Nikon 300 f4 AF-S or a Sigma 300 2.8 EX DG?

[Mike Neary]

I am also interested in the Nikon 300 f4. Can someone comment on
its physical size compared with a 70-200VR please?

I am awaiting delivery of the 300 f/4 AF-S
Physically, it's pretty much identical in size to the 70-200 VR.

Cheers

Miek

 

[Loansharkx]

There are very few lenses as versatile and useful as the 300mm prime.

I use mine often, but I need the faster aperature so I went with the 300 f/2.8 VR.

If you can get by with the loss of one stop, the AF-S 300 f/4 Nikkor is superb.

Excellent performers and super sharp any way you slice it.

Julio

http://www.juliosantanaphotography.com

 

[FOR ART]

As far as I have heard, the 300f4 is in between the 70-200 and the 80-400 vr.
All very handheldable. sharpness is as good as it gets.

But I am holding back buying it just yet.
I am also looking at the Sigma 120-300 which is a f2.8.

thinking you may want to look into that too.
--
For ART

 

[eliz82]

-if you compare them you would compare a F/4 aperture with a F/2.8 aperture MTF graphs.

-motor don't have to much to do with the focus speed. it's the programing of the cip inside the lens who control the motor who make a real difference. the third party lens at the same aperture and focal length focus more slowly because canon and nikon don't share focus algorithms. this is one of the reasons because old third party lenses don't work with new body but proprietary lens from the same period work.

Here are the graphs:

Nikon:

http://nikonimaging.com/global/products/lens/af/telephoto/af-s_300mmf_4d_if/index.htm

Sigma:
http://www.sigmaphoto.com/lenses/lenses_all_details.asp?id=3312&navigator=7

Both are rated at the same frequency so you can compare them. See
the Sigma's off the center performance and make your own
conclusions. Remember, the next nikon body will be nearly FF.

If you add to it close focusing abilities of Nikon, and fact that
Nikon has faster and better motor, the decision will be easier.
Did I mention resale value?

I'd buy Sigma ONLY if 2.8 would be absolutely critical to my work
and I had no money for 2.8 from Nikon.

 

[davidlloyd]

Many thanks for all the replies - I've decided to purchase the Sigma 300 2.8 lens. This was based on its likely use with teleconverters (larger aperture lenses suit teleconverters better) and its compact size versus the 120-300 zoom. I made my decision after viewing and trying all three in a shop today.

Also I already have a 70-200 VR and a Nikon 300 f4 I feel is 'too close' to that lens with its TC17EII converter.

I was very much impressed with its compact size which is important for me travelling-wise. Also, with converters, it offers a 300 f2.8, a 420 f4 and 600 f5.6 - if I need that much length all in a nice package.

I'm hoping to pick it up in a day or two with the 1.4 and 2.0 Sigma converters.

Many thanks again,

-David