Reviews > Ramblings of the Fierce Bear of the North
The new, amazing 300 mm f/4 PF ED VR Nikkor E
Bjørn Rørslett:
No, haven't, only 720 nm which works just fine. So my guess is 830 nm should be similar in behaviour.
Shane:
Thanks.
Jack of all trades:
I would like a 300mm lens, mostly for stage shows. My concern with this lens is the reports I have seen that shooting into light sources gives bad results I like the small size, lighter weight and lower cost compared to the 300mm f2.8 but not at the expensed of unsatisfactory results. Have you observed this problem? Thank you.
Ilkka Nissilä:
--- Quote from: Jack of all trades on September 16, 2016, 04:30:05 ---I would like a 300mm lens, mostly for stage shows. My concern with this lens is the reports I have seen that shooting into light sources gives bad results I like the small size, lighter weight and lower cost compared to the 300mm f2.8 but not at the expensed of unsatisfactory results. Have you observed this problem? Thank you.
--- End quote ---
In stage lighting I haven't had any problems (a few spots in the background).
https://www.flickr.com/photos/ilkka_nissila/28156705820/in/dateposted-public/
I really like the way the lens renders hair and texture, e.g. here the subject is lit from the side.
https://www.flickr.com/photos/ilkka_nissila/28400279893/in/dateposted-public/
As long as the sun is not within the frame or just outside of it, I haven't run into problems. When the sun does hit the front element, then there is flare, but I try to keep it so that it doesn't. In practical shooting avoiding direct sun can be done by having something obstruct the light such as tree leaves:
https://www.flickr.com/photos/ilkka_nissila/27503067925/in/dateposted-public/
Later on that afternoon the light did ruin shots, but I am generally happy with the lens.
It does have a slight tendency to render skin with low contrast and I think it is related to the PF design but the way I use it is that I try to have good lighting contrast, and colourful texture in the subject, and these result in snappy pictures with this lens. Usually perfomers on stage put some attention to the way they are dressed so generally speaking this lens has worked very well for these subjects. However, if the light is very soft and dim then the results are not so great, and a conventional lens like 300/2.8 (or in my case 200/2) works better.
Ilkka Nissilä:
I guess an important point is that my typical application of the 300/4 PF is outdoors and there is always some soft light as a fill even when the sun or stage lights contribute to the lighting. Indoors, in a night club type lighting I use shorter lenses and I haven't used the PF in such conditions.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version