Nikon AF-S 300mm F/4D ED Lens - Quality on a budget!

[BruceSD]

I went out this afternoon with my D7100 with the older version of this 300mm f/4 lens on it. I shot it handheld wide open. It was a cloudy/snowy day.

Anyway, I shot the below photo of a McDonalds sign at their street entrance.  I suppose that I was about 30 yards away.

The first photo is the entire image.  The second photo is at 100%.

You can see that this lens has incredible sharpness, even wide open hand held.

This lens is handholdable if you remove it's tripod collar.  Also it's fairly economical (I recently purchased one for a little over $600 USD).

For those, like me, who like Nikon photography and are on a budget, the AFS 300mm f/4 Nikkor (older version) is a great telephoto option to consider.

Also, here's a link ( http://www.lenscore.org/ )  to "LenScore's" Nikon Prime lens rating page. They rated the older AFS 300mm f/4 version of this lens that I have 8th. That's very high, especially when you consider the seven lenses that are rated above it are all much more expensive.  Please note that the newer version of this lens is only rated 16th.

[Peter Connan]

Please explain why you feel you need to remove the tripod collar in order to hand-hold the lens?

I prefer keeping it on, as I can then rest my elbow in my side, making for a more stable position.

[Bjørn Rørslett]

Is this the version with the horrible tripod mount?

[pluton]

Is this the version with the horrible tripod mount?

I think that if it is the AF-S version, it is.
 I replaced the mount on mine with the Kirk tripod mount, which then allowed me to demonstrate to myself all the pitfalls of camera-generated tripod wobble when using the "danger zone" shutter speeds.
I've owned two different copies. 
This is a lens that forces me to use auto focus most of the time, due to the tacky-rubbery internal clutch feel of the manual focusing, a trait it shares with the AF-S 70-200/2.8 zooms.
It images extremely well on the Fujifilm X camera I have, using a Novoflex adapter.

[Bjørn Rørslett]

That version of the 300 had excellent imaging quality plus the benefit of close focusing. Both features negated by its truly awful wobbling tripod mount.

[Hermann]

A friend of mine sold the AFS version four weeks after he bought because he was so annoyed about the tripod collar. Went back to using his ancient 4.5/300 IF-ED for closeup work.

He's now thinking about getting the new 300mm though.

Hermann

[MILLIREHM]

That version of the 300 had excellent imaging quality plus the benefit of close focusing. Both features negated by its truly awful wobbling tripod mount.

Fortunately it is replaceable (similar to most other Nikon superteles) and that has become a Standard-procedure to be done for most of them

[Bjørn Rørslett]

Wouldn't it be better not having to rely on third-party solutions? Besides, many of these long lenses are built in a manner that will not allow for optimal placement or construction of replacement tripod mounts. For example, you cannot fit really wide rotating collars to them.

[MILLIREHM]

Wouldn't it be better not having to rely on third-party solutions? Besides, many of these long lenses are built in a manner that will not allow for optimal placement or construction of replacement tripod mounts. For example, you cannot fit really wide rotating collars to them.

Yes! I fully agree! and it should be forbidden to combine stellar optics with mechanical construction of that crappy design. But I am glad that there is some kind of workaround - although some "features" like too narrow collars (including lens gems like the AF-S 200/2)  and ill-planned positionong of the mount are unresolved by third party providers (at least they come with Arca-Swiss type rail integrated)

[ColSebastianMoran]

Bruce, thanks for reminding us of the excellent image quality of the AF-S 300 f/4.

If really on a budget, the even older 300 f/4 AF also produces excellent images, though the AF isn't as fast as with the AF-S version.

I've used both of these on a monopod for bird photography.

[Mongo]

The AF-S 300mm f4 (the model immediately before the latest “PF” version) has excellent optics and is the budget longish lens of choice. Mongo bought his used near new from another camera club member for $700 Australian. It came complete with a new Rodenstock UV filter and “the right stuff” brand of after market foot and collar. Amazing value ! Despite other long lenses since buying the 300mm, Mongo has kept it as it is too good to part with.

Smallish, light, reliable and works great with converters. Very respectable results can be obtained even with 20EIII with good technique. Have used it for years and do not miss the VR.

Some sample images just to demonstrate sharpness/quality:-

1.   with D800 @ f8

2.      with D800 @ f8

3.      with D800E and  X1.4EII @ f10, 1/1250th , ISO 400

4.      with D800  and  X1.7EII @ f6.7 (wide open)

[Hugh_3170]

Mongo, your four samples are quite simply excellent.  Probably the first and third I like best.  You have certainly gotten on top of this lens.

[Mongo]

Mongo, your four samples are quite simply excellent.  Probably the first and third I like best.  You have certainly gotten on top of this lens.

Thanks Hugh. The images are just to demonstrate the lens and not for any photographic value

[Hermann]

The images are just to demonstrate the lens and not for any photographic value

I think you're a bit too modest ...  The third one is a great shot, I think. Lovely.

I think I've got to go looking for my fieldguide to check which species it is, as I've never been to your part of the world. May take a while though, there're just too many books ...

Hermann

[Mongo]

I think you're a bit too modest ...  The third one is a great shot, I think. Lovely.

I think I've got to go looking for my fieldguide to check which species it is, as I've never been to your part of the world. May take a while though, there're just too many books ...

Hermann

Thank you Hermann - you are too kind. This a little off topic but to save you looking through too many books, the bird is a common Magpie (juvenile). BTW f10 was only used in this case because Mongo was reasonable close and had a converter on  - thus more DOF was required.