A GOOD ALTERNATIVE FOR MY LUST?

On any wish list for camera equipment that I could come up with, a Nikkor 300mm f/2.8 lens would be on it.  Ever since I saw the first manual focus models in the early 80’s I have lusted after one.  With it’s ability to isolate the subject so well, the 300mm is one of those focal lengths that just works.  And at f/2.8 it is fast enough to use with tele extenders.  Now with the “silent wave” focusing and vibration reduction, the “lust” is if anything even greater.

There are however several “buts” involved with this lens.  First of course is the price.  Something like a good used car’s worth.  They have always been expensive and for most of the time simply out of my reach, even the used versions.  Secondly and maybe even more important (to me at least) is the heavy weight.  At almost 3 kilos /6 lbs. it is a lot of weight to carry around, and especially now that I have gotten older. . .  Both of these little problems bring up the question of how much would I use one, is it enough to justify the cost?  Since I don’t shoot sports or wildlife for a living, there isn’t much there.  On some wedding assignments, I would use it for some of my shots, but mostly it would sit in the camera bag.  Still . . .

In the early 90’s I bought the 300mm f/4.0 AF-D lens for my scouting assignments, and was satisfied enough with it’s performance.  Auto focus was rather slow, but back then I rarely used AF, so it was not an issue.  Then in 2004, one of my friends was interested in getting a telephoto lens and asked my advice on several makes and models.  I convinced him to get the 300mm with a 2X converter (not knowing that Nikon in the mean time had replaced my version with the AF-S 300mm f/4.0 in 2000, yeah I know a little behind the times) .  When his new lens came with the the TC-20E II, I tried it out.  Later that day and without even waiting to sell my older 300mm (or for that matter even think if I could afford to do so), I ordered the same combo.

You may have assumed that I was impressed.  I was!  Later on I did have my doubts, which I will come to a little later on.  First however let me explain why I have chosen to write this blog entry now, nearly five years after purchasing the lens.  In my last blog entry about DOF comparisons in the different sensor sizes, I used the 300mm on several of the test series.  Once again I was notably impressed with it’s performance.  Not only in sharpness, even wide open, but also how it was rendering the out of focus areas.  Also the introduction to an even newer 300mm f/2.8 recently,  further spurred me into writing this review.  So here now are my impressions of this lens, after having used it off and on for the past five years.  This review may be a little late in coming, but at least I have had the time to fully assess this lens.

THE DRAWBACKS

THE TRIPOD COLLAR

First and foremost of the problems with this lens was the tripod collar.  Yes you read that right, “was”.  The original was replaced a short time after I received the lens, with an improved model designed and made by the nature photographer Rainer Burzynski.  There are several other “third party” manufacturers that make them and I feel pretty confident in saying that they all work better.  In the past there have been quite a bit of internet discussions about the short comings of some of Nikon’s tripod collars.  So I won’t go into it too deep here (Bjorn Rorslett’s article was one of the better ones: www.naturfotograf.com/index2.html &  www.naturfotograf.com/lens_tripod_collars.html#top_page).  Suffice to say that I had a hard time getting any tripod mounted shot that I did really sharp, I don’t even want to go on about using it with the TC-20E II.  This was at almost any speed.  Having bought the lens in 2004, meant that I even had the supposedly improved model.   Fortunately it was very easy to replace and once I did, “problem solved”.

IS IT REALLY AN F/4 LENS?

At it’s maximum aperture, I find this lens to be about 1/3 of a stop slow, compared to the rest of the aperture range.  Though I don’t really find it that much of a problem.

THE GOOD STUFF

With the tripod mount issue rectified and the other problems not enough to worry me, then all I can say is that this is one hell of a lens.

BUILD

It is very solidly built and yet at the same time a fairly compact telephoto lens.  Nothing to complain about there.  The finish is real top line Nikon pro, with that slight stippling metal body with the gold engraving.  The large focusing ring has a ribbed rubber surface and has just enough resistance.  There is a “convenient” built in hood, that locks into place and seems deep enough.  The one surprise is the absence of a limiting switch.  When it first arrived I was a little disappointed as was my friend over the case.  It isn’t one of those classic round hard leather ones.  It is made from ballistic nylon, but in the end seems far more practical to me.

HANDLING

The AF works much better on this version then the old AF-D.  Not nearly as much hunting and for the most part very very accurate.  The exception being with the TC-20E II, where the AF has a really hard time of it.  Thus far I have not tried it out with the TC-14E II, but hear that it works far better (with hardly any loss in resolution).  It balances quite well on a pro body.  In fact even though it out weighs the 80-200 by 140 grams (5 ounces) and is 35 mm longer (1.4 inches) it feels lighter somehow and easier to hold.

PERFORMANCE

For the most part I shoot this lens wide open and have not found it to be a problem from a resolution standpoint (maybe I am less critical about those sort of things, if it is sharp enough to show the individual eyelashes for example, then I am happy).  It may not compare well to the f/2.8 300, but it is certainly superior to the 80-200 f/2.8.  Another feature added to the AFS version is the ability to focus at less then 1 1/2 meters (5 feet), giving a reproduction ratio of 1:3.7.  This is accomplished by the shortening of the focal length, which when at it’s minimum focusing, the lens is at 240mm.   Maybe not macro, but still it can make for some interesting close-up shots, thus adding substantially to it’s versatility.  This is one feature that I have used a lot. When you add a tele converter to it, then you really do get macro performance with the added benefit of that “telephoto compression” look.

Here is a variety of shots that I have made, which I believe shows it’s optical qualities and versatility.  Only the photo of the shovel has been cropped (a very little to correct perspective).  On most of the D3 examples, what you are seeing is the 5:4 crop option.

These next three series with the TC-20E II employed.  Are not typical of the results I normally get, unfortunately.  In fact I would say that my success rate is usually 20-30% when  I do utilize the TC-20E II.  Possibly the new version (TC-20E III) will perform better.  Also I understand that the TC-14E II works far better in combination with Nikon’s telephoto lenses.  All three series were shot with the D3 in “live mode”.  I could not get the AF to work on the shots with the TC-20E II.  Thus I do not think it would have been possible to get such good results with the D2X.