Home · Register · Join Upload & Sell

Moderated by: Fred Miranda
Username  

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

FM Forums | Nikon Forum | Join Upload & Sell

1
       2       end
  

Archive 2015 · What would your choice be?

  
 
tevans9129
Offline

Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #1 · p.1 #1 · What would your choice be?


If, IQ and AF accuracy was the primary focus, would you select the Nikon 200-500 f5.6 or, the Nikon 300 f4 PF with Nikon TC-14E iii? It would be used on a D800e and D7100 and primarily for wildlife. Would the 300 combo be worth the additional $1K? Would you care to share your reasoning for your selection? Thanks for all comments.



Sep 28, 2015 at 01:51 PM
sc_john
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #2 · p.1 #2 · What would your choice be?


tevans9129... Thanks for posting this. I had just opened FM to post literally the same question, but in my case a D750.


Sep 28, 2015 at 02:10 PM
ICee
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #3 · p.1 #3 · What would your choice be?


My chose would be the 300mm and 1.4, it gives you two focal lengths and if needed it takes the 2x Mkiii tc well.
It would work well on both bodies but I think I would tend to favour the D7100



Sep 28, 2015 at 02:47 PM
conrad2nr
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #4 · p.1 #4 · What would your choice be?


I'd take the 200-500 on either the D750 or D800E, not that the D7100 wouldn't do well with it but I'd be able to compensate better with the fx bodies by pumping up the ISO.

Now if you know you'll be shooting in fairly decent light and can nail exposure with the D7100 I'd still choose the 200-500.

From the looks of it the new zoom brings versatility and sharpness at the expense of focus speed which still isn't bad.


I've used the 300mm for a short time and while it is great and sharp the technique employed in shooting a prime sometimes leads to an unfavourable composition/crop.



Sep 28, 2015 at 03:10 PM
Two23
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #5 · p.1 #5 · What would your choice be?


For wildlife, I go for focal length.


Kent in SD



Sep 28, 2015 at 06:03 PM
Danner
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #6 · p.1 #6 · What would your choice be?


Size and weight considered, I'd go with the PF every time.


Sep 28, 2015 at 06:50 PM
lorac
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #7 · p.1 #7 · What would your choice be?


IQ with the 300mmPF is known with and without 1.4 TC, it's outstanding. Not enough info on the 200-500mm, but I think safe to say IQ won't match the 300mmPF. A prime lens will always have better IQ than a zoom, but a zoom offers more versatility and convenience. That's the trade off. The PF has even more appeal with the very lightweight nature of it's design. I'm leaning strongly toward the 300mm PF, actually have the funds but when is the lens ever available? I do want to make sure the 200-500mm isn't a better compromise, before I pull the trigger on the PF. It's not clear to me yet if the 200-500mm is actually optimized for the long end. I never understand that not being the case every time, but more often than not these telephoto zooms disappoint in that area.


Sep 28, 2015 at 06:54 PM
jasoncallen
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #8 · p.1 #8 · What would your choice be?


I'd go with the 300mm prime. It's very very sharp, and as a more compact prime lens with a fixed length, easier to balance than the 200-500 and its ever-growing lens barrel when shooting handheld or off a monopod.


Sep 28, 2015 at 08:11 PM
OwlsEyes
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #9 · p.1 #9 · What would your choice be?


I had to make a similar choice but in higher end (faster and pricier) optics. I was shooting a Canon 300mm f2.8IS L + 1.4Xiii w/ a 5DIII and 7D. The opportunity to buy a Nikon 200-400mm f4 VR and D800E fell in my lap... After shooting the 300 f2.8 since 2008 and similar Sigma fast glass on 1DkII's since around 2004, I opted to sell my kit for the Nikon. While the D800E resolution was a huge bonus, I did not make the move for the camera. I chose the flexibility of a owning a shooting a high-end zoom lens. Sure the 200-400mm f4 is not as sharp as the 300 f2.8 @ f4, but it beats my 300mm + 1.4x combo at 400mm & f4. If you plan to shoot long the naked lens will likely outperform a lens with a converter.

As a reasonable comparison... I also own a 300mm f4 AFS (prior model), and this lens is essentialy the same quality as my 200-400mm at 300mm f4. So... if you plan to shoot at 420mm (300mm + converter) and AF speed is not your priority, you will likely prefer what the new zoom can do for you...
BTW... take all of this w/ a bit of speculation, as I am relying on the work I have seen on the web to draw these conclusions. Since web based images are processed heavily and downsized, it is hard to really know how good the new lens is until more people shoot it and offer an unbiased (aka I bought it thus it must be the best) conclusions.

bruce



Sep 28, 2015 at 08:14 PM
Lauchlan Toal
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #10 · p.1 #10 · What would your choice be?


I'd go with, and will be going with, the 200-500. I don't mind a bit of weight, and the focal range is more versatile. 200mm is good for large mammals, and 500mm is good for birds. Plus you can add a 1.4tc for a pretty decent 700mm f8 lens, for more extreme birding. The 300mm focal length is kind of a compromise for wildlife, in my experience. A tad short for small animals, and a bit long for large ones. If you're the right distance from your subject it's great, but often you're forced to make due with less than ideal compositions. Tcs help, but the 200-500 has more reach at the same apertures. The 300 f4 would be better for low light shooting though. For things like deer at dawn it might be a great lens, giving you a little bit more freedom to shoot before sunrise. So it really comes down to your shooting style.


