It's lens day at TPF...advice on 2 Nikkor lenses

[kundalini]

Sorry to start another thread about lenses, but I didn't want to jump the queue with my lens question from those already posted. I have two I'm seriously looking at. The reviews I've read have been pretty good on both and I have some found money.

#1 is the AF Nikkor 85mm f/1.8D. This is for portraits and general photos.

#2 is the AF-S Nikkor 300mm f/4D ED-IF. This is for wildlife & nature mainly.

Does anyone have first hand knowledge or advice otherwise for these or an equally competent third party suggestion?

Cheers....

 

[Garbz]

#1 is a good lens. Used it before but sadly don't own it. Been thinking about adding it to my collection but I need a telephoto first. If you're a sucker for numbers then all tests across the board are excellent, far better than the f/1.4

#2 no experience with it but it looks reasonably good in the reviews.

http://www.photozone.de/8Reviews/

 

[chris]

The 85mm F1.8 is an excellent lens - I wouldn't even bother considering third party offerings. Not only does it turn in an astounding performance, it is reasonably priced as well. I've seen good reports of the f1.4 version too but at nearly three times the price for less than one extra stop I would find it very difficult to justify the extra cost.

I have never used the 300mm f4 so cannot offer any opinion. I have found that Nikon (and other top marque) lenses generally give at least very good results and critisisms tend to be based on the cost vs performance issues rather than the actual performance itself.

 

[notelliot]

I've seen good reports of the f1.4 version too but at nearly three times the price for less than one extra stop I would find it very difficult to justify the extra cost.

the 1.4 is a tank. personally, i found the build quality worth the price along with the extra stop.

 

[jstuedle]

I have the MF version. Great lens, and optically virtually identical to the AF version.

 

[kundalini]

I'm fairly new to Nikon. What is an MF version? I can come up with my own rendition, but that's a story not to be told here.

And which lens are you refering, the 85mm or the 300mm. I'm certain the 85mm has a bullseye on it, in fact I know it does. But I'm in a quandry if I should go ahead and fork out for the 300mm at the same time. I will be heading to the NC mountains in about five weeks for a week of camping. My intention is to capture the fall foliage and waterfalls. With these two ambitions, will the 300mm be of benefit for that shooting. I can get it later.

 

[JIP]

I have the 85 and I love it. It is an extremely sharp lens and so campact for what it does my only problem with it would be the crop factor but that is not too big an issue. As far as the 300 personally if I am going to spend $1100 on a lens I want a 2.8. I used the older model around '94 at a football game and really missed the extra stop. Personally I would think you would be better off with a wide lens for foliage shots but I would assume that when you are asking about these 2 lenses you do.

 

[jstuedle]

I'm fairly new to Nikon. What is an MF version? I can come up with my own rendition, but that's a story not to be told here.

And which lens are you refering, the 85mm or the 300mm. I'm certain the 85mm has a bullseye on it, in fact I know it does. But I'm in a quandry if I should go ahead and fork out for the 300mm at the same time. I will be heading to the NC mountains in about five weeks for a week of camping. My intention is to capture the fall foliage and waterfalls. With these two ambitions, will the 300mm be of benefit for that shooting. I can get it later.

Sorry, MF stands for Manual Focus. The older MF lenses will mount but on many cameras will not meter. They will meter on my cameras so I use them a lot. I have the 85mm f/1.8 and a 300mm f/2.8. Love them both and don't plan on getting the Auto Focus versions unless a deal that can't be passed up comes my way.

 

[kundalini]

Sorry, MF stands for Manual Focus.

I shudda thunk fer a menit.

 

[kundalini]

... Personally I would think you would be better off with a wide lens for foliage shots but I would assume that when you are asking about these 2 lenses you do.

Yes, the wide angle lens is covered.