nikkor AF 300 f4 ed vs nikkor AF 80-400 VR

klaas · 10th March 2007

I have on my D200 a nikkor 18-200 AFS VR DX, a nikkor AF 105 f2.8 macro, and a nikkor AF 300 f4 ED with 1.4 converter. I think to sell the 300 and buy a nikkor 80-400 VR. I use the 300 for wildlife. The 80-400 gives me more flexibility and no hassling with the converter. Is this wise, other options? How is the 80-400?

smallaperture · 10th March 2007

I had the AF300F4ED before. And I used it often with the Kenko 1.4xTC. Then lens itself is a wonderful performer in terms of optics. It's heavy and all metal solid construction that we don't see these days.

However, the AF is slow by today's standard and becomes painfully slow with the TC. That is the main reason why I sold it away. If you shoot anything that moves, be it wildlife or sports, the need for AF speed cannot be over-emphasised.

As for the AF80-400VR - I suggest you go to a shop and try it out for yourself during off-peak hours.

jaxxb · 11th March 2007

I have been thinking bout this lens too. I was desperate enough to get a 2X converter for my 70-200 but the results are quite sad. Right now the speed on 80-400 is just too slow.

I've been waiting for an update on 80-400VR from Nikon for a while, so i can take it along on my travels (and adventures). Although most my travel shots are mostly WIDE but because of that 10% chance, I have to lug my 70-200VR around. At above 2,500m and still ascending, it is really not FUN and almost always having problems fitting into any of my bags.

Thus 100-400VR constant f4 would be perfect. C'mon Nikon! And new prime 35mm F1.2?

ExplorerZ · 11th March 2007

Originally Posted by jaxxb

I have been thinking bout this lens too. I was desperate enough to get a 2X converter for my 70-200 but the results are quite sad. Right now the speed on 80-400 is just too slow.

I've been waiting for an update on 80-400VR from Nikon for a while, so i can take it along on my travels (and adventures). Although most my travel shots are mostly WIDE but because of that 10% chance, I have to lug my 70-200VR around. At above 2,500m and still ascending, it is really not FUN and almost always having problems fitting into any of my bags.

Thus 100-400VR constant f4 would be perfect. C'mon Nikon! And new prime 35mm F2?

100-400 f4... but are you sure you will buy it? look at the 200-400f4.. it cost a bomb...(at least to me $9500 is a HUGE BOMB), anyway alternative would be the sigma 50-500 or 80-400 OS.. the 80-400 is RF, so most probably focusing shouldn't be that slow.
and further more do you think you will bring it for travel considering the weight? fyi the AFS 200-400/f4 VR is more than double the weight of any 70-200 f2.8. so a 100-400/f4 would probably end up 3-4x the weight of a 70-200VR

smallaperture · 11th March 2007

After selling away the 300F4, I bought the Sigma100-300F4. This lens cost much less than the 70-200VR and weighs about the same. More info can be found here:

http://forums.clubsnap.org/showthread.php?t=200389

10th March 2007	#1
klaas New Member Join Date: Sep 2004 Posts: 3	nikkor AF 300 f4 ed vs nikkor AF 80-400 VR I have on my D200 a nikkor 18-200 AFS VR DX, a nikkor AF 105 f2.8 macro, and a nikkor AF 300 f4 ED with 1.4 converter. I think to sell the 300 and buy a nikkor 80-400 VR. I use the 300 for wildlife. The 80-400 gives me more flexibility and no hassling with the converter. Is this wise, other options? How is the 80-400? Last edited by klaas; 10th March 2007 at 08:45 PM.

10th March 2007	#2
smallaperture Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2004 Location: Catchment Area Posts: 2,423	Re: nikkor AF 300 f4 ed vs nikkor AF 80-400 VR I had the AF300F4ED before. And I used it often with the Kenko 1.4xTC. Then lens itself is a wonderful performer in terms of optics. It's heavy and all metal solid construction that we don't see these days. However, the AF is slow by today's standard and becomes painfully slow with the TC. That is the main reason why I sold it away. If you shoot anything that moves, be it wildlife or sports, the need for AF speed cannot be over-emphasised. As for the AF80-400VR - I suggest you go to a shop and try it out for yourself during off-peak hours. __________________ I love big car, big house, big lenses, but small apertures.

11th March 2007	#3
jaxxb New Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Singapore Posts: 27	Re: nikkor AF 300 f4 ed vs nikkor AF 80-400 VR I have been thinking bout this lens too. I was desperate enough to get a 2X converter for my 70-200 but the results are quite sad. Right now the speed on 80-400 is just too slow. I've been waiting for an update on 80-400VR from Nikon for a while, so i can take it along on my travels (and adventures). Although most my travel shots are mostly WIDE but because of that 10% chance, I have to lug my 70-200VR around. At above 2,500m and still ascending, it is really not FUN and almost always having problems fitting into any of my bags. Thus 100-400VR constant f4 would be perfect. C'mon Nikon! And new prime 35mm F1.2? Last edited by jaxxb; 13th March 2007 at 06:58 PM.

11th March 2007	#5
smallaperture Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2004 Location: Catchment Area Posts: 2,423	Re: nikkor AF 300 f4 ed vs nikkor AF 80-400 VR After selling away the 300F4, I bought the Sigma100-300F4. This lens cost much less than the 70-200VR and weighs about the same. More info can be found here: http://forums.clubsnap.org/showthread.php?t=200389 __________________ I love big car, big house, big lenses, but small apertures.