Home · Register · Search · View Winners · Software · Hosting · Software · Join Upload & Sell

Moderated by: Fred Miranda
Username   Password

  New fredmiranda.com Mobile Site
  New Feature: SMS Notification alert
  New Feature: Buy & Sell Watchlist
  

FM Forums | Nikon Forum | Join Upload & Sell

  

Archive 2013 · 300 2.8 optical differences?
  
 
RKB58
Offline

Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #1 · 300 2.8 optical differences?


Hello,

I have been using an older 300/2.8 AF version 1 screwdrive for a couple of years. Have been happy with it, and yes, the AF is (barely) fast enough on recent bodies to get a lot of keepers for the little bit of sports shooting of my friends that I do with it. It has been a good value for $'s I have in it, since I don't generate income with it.

But, I have noted that the price for AF-S non VR versions have come down some. I don't really need to upgrade, but... if image quality is significantly better...and I now have a 1.7 Nikon TC...

Has anyone directly compared image quality at 2.8 for early versions (pre AF-I including manual focus) to AF-S versions on higher resolution bodies such as the D800?

I don't really need faster AF, but would make the upgrade if IQ were significantly improved with an AFS model. Don't know anybody locally with one to borrow and test/evaluate.




Feb 03, 2013 at 04:52 PM
DGC1
Online
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #2 · 300 2.8 optical differences?


My friend has an AF-S/2.8 and I have the AF-S/2.8 VR I. Having used both, I see no IQ difference even with the "sainted" Nano coating.


Feb 03, 2013 at 09:16 PM
AndreasE
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #3 · 300 2.8 optical differences?


RKB58 wrote:
Has anyone directly compared image quality at 2.8 for early versions (pre AF-I including manual focus) to AF-S versions on higher resolution bodies such as the D800?


Yes, I still have a few of those lenses

The optical formula of this series changed basically 2 times

The AiS/AF had an 8/6 lens structure,
the AFI 11/9,
since the AFS type I the lens is a 11/8, enhanced over time with new coating, etc ...

At f2.8 the difference between the AF and AFS is visible unless you downsize the final image considerable. The biggest difference is in night photography, where the AF produces more pronouced halo than the more modern heir.

As allways, it depens if you want to spend the $ on the new lens. Is it better? Yes it is. Does it matter? That depends more on you, less on the lens ...

rgds,
Andy




Feb 03, 2013 at 09:48 PM
RKB58
Offline

Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #4 · 300 2.8 optical differences?


Andy, Thanks for the input. When I got my 2.8AF, I compared it to the 300/4AFS I had. I preferred the results from the 2.8, so the AFS went on the auction block. Can't remember what body I used.

Since then, I have missed having a more portable 300 on occasion. I recently picked up an earlier 300/4ED for a good deal. Now, the 300/4 is looking pretty good on my D600 vs the 300/2.8 (at f/4). Not sure if I just got an especially good 300/4. AF seems OK with my 2.8, was happy with the results last time I had the 2.8 on a shoot.

Guess I need to find a 300/2.8 AFS to compare to the AF I have.






Feb 03, 2013 at 10:32 PM
AndreasE
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #5 · 300 2.8 optical differences?


Taken with the AFS VRII (same optical design like the AFS Typ I)

D800, handheld






100% crop






or helicoper (full size)
or building

D800, AFS 300mm at f2.8






100% crop






regards,
Andy



Feb 03, 2013 at 11:06 PM





FM Forums | Nikon Forum | Join Upload & Sell

    
 

You are not logged in. Login or Register

Username   Password    Retrive password