be much more useful.

For hand-held shooting the AF-S 300/4 is probably about the same optically as your AF 300/4. You would need very good technique to show the improved optical qualities of the newer lens. Some have reported the bokeh of the AF-S 300/4 is not as smooth as some other models. The AF-S 300/4 is quieter so it is less likely to scare wildlife (if the camera shutter hasn't already scared them ) The AF speed on this lens is not particularly fast, the 300/2.8 versions are much faster. The AF-S 300/4 is marginally lighter than your lens with the tripod foot removed, but heavier with the tripod foot. For handheld shooting some photographers have reported the 70-300VR zooms give them more keepers than the AF-S 300/4, VR more than makes up for the slower aperture. If the aperture and reach are enough then maybe the AF-P 70-300VR is a better option, maybe consider a D7200, D7500 or D500 if you need more reach?

On the other hand, if you can shoot from a tripod or monopod for much of the time, a 300/2.8 could be a better option. The extra stop in speed will allow you to photograph in deep shade or twilight conditions more easily, and will give you more subject isolation (provided the depth of field is sufficient for the subject).

[Jedi]

I'll use a monopod.

[Jedi]

In your original post you stated that you wanted to photograph chamois and deer. If you are mostly doing handheld shooting, then consider the size and weight of the AF 300/2.8 lenses. Technically it is better than the 300/4 lenses but for practical purposes it may be too big and heavy. It may be fine for short periods, the extra stop in speed enables you to use faster shutter speed for models without VR. But it must be heavy for extended times, these lenses are about double the weight of your AF 300/4. A smaller lens like your 300/4 or a lens with VR may be much more useful.

For hand-held shooting the AF-S 300/4 is probably about the same optically as your AF 300/4. You would need very good technique to show the improved optical qualities of the newer lens. Some have reported the bokeh of the AF-S 300/4 is not as smooth as some other models. The AF-S 300/4 is quieter so it is less likely to scare wildlife (if the camera shutter hasn't already scared them ) The AF speed on this lens is not particularly fast, the 300/2.8 versions are much faster. The AF-S 300/4 is marginally lighter than your lens with the tripod foot removed, but heavier with the tripod foot. For handheld shooting some photographers have reported the 70-300VR zooms give them more keepers than the AF-S 300/4, VR more than makes up for the slower aperture. If the aperture and reach are enough then maybe the AF-P 70-300VR is a better option, maybe consider a D7200, D7500 or D500 if you need more reach?

On the other hand, if you can shoot from a tripod or monopod for much of the time, a 300/2.8 could be a better option. The extra stop in speed will allow you to photograph in deep shade or twilight conditions more easily, and will give you more subject isolation (provided the depth of field is sufficient for the subject).

I know that 300/2.8 is the best choice, but I haven't got money for it, today. With the money for the 300/4 PF VR i would buy the 300/2.8 and I want to use the monopod, so I don't want to buy the 300/4 PF VR. 70-300 VR? It's a toy, imho and I already have 300/4 AF; on D810 70-300mm is very bad!!!! It isn't a lens for D810. I don't want spent money for another body, I don't need it. I have read your council and I want to wait tomorrow, 9-12 months, to buy 300/2.8 AF. Thanks!

[beryllium10]

Jedi, the 300 mm f/4 AF-S is an excellent lens for wildlife photography. The Nikon converter TC-14 II makes it a 420 mm f/5.6 and hardly detracts from the image quality at all.  I use this combination on a D-810 a lot and am very happy with it.  I owned the AF-ED (screwdriver) version initially but have replaced it with the AF-S lens.  I used the AF-ED on a D7000 so I can't make a direct comparison of focus speed and accuracy with the AF-S, but I think you can assume the AF-S on a D-810 would be quicker, and I do think it is a slightly sharper lens.  Also as Roland mentions, the near focus limit is very short (maximum magnification 0.27X).  Focus on the D-810 is quite fast and usually accurate.  The only situation in which it sometimes can't keep up is when a bird is flying directly towards me - I have lots of those with nicely focused tail-feathers!  The AF-S is heavy, though nowhere near the bulk or weight of the 300 mm f/2.8.  For wildlife photos I think you'd find background blur with the AF-S is nothing special - out-of-focus vegetation often looks a bit textured and "spongy" - details don't quite dissolve away.  The TC tends to exaggerate this.  Some examples are here:  https://beryllium10.smugmug.com/Skies-over-Seattle/Birds/i-dtKfX7k/A and here:  https://beryllium10.smugmug.com/Seattle/Ballard-Locks/i-6pxvzpt/A. I don't mind it too much, but of course that's a matter of taste. 
Unfortunately I can't compare it to the Tamron zoom you mention, which I haven't used.  That would be a more versatile lens, but I can't say how it compares optically.  Likewise I haven't tried the newer 300 mm F/4 PF, which is said to be very good, but also very expensive.  Since it came out a lot of used AF-S lenses have come up for sale which has brought prices down.  You may be able to find a good one cheap.  Overall I can't help you decide between a prime and the zoom, but I believe you'd find the AF-S lens a noticeable improvement on your older 300 mm AF-ED.  Hope this helps - John

[Jedi]

Jedi, the 300 mm f/4 AF-S is an excellent lens for wildlife photography.

