Technical aspects of the AFS 300mm f/4 E PF lens

[Bjørn Rørslett]

The use of extension to 300 mm class lenses has a long-standing tradition amongst nature photographers. The first references in literature I have seen for this approach go back to the mid '50s. I used a 300/4.5 ED-IF plus PN-11 more than thirty years ago ... John Shaw comments and exemplifies the technique in several of his books.

This is a neat way of utilising the fact that depth of field (ie., the zone perceived as sharp) largely depends on magnification, while background blur is controlled by the size of the blur circles, the latter being determined by the absolute size of the aperture. For a short focal length the depth of field tends to be confused with the background blur, as the blur circles are small and one has to examine the image more closely to appreciate the difference, whilst for a long focal length these concepts are much more clearly differentiated. Thus with a 300 mm + extension to give say 1:3 reproduction scale (magnification 0.3X), you can stop the master lens down to f/16 to maximise the depth of field and still keep a blurred background, thus attaining better subject isolation. The main problem is the sheer amount of extension required to get decent magnification thus having a master lens focusing close on its own is a must.

Another popular combination working on the same principle is of course the 180mm f/2.8 ED Nikkor with the PN-11. Subject isolation is not as excellent as with a longer lens, but one gets away with a more compact and manageable package and by opening up more, subject isolation rapidly increases.

[Erik Lund]

Ahh, but then you risk the bg bokeh...

[Bjørn Rørslett]

As long as the blur circles are overlapping enough, background smoothness is guaranteed even at f/16.

[simsurace]

I'm having issues with VR on D750. It is almost impossible to get a sharp image at around 1/125s with VR on. I'm currently in email contact with Nikon service in order to investigate this. Will keep you updated!

[Danulon]

I'm having issues with VR on D750. It is almost impossible to get a sharp image at around 1/125s with VR on. I'm currently in email contact with Nikon service in order to investigate this. Will keep you updated!

vr problems in general or the infamous vr problem with the 300 mm E PF at certain speeds?

[simsurace]

Mostly at speeds between 1/80s and 1/200s.
Otherwise, the lens is pure bliss, so I hope this issue will get resolved.

[chris dees]

This is THE issue with the 300PF. There's a firmware fix (your lens has to go to a repair centre).
After the fix is done problems are not gone (I have a D810). If you have a grip or a lens plate, you can solve this mostly.
My lens has the fix, but I stil have the problems (not as bad as before the fix). It seems to be no problem on the D500 though.
I have mine with me in Scotland, so we can test it if you want..

[simsurace]

This is THE issue with the 300PF. There's a firmware fix (your lens has to go to a repair centre).
After the fix is done problems are not gone (I have a D810). If you have a grip or a lens plate, you can solve this mostly.
My lens has the fix, but I stil have the problems (not as bad as before the fix). It seems to be no problem on the D500 though.
I have mine with me in Scotland, so we can test it if you want..

According to the service advisory, my serial number was made after the batch that was supposed to need the service.
I'm in contact with someone from Nikon support, but I haven't convinced him yet that I have an issue (and not simply a lack of knowledge of how VR works or normal motion blur looks like, LOL). So I'm patiently waiting for clarification.
Yes, let's see whether your lens is any different on my bodies or vice versa.

[simsurace]

Three center crops at 1/125s on the D750. I see very clear double images in the first two shots, the third is either that or even more random blur. The frustrating thing is that it does not happen only occasionally (I would be fine with that, after all I cannot reliably hand-hold a 300mm at 1/125s) but nearly every time. Maybe one out of 20 shots will be sharp by chance, but that's even less than one can expect without VR, where it's not completely unrealistic to get a decently sharp shot with care. At 1/60s it gets better, fully consistent with all the reports on the D8XX cameras.

[Ilkka Nissilä]

Nikon issued a firmware fix to the D750 that addresses VR performance issues, did you update yours with the latest firmware?

Also the 300/4 PF early versions (lower serial numbers than 205101) needed updating in Nikon service.   

https://nikoneurope-en.custhelp.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/64211/~/to-users-of-the-af-s-nikkor-300mm-f%2F4e-pf-ed-vr-lens

However,  VR issues are still reported by some users even with updated firmware. I think the fundamental problem is transfer of the shutter (and maybe mirror) vibration to the lens which somehow interferes with the VR operation. Reprogramming the lens and camera can only go so far to alleviate the problem.

