Ugly Hedgehog - Photography Forum
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register ☰
Main Photography Discussion
Sharpest 300mm tele for Nikon
Page <prev 2 of 3 next>
May 22, 2016 19:37:38   #
Bridges Loc: Memphis, Charleston SC, now Nazareth PA
 
Gene51 wrote:
If you are looking for a sharp lens at 300mm, your best bet is a prime - either a 300mm F4 or a 300mm F2.8. The 55-300 and the 70-300 are consumer oriented lenses that generally have only fair performance at 300mm. The 28-300mm AF performance is dismally slow, has pretty awful image quality past 150mm, and it has poor sharpness in the corners and edges at any focal length and aperture. It is so bad that it did not make Nikon's list of recommended lenses for the D800. Now, because you plan on using your lens on a cropped sensor body, the results are going to be a little better than on a full frame camera, but still not up to a higher standard of quality.

I would suggest taking a look at the Nikon 200-500 and the Sigma 150-600 Sport, or if you want something a little lighter the Contemporary 150-600. Any of these will give you good to excellent performance at 300mm, and will be significantly better than the 55-300. 70-300 or the 28-300.
If you are looking for a sharp lens at 300mm, your... (show quote)


If you have a 28-300 that performs as described, you should return it! I have one and find it has little or no weakness at all focal lengths and when used as a macro (shooting 300mm from a foot away, it is very sharp). I have a 70-300 VR, and an 18-200 for a crop sensor and find the 28-300 better at all focal lengths. Is it as sharp as my 70-200 2.8 Nikor, no, but it outperforms the other non-pro lenses I have.

Reply
May 22, 2016 19:45:37   #
Marilyng Loc: Lorain,Oh.
 
Royce Moss wrote:
Trying to decide on a 55-300 or 70-300 between Nikon, Tamron or Sigma. I've read many , many reviews most say the Nikon 70-300 is the way to go it seems but alot like the Tammy too. I'm looking for the sharpest to from about 250 to 300. Any info would really help. PS now I am using a D3200 and gonna get at least a D7200 in near future. Thanks I value all of your advice as I know you are not getting paid to tell how great your stuff is.


I had the 55-300 for a few years & was not happy with it so I sold it & purchased the 28-300. I love this lens & wish I had it sooner.Check it out before u buy any lenses u won't be sorry!

Reply
May 22, 2016 20:58:41   #
wingclui44 Loc: CT USA
 
whitewolfowner wrote:
wingclui44, glad you asked, I failed to put in the lens, I only said f4.0. The lens I'm referring to is the Nikkor 300mm F4.0 AF Ed lens. If I remember correctly, it was the model before they introduced the the model with the AF-S motor. And it's a true f4.0 too. I remember reading an article that the AF-S model could not be a true f4.0 because they reduced the front opening from 82mm to 77mm, which made it more like a f4.5 lens. Simple math proves this. It is extremely sharp. I have many professional athletes refer it to being a "killer" lens.
wingclui44, glad you asked, I failed to put in the... (show quote)


F4.0 or f4.5, is only a fraction different if that is true, but as you said simple math can prove that, so I found out it is f4.0 (300/77= 3.895..) I like it's built quality, it's internal focusing, so no changing of length when focuses. It may be one of a few Nikon D type lens with AF-s motor. I love using D type lenses because the aperture ring. Almost most of my lenses are AF or AF-D with aperture ring and I use it all the time for aperture adjustment. It's fast and accurate.

Reply
 
 
May 22, 2016 21:38:52   #
Frank 2012 Loc: Olathe, Kansas
 
Royce Moss wrote:
Trying to decide on a 55-300 or 70-300 between Nikon, Tamron or Sigma. I've read many , many reviews most say the Nikon 70-300 is the way to go it seems but alot like the Tammy too. I'm looking for the sharpest to from about 250 to 300. Any info would really help. PS now I am using a D3200 and gonna get at least a D7200 in near future. Thanks I value all of your advice as I know you are not getting paid to tell how great your stuff is.

Something I find useful when I have similar questions like yours is to go online to B&H Photo, look up the lens in question, gather all their good info and then read the customer reviews...paying attention to who is making the review. It isn't the perfect answer, but it is helpful.

Reply
May 22, 2016 22:54:19   #
whitewolfowner
 
wingclui44, it's not the filter diameter, but the lens opening diameter that needs to be divided by 300. Not having the lens I didn't have that figure available but it is definitely less than 77mm and yes, a half a stop can be critical in low light situations; can make the difference of getting the shot or not. Photojournalists know this lesson well; that is why they are the biggest chasers of the fastest lenses they can get their hands on.

Reply
May 22, 2016 22:56:17   #
whitewolfowner
 
Frank 2012, unfortunately, only those that know enough from the beginning can sort out the useful reviews form those that are written by those who think they know what they are talking about. Others are helpless to know who is full of dooky and who isn't.

Reply
May 22, 2016 23:44:19   #
cjc2 Loc: Hellertown PA
 
whitewolfowner wrote:
wingclui44, it's not the filter diameter, but the lens opening diameter that needs to be divided by 300. Not having the lens I didn't have that figure available but it is definitely less than 77mm and yes, a half a stop can be critical in low light situations; can make the difference of getting the shot or not. Photojournalists know this lesson well; that is why they are the biggest chasers of the fastest lenses they can get their hands on.


