p.1 #1 · 300mm f4 vs. 70-200mm f4 with 1.4 teleconverter for aircraft
I'm using the 300mm lens, with D800E, for fast jets both in the air and on the ground at a military airfield. This lens is excellent, and generally about the right focal length. Trouble is, it seems quite heavy after an hour or so. (It's an age thing!). A monopod helps to take the weight during periods of inactivity.
The 70-200mm f4 with a 1.4x teleconverter would give up to 280mm, which should just be OK. This combo is quite a lot lighter than the 300mm (about 1050gms vs. 1440gms). The 70-200mm would also be much more versatile, and have wider use.
Has anyone compared these two options for this purpose? Apart from the weight issue, image quality is the key question. From reviews, it would seem likely that the combo would probably compare well with the 300mm - is this a fair judgement please?
I had tended to dismiss the Nikon 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6G AF-S VR, because image quality may fall short compared with the 300mm. Is this fair? This lens would certainly be much lighter.
p.1 #2 · 300mm f4 vs. 70-200mm f4 with 1.4 teleconverter for aircraft
I can answer your question in part: 70-200f4 with 1.4 TC's image quality is extremely good, imho. I really could not detect any degradation in IQ for my use. Coincidentally, this combo also works very well with the 2.0iii, though AF hunts in low lighting conditions.
p.1 #3 · 300mm f4 vs. 70-200mm f4 with 1.4 teleconverter for aircraft
Of course, you're also at f/5.6 wide open, which means your focus is going to be slower as well as needing to boost ISO/lower SS to compensate (assuming you shoot wide open much).
p.1 #4 · 300mm f4 vs. 70-200mm f4 with 1.4 teleconverter for aircraft
My 300 f4 reaches stupid sharpness at f5 I'm thinkin' using the TC with an f4 zoom you'd be lookin' at
f8 or f9 to get the best IQ...if you can live with that, go for it. It still won't equal the naked prime, however.
p.1 #5 · 300mm f4 vs. 70-200mm f4 with 1.4 teleconverter for aircraft
Taking Trenchmonkey's point, the speed/aperture equation is an issue to think about. My last set of photos with the 300mm lens were shot at ISO 200, f5.6 and 1/1250. If anything, I would prefer a faster shutter speed (hands no longer quite as steady). That means I have little to compromise with, and f8 would add to the problem.
The whole point of asking was to get other views before jumping! 'Binary's' point about slower focussing is relevant for jets which even on landing are moving fast, and close. 'Jammyn' seems to be happy though - is that at f5.6?
p.1 #6 · 300mm f4 vs. 70-200mm f4 with 1.4 teleconverter for aircraft
binary visions wrote:
Of course, you're also at f/5.6 wide open, which means your focus is going to be slower as well as needing to boost ISO/lower SS to compensate (assuming you shoot wide open much).
Well, at f/5.6, Nikon's cross-type sensors will be fully operational (I am unsure about the single-orientation sensors), so that should be taken out of the equation. This leaves the focus speed of the lens itself. The 300/4 is not terribly fast, but with the focus limiter, it is pretty decent. With a 1.4 TC, the 300/4 does not slow down (this is on my D2 bodies - not sure about newer - but I expect the same behaviour).
p.1 #7 · 300mm f4 vs. 70-200mm f4 with 1.4 teleconverter for aircraft
Hi Avi -
Just because the sensor is operational doesn't mean that the AF will be as fast. The more light is coming in, the better the PDAF will work. Same reason PDAF slows down when it's dark out, even if it's within the spec of the AF system (e.g. EV -2).
p.1 #8 · 300mm f4 vs. 70-200mm f4 with 1.4 teleconverter for aircraft
For a lightweight stabilized 300/5.6, the Tamron 70-300 VC is the one to beat. Better than the Nikon 70-300VR on the long end, and it's enough lighter than the 300/4 to make it a reasonable different choice. The 70-200/4 is a great lens, but seems unlikely to give clear benefits in any area (still fairly heavy, not as good optically as the 300/4, etc.). It's also cheap, so it's easier to add, without selling off the stellar 300/4.
