Hiking wildlife - 300/4 PF + TC vs 500/5.6 PF

lawa222
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #1 · p.1 #1 · Hiking wildlife - 300/4 PF + TC vs 500/5.6 PF

I have a 500/4 FL with the 14 and 17 TC's as my primary wildlife lens in the Rockies and Southwest -- mostly in the Yellowstone area -- and would love to have a lighter/smaller option for wildlife while on foot. I'm switching to a Z8 as my body and Z 24-120 as my walk-around lens.

The Z-mount options (100-400, 400/4.5, 600/6.3) are more than I want to spend on a lightweight option.

My plan was to buy a 500/5.6 PF. Obviously, it's a great lens. The downside would be mostly its price and also having almost no flexibility. It'd be essentially exclusively a wildlife lens.

Surfing the buy/sell boards, I remembered the 300/4 PF. It'd be both an occasionally useful for close-ups and tele landscape lens at 300 plus is a 500/6.7 with my TC17 attached. It's also dirt cheap used and tiny.

Any suggestions or considerations? Will the 300 + TC be way, way worse than the 500/5.6 for wildlife? Has anyone used it with the TC17 with great success?

Edited on Nov 08, 2023 at 09:24 AM · View previous versions

Nov 07, 2023 at 09:03 PM

binary visions
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #2 · p.1 #2 · Hiking wildlife - 300/4 PF + TC vs 500/5.6 PF

I've used the 300mm PF extensively as a travel/hiking lens.

I was never thrilled with it with the 1.7x attached. I think it's a really decent combo with the 1.4x, though.

Biggest downside is that it's got extremely nervous and jumpy VR; it's actually kind of weird to shoot with if you're used to better-behaved lenses. By far the worst VR lens I've ever used, no contest. It's also not in the same class as the 500pf for image quality when you've got the TC attached.

Upside is that it's quite literally half the size. I don't take my 500pf on most hikes, but the 300pf easily slips into a water bottle pouch and doesn't weigh me down. Also the 300pf makes a much better flower/semi-macro lens.

At the end of the day the best lens is the one you'll take with you. If you'll haul the 500pf on your hikes, it's certainly a better lens for wildlife. If I was spending most of my time <5 miles from the car, or I was out on a Wildlife Hike, I would opt for the 500pf. If you want something that's easy to pack "just in case," or that you can take on long hikes without feeling weighted down, though, the 300pf fits that bill nicely.

Nov 07, 2023 at 09:40 PM

TurtleCat15
Offline
•
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #3 · p.1 #3 · Hiking wildlife - 300/4 PF + TC vs 500/5.6 PF

If you don’t need lens speed why not the 70-300 or Tamron 100-500?

Nov 08, 2023 at 06:39 AM

suteetat
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #4 · p.1 #4 · Hiking wildlife - 300/4 PF + TC vs 500/5.6 PF

300/4pf is nice and light but how concern are you regarding weather sealing? Tc14e iii for example is not weather sealed to the same level as Nikon super tele lens or upper end body. I used it in the rain in the past with rain coat on top of the setup but it was raining quite hard. Camera and lens did just fine but eventually I got a lot of moisture into the teleconverter. So now at least with f mount TC, I avoid using it in the rain completely.

Nov 08, 2023 at 06:39 AM

bs kite
Online
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #5 · p.1 #5 · Hiking wildlife - 300/4 PF + TC vs 500/5.6 PF

lawa222 wrote:
I have a 500/4 FL with the 14 and 17 TC's as my primary wildlife lens in the Rockies and Southwest -- mostly in the Yellowstone area -- and would love to have a lighter/smaller option for wildlife while on foot. I'm switching to a Z8 as my body and Z 24-120 as my walk-around lens.

The Z-mount options (100-400, 400/4.5, 600/6.3) are more than I want to spend on a lightweight option.

My plan was to buy a 500/5.6 PF. Obviously, it's a great lens. The downside would be mostly its price and also having almost no flexibility. It'd be essentially...Show more →

The 500PF is my primary, go-to lens and it will remain so, as long as I can maintain it. First/foremost, I document/promote wildlife/nature. All the superteles in the Nikon line-up are super sharp.

I do not have a TC1.7 but I do frequently use the 500PF with my TC1.4.