So why then, does the 24-70/2.8 AND the 70-200/2.8 AND the 85/1.4 Nikon lenses have the same filter size. Answer, your comment is flawed as the type and design of the lens and its elements are also very important. Please refrain from making a comment like this unless you are better informed. Flawed comments like this are not appreciated by those of us who truly do know everything!

Reply
 
 
May 23, 2016 00:21:17   #
whitewolfowner
 
cjc2, sorry, you are the one that does not know what you are talking about. Like I said, it's all in the math and optical engineering. Go look up the formulas!

Reply
May 23, 2016 00:42:39   #
Royce Moss Loc: Irvine, CA
 
Ok now now guy don't get in a piss fight. I pretty much have decided to go with a older 300mm f4 prime instead of a zoom. Have read alot of good things about it and a used one is in my budget.Now I want to find the best teleconverter to add at a decent price. Any advice on teleconverters?? Thanks

Reply
May 23, 2016 00:42:40   #
Royce Moss Loc: Irvine, CA
 
Ok now now guy don't get in a piss fight. I pretty much have decided to go with a older 300mm f4 prime instead of a zoom. Have read alot of good things about it and a used one is in my budget.Now I want to find the best teleconverter to add at a decent price. Any advice on teleconverters?? Thanks

Reply
May 23, 2016 05:11:17   #
FiddleMaker Loc: Merrimac, MA
 
Gene51 wrote:
If you are looking for a sharp lens at 300mm, your best bet is a prime - either a 300mm F4 or a 300mm F2.8. The 55-300 and the 70-300 are consumer oriented lenses that generally have only fair performance at 300mm. The 28-300mm AF performance is dismally slow, has pretty awful image quality past 150mm, and it has poor sharpness in the corners and edges at any focal length and aperture. It is so bad that it did not make Nikon's list of recommended lenses for the D800. Now, because you plan on using your lens on a cropped sensor body, the results are going to be a little better than on a full frame camera, but still not up to a higher standard of quality.

I would suggest taking a look at the Nikon 200-500 and the Sigma 150-600 Sport, or if you want something a little lighter the Contemporary 150-600. Any of these will give you good to excellent performance at 300mm, and will be significantly better than the 55-300. 70-300 or the 28-300.
If you are looking for a sharp lens at 300mm, your... (show quote)

Gene51, I am glad I read your comments about the 28-300mm above. I bought this with my D750. I wish now I had opted for something different - perhaps the 24-120mm and the 200-500 for long reach stuff. ~FiddleMaker

Reply
 
 
May 23, 2016 07:00:15   #
wingclui44 Loc: CT USA
 
whitewolfowner wrote:
wingclui44, it's not the filter diameter, but the lens opening diameter that needs to be divided by 300. Not having the lens I didn't have that figure available but it is definitely less than 77mm and yes, a half a stop can be critical in low light situations; can make the difference of getting the shot or not. Photojournalists know this lesson well; that is why they are the biggest chasers of the fastest lenses they can get their hands on.


Oh ya! I forgot it's not the front lens element, it's the diameter of the aperture diaphragm. Thank you for correcting my mistake! Any way, I am not a pro or some thing, I just love my hobby and been in it for over 40 yrs. I got the best that I can afford, and still dreaming! Nice talking to you!

Reply
May 23, 2016 12:10:37   #
whitewolfowner
 
wingclui44, I'm with you there. Actually my knowledge of the figuring of the f stop of a lens comes from astronomy with telescopes. Been doing photography for almost half a century, love it, and will be doing it until I can't pick up a camera anymore. I would have never thought about the reduction of the filter diameter causing the f stop to be reduced on the lens, but remember reading it in an article about it, maybe in Popular Photography. Connected it with the telescope knowledge and made a mark on my brain and remember it to this day. Don't know why, just did. It has always been a mystery to me how we remember somethings and forget others that are so much more important.

Reply
May 23, 2016 13:30:11   #
OddJobber Loc: Portland, OR
 
Leon S wrote:
Not too long ago I stopped the car at an old falling apart house and was surprised by a pair of vultures roasting on the roof mostly hidden by over grown scrub trees.


Sounds yummy! Did the homeowners invite you in for roast vulture, poke salad and moonshine?

Reply
May 23, 2016 15:43:35   #
jmcgloth Loc: Ocean Park, WA
 
Gene51 wrote:
If you are looking for a sharp lens at 300mm, your best bet is a prime - either a 300mm F4 or a 300mm F2.8. The 55-300 and the 70-300 are consumer oriented lenses that generally have only fair performance at 300mm. The 28-300mm AF performance is dismally slow, has pretty awful image quality past 150mm, and it has poor sharpness in the corners and edges at any focal length and aperture. It is so bad that it did not make Nikon's list of recommended lenses for the D800. Now, because you plan on using your lens on a cropped sensor body, the results are going to be a little better than on a full frame camera, but still not up to a higher standard of quality.

I would suggest taking a look at the Nikon 200-500 and the Sigma 150-600 Sport, or if you want something a little lighter the Contemporary 150-600. Any of these will give you good to excellent performance at 300mm, and will be significantly better than the 55-300. 70-300 or the 28-300.
If you are looking for a sharp lens at 300mm, your... (show quote)


I would like to add that the 80 - 400 is a really fine, sharp lens.

Reply
Page <prev 2 of 3 next>
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
Main Photography Discussion
Home | Latest Digest | Back to Top | All Sections
Contact us | Privacy policy | Terms of use | DMCA
UglyHedgehog.com - Forum
Copyright 2011-2024 Ugly Hedgehog, Inc.