70-300mm or 300mm PF, for occasional tele use on Z6 ?

joe-shaw · Nov 15, 2020

Hi,

I recently acquired Z6, with 24-70mm f4 lens. I don't shoot usually in tele range and I am not pro. But whenever I shot for (large) birds, animals, far objects (more than 200mm) I would need a sharp tool. My expectation is lightweight and sharp.

I am coming from Olympus, so I am spoiled by 75mm f/1.8, 40-150mm f/2.8, and 300mm f/4. I didn't like Olympus 70-300mm comparatively. I have been reading some options and can see 2 options, i.e. 70-300mm AF-P and 300mm PF.

I have been reading lot of old posts. Some posts dictate that IQ, color rendering, and sharpness of 70-300mm AF-P is very close to 300mm PF. But usually, primes are always sharp and better by standards. While other posters suggest that prime would always beat and difference of picture quality will be clearly visible.

I am struggling to decide between both lenses, which one to pick. Users, who have experience with both lenses, can shed some light on it and suggest, please?

If I need to choose 300mm PF, I will pick a used copy for around $1200.

Other lenses are not fitting into the criteria. Upcoming 100-400 S is not sure when it will come and what would be its weight and price. Sigma looks big. 200-500 is very heavy for me.

Thanks

Peter M J · Nov 15, 2020

Hi Joe. I have both of the lenses and use them on my Z6 and Z7 I think either of these would serve you well. I use the 300 FP with the 1.4 TC 111 This combination works very well on the Zs The 70-300 FP zoom is not quite as sharp as the prime but is still a cracking lens and has the advantage of being more versatile by covering more situations. I purchased both lenses as " nearly new " from MPB the Prime cost about £1400 and the Zoom about £350. I think you you would be happy with either of them. Here are a few photos taken on the Z7 with the Prime + Tc combo.

Taken from about 6ft away

I use the Z7 beause there is more options for cropping but either lens works wee with the Z6

--Best wishes

Peter

joe-shaw · Nov 15, 2020

Thanks for the reply Peter.

Do you think that even after cropping on 300mm, it beats 70-300mm? Otherwise, it looks like, in good light, both lenses should give comparable or close to comparable IQ/sharpness?

Peter M J · Nov 15, 2020

Hi Joe

In my opinion you would be happy with the results from either lens The 300 prime is a fantastic quality lens giving brilliant results especially used with the 1.4 TC. This combo even second hand will run to nearly £2000.

The Zoom new is just over £500 and it is more versatile with excellent results if not quite up to the standard of the 300 Prime.

The choice is yours

Best wishes

Peter

j_photo · Nov 15, 2020

I've been shooting daily with the 300 PF (usually with the TC1.4 III attached) since early spring. I have also shot 70-300 in the past, though I don't have one currently. The PF is a bit more of everything. It's faster, it's sharper, and with the teleconverter it can reach farther. The tradeoff is cost and size.

I have found for the way I like to shoot small birds, the 300 PF with the TC1.4 is a sweet spot. 300mm is shorter than I would like. I also tried the 500 PF and found it was too much reach for me. Also, living in the Pacific NW, this is a dark time of year. Being able to remove the TC and shoot at f/4 is a big plus some days, especially when working under the forest canopy among the undergrowth. There are plenty of examples with 300 in my gallery if you are interested.

All that said, the 70-300 is a great little lens, is satisfying to shoot with, and provides a lot of bang for the buck. For a lot of shooters it's the sensible choice.

sirhawkeye64 · Nov 15, 2020

joe-shaw said:
Hi,

I recently acquired Z6, with 24-70mm f4 lens. I don't shoot usually in tele range and I am not pro. But whenever I shot for (large) birds, animals, far objects (more than 200mm) I would need a sharp tool. My expectation is lightweight and sharp.

I am coming from Olympus, so I am spoiled by 75mm f/1.8, 40-150mm f/2.8, and 300mm f/4. I didn't like Olympus 70-300mm comparatively. I have been reading some options and can see 2 options, i.e. 70-300mm AF-P and 300mm PF.

I have been reading lot of old posts. Some posts dictate that IQ, color rendering, and sharpness of 70-300mm AF-P is very close to 300mm PF. But usually, primes are always sharp and better by standards. While other posters suggest that prime would always beat and difference of picture quality will be clearly visible.

I am struggling to decide between both lenses, which one to pick. Users, who have experience with both lenses, can shed some light on it and suggest, please?

If I need to choose 300mm PF, I will pick a used copy for around $1200.

Other lenses are not fitting into the criteria. Upcoming 100-400 S is not sure when it will come and what would be its weight and price. Sigma looks big. 200-500 is very heavy for me.

Thanks

If it was me, I'd get the 70-300 for flexibility and weight purposes (great travel lens).

I'm not sure what other lenses you have in your bag but this would go nicely with your 24-70 and would give you full coverage from 24mm to 300mm, whereas you'd have a decent gap between 70 and 300mm with the other lens. The choice is yours obviously, but consider what types shooting you might be doing. If this is going to be used for travel, get the 70-300 for flexibility. You can find used ones for around $400 USD at least.

Or if you can give up 100mm, maybe consider a 24-200 if you want a good travel lens (that would mean one lens that pretty covers a good range, although it's slower than the 24-70 f/4 beyond about 50mm.

thomas2279f · Nov 15, 2020

and for £480 great price, also very light, good in both stills and video.