I use faster shutter speeds when hand holding the lens (typically 1/200s or faster) and don't expect critical sharpness at slow speeds with a hand held lens. For landscape and close-up photography, I use the lens with a tripod.  When I've tried the hand held VR operation at different speeds, it seemed that the sharpness gradually increased towards shorter exposure times and figured that this is the expected behavior in a lens.

[simsurace]

I have the most recent firmware version on my D750.

I don't expect every shot to be sharp. But to have every single shot have the same blur is not acceptable I think because this is actually worse than having VR turned off. This dramatically reduces the usefulness of VR.
Moreover, you can expect to have very sharp shots occasionally, even with 1/125s with VR hand-held on a D810, as this report shows:
http://www.richardpeters.co.uk/blog/2015/06/25/nikon-300mm-f4-pf-review-the-death-of-super-telephotos/

I don't know whether Nikon will find a solution to this problem, but for the time being I will stay in touch with them.

The VR works better on my D600, and very well on the V1 with FT-1. I managed to get sharp results at 1/20s on the V1, which is amazing. To have issues at much faster speeds (like 1/125) on FX is strange.

[Airy]

I have a recent copy (supposedly with the correct firmware) and, on Df, I do use VR
- at 1/250s at least, to ease framing when handheld (= most of the time)
- at 1/30s (M Mode, with auto ISO to take care of the exposure) on dark static subjects, with excellent results (at least two *really sharp* shots out of three).
The lens is optically sooo goood, and such easy to carry and tuck into a shoulder bag, that I can live with the flawed VR.

[simsurace]

I agree that the lens is otherwise great, but...

I do not think that VR issues of this degree are acceptable, the VR is among the key features of this lens that are advertised by Nikon. Nikon claims 4.5 stops benefits over hand-holding. Therefore the high customer expectations are warranted. Issues to get any sharp results at all at 1/125s, which isn't even 2 stops under the usual hand-holding speed, are therefore not to be expected (I understand the issues with mirror slap etc that might be at play here, but it is the engineers' task to find solutions for this, or at least the issue should be made fully public such that customer expectations are set straight). Moreover, there are plenty of lenses that do not show the same issue (did anyone ever encounter these issues on a 300/2.8 VR I or II?).

When there is an issue with a product, advanced photographers (I'm not even that advanced IMHO) will quickly notice it. I expect Nikon to react with an attitude which is focused on solving the problem, rather than denying it. Unfortunately, it has often been the case with Nikon that problems are denied until pressure gets too high. I feel that this is getting better, but it crucially demands that customers who are not entirely satisfied give feedback to Nikon such that they realize how wide-spread a given problem is.

[Airy]

I agree this should not have happened, and Nikon's reaction so far is not sufficient. My expression of satisfaction is just personal judgment, not about the company. I initially intended to return the lens, until I got some really beautiful (to me) shots I could not have (easily) obtained with others - neither the 300/4 AF, nor the 70-200VR2. So I decided to keep it, keep on shooting with said settings, and wait for an unlikely reaction from Nikon's part.

[Ilkka Nissilä]

I waited for a VR version of the 300/4 for many years. I am actually reasonably happy with the VR works on this lens for me. I need it when photographing people hand held. The subjects are moving and the VR stabilizes the view and improves my focus keeper rate. The AF was not that great in the previous version but in the VR version I find it works very well. I typically shoot at 1/500s to 1/1000s when the subject is in motion. Occasionally I may take a shot of a static subject at around 1/250s but I don't expect as good results as I would at higher speeds. With the 300/4D AF-S, I would have to go to 1/800s minimum to get a sharp pic hand held and many of them would be out of focus. So the 300/4 VR does do what I need it to do.

A 300/2.8 is a different animal, much heavier and so it shakes less (and is likely less easily perturbed by shutter/mirror movement). A V1 has no mirror and can operate in electronic shutter mode AFAIK. An FX camera has a larger mirror and shutter than a DX camera. The D810 has a motor driven mirror which slows down before impact, causing less vibrations than a D750. Large mirror and shutter, tiny lens with low mass and high magnification. => o-oh.

I am actually waiting for a 300/2.8E FL VR. I know the current G VR II version is excellent but an FL version would be a bit lighter. And I hope for a better tripod mount in that lens. I'm not in a hurry as the 300/4 VR does what I need most of the time.