p.1 #9 · 300mm f4 vs. 70-200mm f4 with 1.4 teleconverter for aircraft
The 300 F4 is fairly fast and crazy sharp. I can't imagine any way the 70-200 w/ TC would ever be as sharp (I own both lenses and TC). Just the way it is. I honestly don't even have a real need for my 300 F4 at this point, but I keep it just because it's such a sharp lens.
p.1 #10 · 300mm f4 vs. 70-200mm f4 with 1.4 teleconverter for aircraft
Based on my tests the 70-200 f/4 + 1.4X isn't as sharp as the the new 80-400 AF-S at 300mm (which is the least sharp focal length on the 80-400) so I wouldn't expect it could touch the bare 300 prime.
p.1 #11 · 300mm f4 vs. 70-200mm f4 with 1.4 teleconverter for aircraft
Thanks for all the comments - it has made me re-think it all. First decision is to keep the 300mm lens, and use it for short periods of time in those locations where the 'reach' is essential.
I'm pretty much also decided to get the 70-200mm f4 for parts of the airfield that have closer access. These usually involve more walking, and the lighter weight of this lens should be OK. I can usually park fairly close to the action so it won't be necessary to cart the second lens around all the time.
The new 80-400mm AF-S should be a perfect airfield lens, if it were not for the weight!
p.1 #14 · 300mm f4 vs. 70-200mm f4 with 1.4 teleconverter for aircraft
Weight is the only problem with my 300mm, so anything heavier just gets worse. I never got as far as checking the price of the 80-400mm!
As an aside - I still have my Canon gear, including a great 70-200mm f4 L lens and 5D Mk2. I considered using this combo as a second camera to alternate with the D800E/300mm combo. BUT, whilst the Canon is still excellent gear, I'm finding the Nikon outfit suits me so well. (Not wanting to make comparisons and stir up a hornets nest!). Maybe it is time to sell the little used jewels of my Canon prime lens collection to fund a 70-200mm f4 VR.
p.1 #16 · 300mm f4 vs. 70-200mm f4 with 1.4 teleconverter for aircraft
I've got to keep the D800E. Best all round camera I have ever owned, and the loss in a second-hand sale compared with the price it cost new would be more than I dare calculate.
The D7100 does look good though, and with a 70-200mm lens it would give enough 'reach' at a good weight. I have now come round to thinking that the D800E with a 70-200mm f4 lens would be good for most of the time, swopping to the 300mm for long shot situations. I could work with that compromise, I think.
p.1 #17 · 300mm f4 vs. 70-200mm f4 with 1.4 teleconverter for aircraft
That's your best bet. The D7100 and the D800e are somewhat complimentary camera bodies. Also you could consider a Nikon 70-200mm VRI to go on the D7100. Faster, somewhat better subject isolation. Perfectly fine on the D7100. And find a used copy cheaper than the new f/4 version..
p.1 #19 · 300mm f4 vs. 70-200mm f4 with 1.4 teleconverter for aircraft
That is a great shot trenchmonkey - the sort that cry out for a shotgun (In my defence of such an outrageous comment, my shotgun has long since replaced by a camera!).
Yesterday was the 70th anniversary of the wartime raid on the German dams by RAF Lancaster bombers using 'bouncing bombs'. A Lancaster marked this anniversary with a pass over our local reservoir. The 300mm plus 1.4x teleconverter was perfect, handheld at the same shutter speed and aperture as your shot. I normally photograph the fast jets at those settings without obvious camera shake. The downside for a Lancaster or Spitfire is the lack of propeller blur - can't have it all, it seems. I'm still OK with this heavy outfit for short periods, but not all day.
The two photos are the first that I have posted. Apologies if their size/resolution is wrong - I will then sort out any issues when I can see what I am doing wrong!
I'm thinkin' using the TC with an f4 zoom you'd be lookin' at
It still won't equal the naked prime, however.
(In my defence of such an outrageous comment, my shotgun has long since replaced by a camera!).