You can always save up long term for the 300 PF which may be made for the Z mount

joe-shaw · Nov 15, 2020

j_photo said:
I've been shooting daily with the 300 PF (usually with the TC1.4 III attached) since early spring. I have also shot 70-300 in the past, though I don't have one currently.

Was zoom lens not helpful for your kind of work or why you gave it up?

j_photo said:
The PF is a bit more of everything. It's faster, it's sharper, and with the teleconverter it can reach farther. The tradeoff is cost and size.

Weight-wise both tele looks close, i.e. 70-300 mm is 680g and 300mm PF is 775g. Yes, the cost would be a factor. A used lens+TC would reach to $1500 I guess.

j_photo said:
There are plenty of examples with 300 in my gallery if you are interested.

I am guessing the section of birds is 300mm? Your gallery is pretty impressive

joe-shaw · Nov 15, 2020

thomas2279f said:
and for £480 great price, also very light, good in both stills and video.

You can always save up long term for the 300 PF which may be made for the Z mount

Upcoming Z Primes is 400mm and 600mm, but there is no date announced. Few rumors say that it may not be coming in 2021.

100-400 S may come in 2021, but not sure what would be its weight and what would be its cost. I am guessing above $2000.

djd97 · Nov 15, 2020

joe-shaw said:
thomas2279f said:

and for £480 great price, also very light, good in both stills and video.

You can always save up long term for the 300 PF which may be made for the Z mount

Click to expand...

Upcoming Z Primes is 400mm and 600mm, but there is no date announced. Few rumors say that it may not be coming in 2021.

100-400 S may come in 2021, but not sure what would be its weight and what would be its cost. I am guessing above $2000.

I'd guess the 100-400 will be similar in price and size to the 70-200 S -- $2500, 220mm long, and 1400g.

joe-shaw · Nov 15, 2020

djd97 said:
joe-shaw said:

thomas2279f said:

and for £480 great price, also very light, good in both stills and video.

You can always save up long term for the 300 PF which may be made for the Z mount

Click to expand...

Upcoming Z Primes is 400mm and 600mm, but there is no date announced. Few rumors say that it may not be coming in 2021.

100-400 S may come in 2021, but not sure what would be its weight and what would be its cost. I am guessing above $2000.

Click to expand...

I'd guess the 100-400 will be similar in price and size to the 70-200 S -- $2500, 220mm long, and 1400g.

From any posts or announcements, did you hear when it is going to release? I can't see any reliable post on this.

djd97 · Nov 15, 2020

joe-shaw said:
djd97 said:

joe-shaw said:

thomas2279f said:

and for £480 great price, also very light, good in both stills and video.

You can always save up long term for the 300 PF which may be made for the Z mount

Click to expand...

Upcoming Z Primes is 400mm and 600mm, but there is no date announced. Few rumors say that it may not be coming in 2021.

100-400 S may come in 2021, but not sure what would be its weight and what would be its cost. I am guessing above $2000.

Click to expand...

I'd guess the 100-400 will be similar in price and size to the 70-200 S -- $2500, 220mm long, and 1400g.

Click to expand...

From any posts or announcements, did you hear when it is going to release? I can't see any reliable post on this.

Based on the 80-400 vs 70-200 F mount lenses and the CES roadmap with the silhouette of the 100-400.

j_photo · Nov 15, 2020

joe-shaw said:
j_photo said:

I've been shooting daily with the 300 PF (usually with the TC1.4 III attached) since early spring. I have also shot 70-300 in the past, though I don't have one currently.

Click to expand...

Was zoom lens not helpful for your kind of work or why you gave it up?

At the time, I traded the 70-300 for an 80-200/2.8. For the performance photography I was getting into, the latter was a much better fit. Today, I have the Z 70-200/2.8. One possibility I'm considering is the 2x TC with that lens, which gets me to basically the same focal length and aperture as the 300 PF with 1.4 TC (although also larger and heavier).

joe-shaw said:
joe-shaw said:

The PF is a bit more of everything. It's faster, it's sharper, and with the teleconverter it can reach farther. The tradeoff is cost and size.

Click to expand...

Weight-wise both tele looks close, i.e. 70-300 mm is 680g and 300mm PF is 775g. Yes, the cost would be a factor. A used lens+TC would reach to $1500 I guess.

The 300 prime is surprisingly light. I find it very comfortable to take on even longish hikes. I use a Black Rapid strap. But without a doubt, the zoom is lighter and offers focal length versatility as well.

joe-shaw said:
joe-shaw said:

There are plenty of examples with 300 in my gallery if you are interested.

Click to expand...

I am guessing the section of birds is 300mm? Your gallery is pretty impressive

Thanks for nice comment. The largest share of what's there were shot with the 300 + TC combo (the focal length is reported as 420mm). There are also some shot at 300mm without the TC, some shot with my 70-200/2.8, and just a few shot with the 500 PF when I had that on loan for one weekend.

I'm a fan of the prime, obviously. But it is a specialized lens and I can see the point to the 70-300 for many shooters as well. In the end both are good choices. Good luck.

Search

70-300mm or 300mm PF, for occasional tele use on Z6 ?

joe-shaw

Member

Peter M J

Leading Member

Attachments

joe-shaw

Member

Peter M J

Leading Member

j_photo

Veteran Member

sirhawkeye64

Forum Pro

thomas2279f

Senior Member

joe-shaw

Member

joe-shaw

Member

djd97

Forum Enthusiast

joe-shaw

Member

djd97

Forum Enthusiast

j_photo

Veteran Member

Similar threads

Keyboard shortcuts