I like 1, 4 and 5 really great images, incredible sharp detail, great color. However, number 6, the one you were questioning, I don't particularly care for. The bird shots are great too. It's nice to see what that lens is capable of in the right hands.
Hey Joe (where you goin' with that gun in your hand?) -
Yes, there are a couple extension tubes that do AF. Kenko makes a set, too.
I read a handful of complaints about the Kenko tubes where people found they had enough slop in the tolerances that there were issues with the contacts, or the aperture lever would quit stopping the lens down.
It was not a significant number but given that AF and metering were not important to me, it seemed silly to spend more money on the Kenko tubes when these extremely well manufactured Nikon tubes crop up on eBay fairly regularly. Mine was brand new, never been out of the box... and has a built-in, rotating tripod collar to boot.
Avi, it's actually a PN-11, it's not part of the PK series of tubes.
The PK-13 is 27mm, the PN-11 is 52.5mm. Also, this one has a rotating tripod collar, handy for when you add it to an already fairly long lens without a collar (like my Tamron 90mm f/2.8).
I don't know much about the PK series. I got this since was twice the size and my intent was to use it on the 300mm, so I needed a lot of extension. It seemed silly to add all those mechanical couplings to stack the extenders, if I wasn't going to use them individually anyway.
Wow..Nice pictures..I didn't know the 300 is that nice. I just have been hearing mixed reviews about this lens. I almost picked one up but wasn't sure..I use to shoot canon and the 300 f/4 IS was an excellent lens fast AF, IS, sharp, and nice colors..I was just scared that nikons version wouldn't be the same.
revoke99 wrote:
Wow..Nice pictures..I didn't know the 300 is that nice. I just have been hearing mixed reviews about this lens. I almost picked one up but wasn't sure..I use to shoot canon and the 300 f/4 IS was an excellent lens fast AF, IS, sharp, and nice colors..I was just scared that nikons version wouldn't be the same.
Bad reviews? Everything I have read is positive; average score of 9.6 on FM reviews is very good. Many say it is better than the Canon 300 f4.
Yeah, where were these bad reviews? I'd like to know. I know my copy of the lens (which didn't come with the tripod foot) is very sharp and has great colours.
All the reviews I see for the 300mm f/4 are glowingly positive.
If anyone needs a sales pitch, I highly recommend looking up the posting history of Ronnie Gaubert on DPReview. Until he got his 500mm f/4 VR very recently, he shot almost exclusively with the 300mm f/4 + teleconverters. Amazing work.