I'm afraid of the famous whistle of an 300/4 AF-S's Old specimen, the same problem of 28-70/2.8 AF-S, 17-35/2.8 AF-S, 80-200/2.8 AF-S. It is happening to many users recently, in fact you can see many specimens on flea markets (used markets, I don't know if the right term is "used" or "flea", excuse me!).

[Jedi]

Jedi, the 300 mm f/4 AF-S is an excellent lens for wildlife photography. The Nikon converter TC-14 II makes it a 420 mm f/5.6 and hardly detracts from the image quality at all.  I use this combination on a D-810 a lot and am very happy with it.  I owned the AF-ED (screwdriver) version initially but have replaced it with the AF-S lens.  I used the AF-ED on a D7000 so I can't make a direct comparison of focus speed and accuracy with the AF-S, but I think you can assume the AF-S on a D-810 would be quicker, and I do think it is a slightly sharper lens.   

Also the Nikon 300/4 F doesn't lose sharpness which Kenko 1,4x Pro DG. For these reasons, I will prefer to keep with me my old Nikon AF 300/4. Now the problem is if the Tamron 150-600mm G2 is sharper. By the picture of others owners I can see that its blur isn't good for me; blur of my 300/4 is fantastic (for me), but I would use a quite sharper lens and the Tamron 150-600mm G2 is the lens which i'm searching for?

[Jedi]

In terms of sharpness, I would expect the 300/4 to be sharper than the zoom at 300mm. Adding a TC to the 300mm will cause some drop in sharpness which might even things up. Again it is hard to be certain without directly comparing the two lenses. The G2 has good reviews so I would expect the sharpness to be competitive.

The AF 300/4 uses the older "screwdriver" AF, which is reasonably fast but probably not as precise as AF-S type motor in the Tamron zoom. The older AF lens is noisier when focusing which could scare wildlife away. AF performance is likely to be worse with a TC attached.

The Tamron has VC (or VR in Nikon terms) which should be very useful for hand-held shooting. The ability to zoom and frame the subject is also a good feature as you could zoom out to show the deer in its environment and then zoom in for a head shot.

Note I have not used either lens but for the purposes you describe, my feeling is the zoom would give better results.

Thank you. My doubt on the Tamron remains large....... In your opinion Tamron 150-600mm could be the best choice, until I will can't buy Nikon F 300/2.8 (using it with monopod), first of all if I use a 1,4x on 300/4 AF. The choice about zoom or not zoom doesn't exist for me as a problem, because the deer or chamois are always far away...... The Vibration Reduction of Tamron could me remove 3 stops, but if I shoot at 1/640s at 600mm with D810 (rule of the inverse of the focal), I coul shoot at 1/125s, we can say......, but I haven't problem to shoot with a monopod..........

[Jedi]

Thank you. My doubt on the Tamron remains large....... In your opinion Tamron 150-600mm could be the best choice, until I will can't buy Nikon F 300/2.8 (using it with monopod), first of all if I use a 1,4x on 300/4 AF. The choice about zoom or not zoom doesn't exist for me as a problem, because the deer or chamois are always far away...... The Vibration Reduction of Tamron could me remove 3 stops, but if I shoot at 1/640s at 600mm with D810 (rule of the inverse of the focal), I coul shoot at 1/125s, we can say......, but I haven't problem to shoot with a monopod..........

For my scruple, I would use a 1/800s or a 1/1000s without monopod with a 600mm, but the Tamron has got the VC and it is light, so I could use 1/125s..... chamois stand still looking at you.

[ColinM]

I know that 300/2.8 is the best choice....

I’ve seen some wonderful images taken with this lens. But don’t underestimate the shooting techniques needed and limitations of using a lens of this weight and size.

I took this image with the 300mm f4 AF-S, hand-held, during a session lasting over 2 hours



A while later, I rented the f2.8 version and went back to the same place.
The weight became more noticeable throughout the session and I stopped handholding quite quickly. All the interesting Red Kite manoeuvres took place above my head. Despite taking a monopod and also some Wimberley gear I couldn’t achieve  the same agility and ability to respond and came back with a poor set of images.

Obviously skills for this lens take time to acquire, but if I ever thought I could even afford the f2.8, the desire to actually own one went away after this session.