Telephoto option?

[jaomul]

I enquired here a week or so ago about a good telephoto at about 1200 ish dollars and got pointed in the tamron/sigma 150-600 direction. Both these lenses seem great.

I was about to pull the trigger on one (leaning for sigma due dock and future compatability) but had to use funds elsewhere. It will be a few weeks now before I purchase. A bit more research and I found another interesting option, a Nikon 300mm f4 afs. I was considering this and in time add a 1.4 teleconverter. I know I lose reach and zoom, but it works out about same price. Could anyone advise what set up they think would be better. Thanks

 

[Derrel]

I've owned the Nikkor 300/4 AF-S since 2002 I guess...it's a nice lens, 77mm filters, fits into the Nikon 70-200/2.8 and Canon 70-200/2.8 ballistic nylon carrying cases with shoulder strap. he chief thing it offers is an amazingly CLOSE minimum focusing distance, I think it's 4.3 feet market on the barrel, but it focuses a little bit close than the marked distance; it is one of the closets-focusing 300's Nikon has made, so it works as a sort of "field macro" type lens; with the 1.4x TC14e, or TC14e-II, it makes a pretty good 420/5.6. It also makes a good close-up/macro type lens with the 1.4x added OR with a Kenko extension tube added.

Overall length is very "carryable", and it can easily be carried over the shoulder in the supplied ballistic case OR it even fits in my photo vest pockets.

It is in effect, a portrait/sports/nature/landscape AND MACRO/close-up type prime lens. It offers no zoom, but it's basically like getting a looooong outdoor/nature macro lens, and a 300/4 and 420mm f/5.6 lens.

The BRAND-NEW 300mm f/4 model Nikon has released might bring more of these lenses onto the used market within six months.

 

[jaomul]

Thanks Derrel

 

[Jasii]

Would Ditto what Derrel has advised.... :like:

 

[PaulWog]

My opinion:

The 300mm f4 AF-D lens is a really cool choice, but it definitely does not replace a 150-600. I have the Sigma 150-600 Contemporary, and I would love to have a 300mm f4 lens alongside the 150-600.

Rifle through shots on flickr, or use pixelpeeper to see specific settings of real-world photos. Check out thedigitalpicture.com and check out the lens quality comparison tool. If you compare the 300mm f4 AF-D to the 150-600 Contemporary at 420mm (300mm with 1.4x extender) at f8, versus the 150-600 Contemporary at any setting at f8, you get a much sharper image on the 150-600 Contemporary. The 300mm isn't worth getting if you want to pick it up and crop in every shot to treat it like a 600mm lens (especially if at 600mm you would need to crop in lots anyways).

If you're looking at the 300mm AF-D and a 150-600 lens, you might want to rent first to see what fits you best.

 

[jaomul]

Thanks PaulWog.

I had kind of come to the telephoto zoom conclusion as well. The nikon looks great but I think I would find the zoom more conenient and ultimately use it more. I do also think you could own both set ups and it wouldn't be wasted as the primr definetely would be a worthy addition.

It likely will be a 150-600mm zoom, and to be fair some of the images I have seen from these lenses are fantastic, likely the lens ability would far outweigh my own.

Looking at both the Tamron and Sigma I have seen more nice examples on Flickr (not to mention coastalconn) from the tamron, but maybe that's because its out longer. I am thinking that the Sigma C may be a more sensible choice as the dock may ensure better chance of fwd compatability with future bodies due the fact it works with the dock

As for renting, thats not really an option where I live. The market is not so big here. Even trying a lens or camera in a shop here is hit and miss, mostly all that is stocked is a small amount of really popular gear, which is why you'll often find me posing questions in the gear section here

 

[Derrel]

The 300 AF-D and the 300 AF-S are two somewhat different lenses.

 

[jaomul]

The 300 AF-D and the 300 AF-S are two somewhat different lenses.

I missed that. The one I originally asked about was the Af-s version. To many abbreviations, easy to miss one.
You gave a good overview of the 300mm AF-S. If you were buying today would you puck this combo oiver the newer 150-600 options. Thanks

 

[PaulWog]

Woops. Meant to say AF-S, not AF-D. What I said still stands, just sub out the incorrect wording

 

[Derrel]

If you were buying today would you pick this combo oiver the newer 150-600 options. Thanks

I dunno...both are very,very different things. Neither one can do the jobs the other one can in the same way, or with the same accessories. Where does the 150-600 drop from f/5 to f/6.3? How close can the 150-600 focus? And so on. These two are really not directly comparable things. I think the zoom is a pretty good value, and it's long. For the price, it's the longest, lightest lens one can buy brand new.

 

[jaomul]

Well 7 months later (after a bunch of unexpected bills that make you want to be a kid again ), I just agreed to buy the 300mm f4 AF-S. I should have it monday next due logistical reasons. I have store credit locally so may plump for the 1.4 tc also. Thanks for the input