Sep 28, 2015 at 08:23 PM
tevans9129
Offline

Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #11 · p.1 #11 · What would your choice be?


Thanks to everyone for your thoughts. Since I am on a fixed (small) income, the $1k price differece is an obstical. However, I have the Tamron 150-600 but the issue with it that is not appealing to me is the barrel extension when zoomed out to 600mm. That is one feature of the 200-500 that is not appealing to me. I also think the 300 PF would result in crispier images but that is not a proven. It should also be somewhat less prone to mechanical issues I would think. Oh well, plenty of time left for changing my mind a few dozen times. Thanks again everyone.


Sep 28, 2015 at 08:33 PM
dag_anir
Offline

Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #12 · p.1 #12 · What would your choice be?


I will join the recommendations for the 300 pf
I got to play with it for a couple of days, its light, sharp and will work well with the 1.4.
However if you are aiming mostly for birds it could be a bit short.
It all depends on what you are planing to shoot with it



Sep 29, 2015 at 02:44 AM
OwlsEyes
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #13 · p.1 #13 · What would your choice be?


tevans9129 wrote:
Thanks to everyone for your thoughts. Since I am on a fixed (small) income, the $1k price differece is an obstical. However, I have the Tamron 150-600 but the issue with it that is not appealing to me is the barrel extension when zoomed out to 600mm. That is one feature of the 200-500 that is not appealing to me. I also think the 300 PF would result in crispier images but that is not a proven. It should also be somewhat less prone to mechanical issues I would think. Oh well, plenty of time left for changing my mind
...Show more

The telescoping extension of the less expensive super-zooms is one of my least favorite characteristics of these lenses as well. I could see this as being a weak point if the lens is to be used a lot.



Sep 29, 2015 at 05:51 AM
fdevyatkin
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #14 · p.1 #14 · What would your choice be?


The 300 prime is a very useful lens. You already have the Tammy for greater reach. The 300 can be hand held for extended periods and adding the TC will not change that. Maybe the question is, should you sell the Tammy for the 200-500vr? Stick the 300 on the D7100 and see what you think.
My two cents : )
Fred

tevans9129 wrote:
If, IQ and AF accuracy was the primary focus, would you select the Nikon 200-500 f5.6 or, the Nikon 300 f4 PF with Nikon TC-14E iii? It would be used on a D800e and D7100 and primarily for wildlife. Would the 300 combo be worth the additional $1K? Would you care to share your reasoning for your selection? Thanks for all comments.




Sep 29, 2015 at 06:16 AM
conrad2nr
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #15 · p.1 #15 · What would your choice be?


If you plan to keep the Tamron 150-600 (I have one and love it) I'd give the 300mm PF a go, at least to compare sharpness with and without the TC.

Tammy for convenience and reach
and
300mm PF for lightweight and sharpness



Sep 29, 2015 at 08:43 AM
OldDogKen
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #16 · p.1 #16 · What would your choice be?


The 300 and TC for wildlife reach. Reaction time for firing may also improve with less zooming decisions to make. I favor primes for reaction time.


Sep 29, 2015 at 08:49 AM
trenchmonkey
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #17 · p.1 #17 · What would your choice be?


Neither. I'd take the 80-400G for range/versatility.
I have a 300 f2.8 as well as the Sport 150-600, yet
my 80-400's still in the bullpen and ready to rock.
Seen some great deals on used ones of late.



Sep 29, 2015 at 08:56 AM
ckcarr
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #18 · p.1 #18 · What would your choice be?


Being that you're on a fixed income I'd be sure that you really want new gear, can sell the old gear, and that the cost is worth it. And that you are not swept up in NAS with these two new lenses. On the other hand, if photography is a big part of your life and makes you happy, then go for it.

Like Trenchmonkey is pointing out, don't ignore the 80-400mm G either, if you really need/want it.



Sep 29, 2015 at 09:11 AM
tevans9129
Offline

Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #19 · p.1 #19 · What would your choice be?


ckcarr wrote:
if you really need/want it.


Since I am a rank amateur, "need" has nothing to do with it. It is more like an appreciation for quality tools……ones that I can afford. Some appreciate nice paintings, I prefer nice tools, with the added benefit of using them.



Sep 29, 2015 at 10:05 AM
tevans9129
Offline

Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #20 · p.1 #20 · What would your choice be?


If I may ask another question…..it is only on rare occasions that I do not use a tripod so would there be any downside going with the older version of the 300 f4? Keeping in mind that my primary interest is IQ and AF accuracy. Some nice ones seem to be available for about half the price of the new PF.

I will keep the Tammy 150-600 if I go with the 300 but would sell it if I decide on the 200-500.

Thanks to all for your comments and suggestions.



Sep 29, 2015 at 10:31 AM
1
       2       end




FM Forums | Nikon Forum | Join Upload & Sell

1
       2       end
    
 

You are not logged in. Login or Register

Username       Or Reset password



This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.