p.1 #1 · Nikon shooter: Your opinion on Canon 300 f4 IS (w TC14 too).
I now have the Nikon 300 f4 AFS (again). I have a short time to decide if I am keeping it.
I am now finding that I strongly feel that for the money I should be enjoying the increased freedom of VR. I know.....I knew that when I ordered it. But I thought I would not mind adapting to it. Now I ask myself “Why the hell should I be fighting to adapt to this when Nikon is so very long overdue for upgrading this lens?". I find now that i am PO’d.
I could get another 300 2.8 but there are other things more important in my life now, i.e. the f2.8 cost and weight are a major investment/commitment over the f4 and one that I am not now willing to commit to again....not for now at least.
1. I want to hear from photographers who own (or have owned) both the Nikon 300 AFS and the Canon 300 f4 IS. I would like to here about the Canon’s performance naked and with the Canon 1.4.
2. Also, what Canon body would you recommend with it. FYI, it must be equivalent to my D300 or...Thanks anyway, but just disregard this posting.
I do not need to know how the Nikon performs. It is inarguable that the Nikon 300 AFS is outstanding (disregarding the ongoing, deliberate omission of VR!). I have owned three Nikon 300 f2.8’s....and the f4 is just as sharp as any of the three I had.
I want to know about a comparison of the Canon f4 vs the Nikon f4 from those who have had both.
p.1 #2 · Nikon shooter: Your opinion on Canon 300 f4 IS (w TC14 too).
I hear ya on the absence of VR
Regarding the Canon 300 f4L IS, I've had several over the years. Better build, nice MFD, but the Nikon is a tad sharper.
The old 300 f4L would be more like it, but hard to find and then there is no IS. I guess a 7D would be close to your D300
but slappin' a 1.4TC on it not nearly as good as the naked 400 f5.6L but again...no IS. You see where this is going.
p.1 #3 · Nikon shooter: Your opinion on Canon 300 f4 IS (w TC14 too).
trenchmonkey wrote:
but slappin' a 1.4TC on it not nearly as good as the naked 400 f5.6L but again...no IS. You see where this is going.
probably toward the 100-400L .
OK not as sharp and fast focusing as the old non IS 300/4 and 400/5.6 but on a par with the 300/4 IS (but a stop slower) and usually better than the 300/4IS with a TC.
p.1 #4 · Nikon shooter: Your opinion on Canon 300 f4 IS (w TC14 too).
I used to own the 300/4 IS. It was a nice lens and sharp enough, though the 300/2.8 L I owned later was in a different league entirely.
If you were plan on using it as a 300 prime, I'd say it's a good buy. But if you were planning on using it a lot with a 1.4x TC, I would probably advise getting the 100-400L instead. The zoom will be marginally sharper at 400mm and offer a lot more flexibility.
but again...no IS. You see where this is going. 