You say you are moving to the Z8. You will love this camera! Here is a link to a post I made last week regarding the FTZII adapter and the 500PF. Please note the comment on the 500PF with the TC14II (NOT the III)

https://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1831244/0#16383516

Regarding your concern with the 500PF price, right now NikonUsa has a refurbed one.
https://www.nikonusa.com/en/nikon-store/refurbished-cameras.page#!/tag:8ps:Lenses

Regarding your concern with lack of flexibility: Any/all of these super lightweight Nikon superteles can be used for grabbing walkabout snapshots and they make great close-up lenses. These super lightweight superteles can be carried with one hand, hanging down by the side (I also have a sling attached in case I lose grip of the Z8). So, I can walk around the coastline and grab snapshots of a bunch of exciting subjects. I think I'll do it this afternoon

My folders are filling with super-sharp butterfly images from summers 2014 to 2023 in my wildflower garden. I stay near minimum focus distance and then crop (when needed) the butterfly image from the 45 mpx file.

Nov 08, 2023 at 08:38 AM

lawa222
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #6 · p.1 #6 · Hiking wildlife - 300/4 PF + TC vs 500/5.6 PF

Interesting, thanks everyone.

Seems like the more I read, I'm coming to understand the 300/4 PF is good enough quality for me, but there's serious quality-control issues with the VR even after recall fix. I wonder how much of the way depressed used market price is people ditching poorly working copies.

Does anyone have experience with the 300/4 PF on the Z8/9 specifically? Seems like more advanced body, in-body VR, and no mirror + shutter slap could resolve its issues.

Edited on Nov 08, 2023 at 10:35 AM · View previous versions

Nov 08, 2023 at 10:12 AM

binary visions
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #7 · p.1 #7 · Hiking wildlife - 300/4 PF + TC vs 500/5.6 PF

lawa222 wrote:
Interesting, thanks everyone.

Seems like the more I read, I'm coming to understand the 300/4 PF is good enough quality for me, but there's serious quality-control issues with the VR outlasting the recall. I wonder how much of the way depressed used market price is people ditching poorly working copies.

Does anyone have experience with the 300/4 PF on the Z8/9 specifically? Seems like more advanced body, in-body VR, and no mirror + shutter slap could resolve its issues.

Just to note, what I am discussing is not the "recalled" issue where the VR was actually misbehaving and was actually causing blur in some photos.

I am saying that the 300pf's VR is simply of poor quality. It's extremely nervous and jumpy, which you can clearly see just looking through the viewfinder, and does not provide as much stability as other lenses. This will not be resolved by reducing shutter slap or improving your camera body. The fact that the 300pf is so lightweight actually works against it a little in this case.

I don't know the full details of the interactions between the F-mount VR and the in-body VR; it was my impression that only Z-mount lenses would have their VR work in conjunction with the in-body VR, and that an F-mount VR lens would essentially disable the in-body VR. I'm not sure if you could disable the lens VR and have the in-body VR take over.

I haven't used it on a Z8 or Z9, but have used it a lot on my Z7ii.

Nov 08, 2023 at 10:31 AM

Alan Olander
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #8 · p.1 #8 · Hiking wildlife - 300/4 PF + TC vs 500/5.6 PF

I don't see much, if any, of the "nervousness" in the VR of the 300mm PF. I use the Sport setting almost exclusively, but even with the Normal setting, it's not that jumpy. I use both the bare lens and with a TC1.4e iii and find the sharpness excellent in both cases (on a Z7). I'm sure the 500mm PF would beat the 300mm PF + TC, but most lenses do suffer at least a little with a TC. There apparently are "issues" around 1/125th shutter speed, give or take, but I don't often use those shutter speeds with the 300mm, and I think the issue is overblown. Other lenses no doubt do have better VR, but I wouldn't let that keep me from purchasing one. If you have a 300mm PF with nervous VR, it may need repair.

Nov 08, 2023 at 12:24 PM

Danny W.
Offline
•
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #9 · p.1 #9 · Hiking wildlife - 300/4 PF + TC vs 500/5.6 PF

I've been using a 300 PF for a number of years now. Don't have any issues with the VR, rock solid with any of my TCs.

Nov 08, 2023 at 03:49 PM


FM Forums \| Nikon Forum \| Join Upload & Sell

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