There are 2 Nikon lenses I love to use, the 200mm f2 & the 300mm 2.8, this grouping is the 300mm 2.8 VRII that is used hand held all the time with either a D500 0r D5, most of these images are the taken with a D5 which I think of as a D500 on steroids. I mostly shoot in early morning or just before sunset always seeking the golden light.
Great images - thanks for sharing! Hope others can help revive this thread. I’ll post once I take the lens out.
rand1951 wrote:
There are 2 Nikon lenses I love to use, the 200mm f2 & the 300mm 2.8, this grouping is the 300,, 2.8 VRII that is used hand held all the time with either a D500 0r D5, most of these images are the taken with a D5 which I think of as a D500 on steroids. I mostly shoot in early morning or just before sunset all=wats seeking the golden light.
Nikon truly made incredible optic lenses for cameras and the cameras they produced created great color for their images of which the 300mm 2.8 VRII is on of the best. With the advent of the fresnel technology now applied to the new light fresnel Nikon lenses the manufacture of these high quality optics will slowly fade. As I switch to a mirrorless Nikon system I will hold on to these irreplaceable lenses as their manufacturer cost will become to extreme.
Last year I stopped using teleconverters entirely not wanting to sacrifice sharp focus for larger image. A paradox now as the new mirrorless cameras have very little loss with using a teleconverter and the need for lense calibration in the camera is a mute point.
stevekphotos wrote:
Loved the lens when I had it. Kept the 200mm F/2, because 200F/2 & 400mm F/4 was more useful for me long term.
I understand you keeping that combo, makes excellent sense!
All of the super teles from Nikon are out of this world.
Cannon makes some great super teles as well, but when digital cameras came on the scene, I was too heavily invested in Nikon lenses to make the switch. However, I am happy that I stayed with the Nikon products as they have never let me down!
Awesome images, especially like the 3rd one with the rider looking at the cameraman, usually I do not like that, but this image caught a moment that connected.
GSteele wrote:
I understand you keeping that combo, makes excellent sense!
Cannon makes some great super teles as well, but when digital cameras came on the scene, I was too heavily invested in Nikon lenses to make the switch. However, I am happy that I stayed with the Nikon products as they have never let me down!
I've never had the privilege of using any of the Canon supertele's. My experience with Canon is that the images are always dull and flat. Sony looks artificial, as if it was heavily post processed. Nikon is basically straight out of the camera sublime (as mine is above, no post processing).
I think the 200mm F/2 makes colors pop about 50% more than the 300mm F/2.8 or 400mm F/2.8, but optically and focus wise all three lenses are perfect and you wouldn't be able to tell the difference unless they were side by side.
I noticed today that Sony's new 400mm F/2.8 for their E mount has terrible bokeh because of the redesign of the lens. I'm wondering if Nikon's will share the same issue.
Something special about Nikon's optical designs. In my opinion.
stevekphotos wrote:
I've never had the privilege of using any of the Canon supertele's. My experience with Canon is that the images are always dull and flat. Sony looks artificial, as if it was heavily post processed. Nikon is basically straight out of the camera sublime (as mine is above, no post processing).
I think the 200mm F/2 makes colors pop about 50% more than the 300mm F/2.8 or 400mm F/2.8, but optically and focus wise all three lenses are perfect and you wouldn't be able to tell the difference unless they were side by side.
I noticed today that Sony's new 400mm F/2.8 for their E mount has terrible bokeh because of the redesign of the lens. I'm wondering if Nikon's will share the same issue.
Something special about Nikon's optical designs. In my opinion. ...Show more →
I have been shooting with some buddies and tried out their 500mm & 600mm as they tried out mine. It was with the 500mm that we had the Ford vs Chevy type debate on which was the better lens.
You know, I take for granite Nikon's Colors and Clarity and agree there is nothing better straight out of the camera, not exactly sure how Nikon puts it all together but am glad that they do
I'm sure we would/will get some argument from other's on this, however my Canon buddies have forgotten more about post processing than I will ever know or want to know. I wonder why?
It is hard to imagine that Nikon would give anything up on their new 400mm f/2.8!
GSteele wrote:
I have been shooting with some buddies and tried out their 500mm & 600mm as they tried out mine. It was with the 500mm that we had the Ford vs Chevy type debate on which was the better lens.
You know, I take for granite Nikon's Colors and Clarity and agree there is nothing better straight out of the camera, not exactly sure how Nikon puts it all together but am glad that they do
I'm sure we would/will get some argument from other's on this, however my Canon buddies have forgotten more about post processing than I will ever know or want to know. I wonder why?
It is hard to imagine that Nikon would give anything up on their new 400mm f/2.8! ...Show more →
In order for me to get the Nikon sRGB colors into Lightroom properly I have to export the NEF from Capture NX-D/Studio into a TIFF, and then import the TIFF (which contains the profile) to Lightroom. Otherwise, it's never right.
You know I was considering picking up a 400mm F/2.8 VR, but now I'm wondering if I should just buy another of these 300mm VR units and keep it indefinitely. I'm not sure I have much use for 600mm/F5.6, but more reach never hurts.
The 300 is the only other 6 pound lens I can hand hold. Once you hit 400, you're on a monopod. It's not that you can't handhold ten pounds, but the 400mm is just too long with the weight on the far end.
My F5 film camera is amazing with this lens and focus is no issue. AS EXPECTED, my Z5 struggles with this lens in auto area af. While I wait for my Z9 order... are their any modes/tips etc that help this lens/camera combo.
You are so right about the 300mm 2.8 VR being a hand holdable lens and the 400mm 2.8 Vr is not. I had the 400mm 2.8 VR and sold it for exactly that reason, I can walk around with either the 300mm 2.8 or 200mm f/2 on a D5, on a 5 mile hike the weight is noticable, but very manageable and the images are worth the effort, not to mention being able to shoot at just about any time of day, even after sunset or before sunrise,
About the 200mm f/2, it just has insanely unique images that pop. As always, light is always king and most cameras above $350 can get an extremely good image is taken in great light. I always read the manual and experiment with different settings, the 900 page z9 manual looks like it will take a while and as much as I try am never able to feel like I can stop learning something new.
My F5 film camera is amazing with this lens and focus is no issue. AS EXPECTED, my Z5 struggles with this lens in auto area af. While I wait for my Z9 order... are their any modes/tips etc that help this lens/camera combo.
Is it just slow, in relation to what, or is it hunting to find focus? What model 300mm do you have? How old is the battery on your Z5?
Hunting. Nikon 300mm 2.8VRII that is less than a year old. The z5 with a fresh, OEM battery. It struggles more than any other adapted lens I have. The 70-200 2.8E VR has no issues for me.
It's hard for me to track my kids running, with the camera struggling.
GSteele wrote:
Is it just slow, in relation to what, or is it hunting to find focus? What model 300mm do you have? How old is the battery on your Z5?
