🐺 Nikon 300Mm F4 Vs F2 8

Since I've really wanted a 300mm f/4 prime, I decided to AB them. Unfortunately for me, the rear of the screw drive lens is made the same as the AF-S (lacking a rear element). The sales rep said he's never heard of it being an issue and said other Nikon primes are made the same way. I know my Nikon 180mm f/2.8 lacks a rear element, too. If you are looking for a lens that will tolerate all the TC's, give the absolute fastest AF and the best IQ then the 2.8 is the. choice. But if you want a great performer at 300 and a good performer at 420 with the TC-14 then don't discount the f/4. The shot below is with the 300 f/4 @ f/6.3. Re: Nikon 300 f4 PF vs 70-200 2.8. You can't go wrong with both. I own the 300 PF and the 70-200 FL. The 70-200 FL focus much faster (AF wise) and is more versatile. And you have one stop of light more. I didn't use the FL much with teleconverters but others report it works pretty well even with the 2x. On the other side the 300 PF gives you According to Peter Braczko's guilde: Complete Nikon System. There are two different AI-S versions of the 300mm/f2.8. The first AI-S version differs from the older AI because AI-S version 1 has an additional clear, protection filter in front. AI-S version 2 can focus closer down to 9.8 feet/3 meters. More info on Roland Vink's web site: Nikon If your talking about the Nikon afs 300mm f2.8 ed if II lens, then yes the tc 1.4EII will work fine. I have the Nikon afs 300mm f2.8d ed if lens which is heavier than the II lens and it works fine with the tc 1.4EII. If you get a chance to buy the Nikon afs 300mm f2.8 ed II, jump at it. Its the lightest of all the 300 f2.8 lenses. Larry The fixed f/4 aperture means that the lens is a bit slow for 200mm, but perfectly fine for 400mm, where you'll likely use it most. For most subjects you'd shoot at 400mm, you'll get some depth of field isolation, though not like you get with the f/2.8 exotics (especially true on DX bodies). The Nikon 300mm f/2.8 AF-S II is a top pick for any professional use for sports, nature, landscape and portraiture. It's fast, long, ultrasharp, has fantastic bokeh, focuses just about instantly and is Nikon's lightest autofocus 300/2.8 of all time — and no 300/2.8 focuses closer. In addition to being optically superior, another reason to own All three Nikon 300mm primes outresolve any existing sensor very comfortably right from f4. Absolutely no one could tell at f6.7 whether you took a given shot with the 4002.8 or any 300 prime plus t.c., they're that good. Color is slightly improved with the PF over the D owing to nano coating. Nikon 300mm f/4D AF-S vs Nikon 80-400mm f/4.5-5.6G VR Conclusion Although both lenses seem to perform well at 300mm and 420mm focal lengths when stopped down to f/8, as demonstrated in the above charts, I would still recommend the Nikon 300mm f/4D over the 80-400mm lens for two main reasons – autofocus performance/accuracy and better reach. The simplified answer is that there are two main differences. The most obvious difference between an f/2.8 and an f/4 lens is in their "brightness", i.e. in the maximum amount of light each lens allows to reach the sensor. Another key difference lies in the depth of field. An f/2.8 lens would usually be capable of giving a more shallow depth of I sold my Tamron 300mm f2.8 and purchased a Sigma. 500 f4.5 HSM EX, the newest version, which is usable with my. modified TC-14E and TC-20E, although AF is very problematic with. the 20E, it works very well with the 14E. If I was forced to make. a comparison between this Sigma lens and the Nikon f4, I would say. Nikon AF-S Nikkor 300mm f/2.8G ED-IF VR Nikon AF-S Nikkor 300mm f/4D ED-IF Nikon AF-S Nikkor 35mm f/1.4G Nikon AF-S Nikkor 35mm F1.8G ED Nikon AF-S Nikkor 400mm f/2.8D ED-IF II Nikon AF-S Nikkor 400mm f/2.8E FL ED VR Nikon AF-S Nikkor 400mm f/2.8G ED VR II oe3i.

nikon 300mm f4 vs f2 8