70-200 VR II F.2.8 +1.4 TC or 300 f4 which do you recommend Pl help!!!

Started Sep 8, 2012 | Discussions
stadimiri Regular Member • Posts: 348
70-200 VR II F.2.8 +1.4 TC or 300 f4 which do you recommend Pl help!!!

hi guys

My interest is mainly wild life,birding and landscapes.i shoot with Nikon D300 + nikon 300 f 4+14.tc and 16-85, tokina 11-16 for landscapes

i am seriously considering switching to 70- 200 VR II f2.8 + 1.4 TC instead because
1. better range especially shooting large mammals and large BIF

2.i understand that the IQ of this lens is uperb

3. VRII is very helpful in my shaking hands

4 i am told that this lens gives great results even with 1.7 TC and the new 2.0 version 3 Tc please advise
thanks in advance
regards

srini

Nikon D300
If you believe there are incorrect tags, please send us this post using our feedback form.
SergeyGreen
SergeyGreen Contributing Member • Posts: 582
Not for wildlife ..

Although 70-200/2.8 is an outstanding lens, it is not a wildlife lens. The 300/4 is a better entry to it. Add 17.tc (not 14.tc) to it instead, you will be amazed what it can do for you.

The 70-200/2.8 is better for the closer subjects, like people etc., it gives excellent out of focus blur with very good contrast and colors, but it is not for shooting birds.

-- hide signature --

-sergey

Lions Contributing Member • Posts: 550
Re: 70-200 VR II F.2.8 +1.4 TC or 300 f4 which do you recommend Pl help!!!

The bare 300f4 is always sharper than the 70-200f2.8+1.7TC (340mm). For maximum reach and excellent photo quality the 300f4+1.7 =500f6.7. It is the best affordable, portable 500mm setup available. That being said, I use the 70-200f2.8+1.7TC when VR is required, ie: in a boat or kayak photographing whales. You should own both lenses, one will not replace the other.
--
Ken R. Pride

 Lions's gear list:Lions's gear list
Canon EOS 5D Mark IV Canon EOS 7D Mark II Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L II USM Canon EF 70-200mm F2.8L IS II USM Canon Extender EF 1.4x III +2 more
Leonard Shepherd
Leonard Shepherd Forum Pro • Posts: 15,322
Re: 70-200 VR II F.2.8 +1.4 TC or 300 f4 which do you recommend Pl help!!!

Wait a few days to see what Nikon announce at Photokina.
If there is to be a 300 f4 VR soon I would wait for it.

Moving away from your needs - this eventual upgrade is on my shopping list, sometimes teamed with a 1.4 TC, for outdoor insect photography.

The 70-200 while very good is not superb wide open - before you add a converter. The 300 f4 AF-s is superb wide open.
--
Leonard Shepherd

Many problems turn out to be a lack of intimate knowledge of complex modern camera equipment.

 Leonard Shepherd's gear list:Leonard Shepherd's gear list
Nikon D810 Nikon D7200 Nikon AF-S Nikkor 16-35mm F4G ED VR Nikon AF Micro-Nikkor 60mm f/2.8D Nikon AF-S Micro-Nikkor 105mm f/2.8G IF-ED VR +17 more
Joe Porto Senior Member • Posts: 1,064
Re: 70-200 VR II F.2.8 +1.4 TC or 300 f4 which do you recommend Pl help!!!

The 300mm is by far a better lens for birding, and takes the TC-14 very well. It is very sharp, and lighter. It also doesn't suffer from focus breathing, so you will get a true 300mm for shooting close subjects.

I simply use a monopod, and have no need for VR.

 Joe Porto's gear list:Joe Porto's gear list
Canon PowerShot G15 Nikon D7000 Nikon D750 Nikon AF-S Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8G ED VR II Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 10-24mm f/3-5-4.5G ED +5 more
Funduro
Funduro Contributing Member • Posts: 983
Re: 70-200 VR II F.2.8 +1.4 TC or 300 f4 which do you recommend Pl help!!!

stadimiri wrote:

hi guys

My interest is mainly wild life,birding and landscapes.i shoot with Nikon D300 + nikon 300 f 4+14.tc and 16-85, tokina 11-16 for landscapes

i am seriously considering switching to 70- 200 VR II f2.8 + 1.4 TC instead because
1. better range especially shooting large mammals and large BIF

2.i understand that the IQ of this lens is uperb

3. VRII is very helpful in my shaking hands

4 i am told that this lens gives great results even with 1.7 TC and the new 2.0 version 3 Tc please advise
thanks in advance
regards

srini

Wait for the VR version of the 300mm f4 announcement before deciding. See what the price bump because of VR being added Vs 70-200mm f2.8. Note: The 70-200 f2.8 is huge and heavy, adding a TC will further increase the total body-lens weight and length. I have the D300s, 300mm f4, TC1.4 and 70-200 f2.8, bought a BlackRapid strap because of the weight. I use tripod/monopod with a Manfrotto gimbal head(heavy & big!) to shoot birds, people love the Wemberly gimbal head(lighter & smaller) but was too expensive for me. I believe the TC1.7/300f4 WILL have unacceptable SLOW auto focus speed, useless for BIF(birds in flight). Read plenty of positive comments about using 300f4/TC1.4, I keep the TC connected all the time to limit dust getting into the 300mmf4, which might not be a issue with the new version. 300mm/f4 with TC1.4 gives great bokeh. VR is very useful handheld and lower light conditions.
Hope this helps in making your decision.

-- hide signature --

FYI avatar image is by Steve McCurry

 Funduro's gear list:Funduro's gear list
Olympus XZ-1 Fujifilm FinePix X100 Nikon D300S Nikon D700 Nikon D800 +11 more
Chuck Yadmark
Chuck Yadmark Veteran Member • Posts: 4,351
Re: 70-200 VR II F.2.8 +1.4 TC or 300 f4 which do you recommend Pl help!!!

I do not have experience with the 70-200 VRII, I have the VR1. I find the 300/4 AFS to be vastly superior to the VR1+tc14/tc17.

I carry both 70-200 and 300/4 because my work requires sharp, no-excuses photos, and that means no TC's. (and I can't justify buying the 200-400)

-- hide signature --

http://www.sportsshooter.com/cyadmark
Ann Arbor, MI USA

Equipment in profile

 Chuck Yadmark's gear list:Chuck Yadmark's gear list
Nikon Df Nikon D4 Nikon 1 V1 Nikon D4S Nikon D5200 +17 more
TheronFamily Forum Pro • Posts: 19,983
hmmmm

stadimiri wrote:

hi guys

My interest is mainly wild life,birding and landscapes.i shoot with Nikon D300 + nikon 300 f 4+14.tc and 16-85, tokina 11-16 for landscapes

i am seriously considering switching to 70- 200 VR II f2.8 + 1.4 TC instead because
1. better range especially shooting large mammals and large BIF

so, this says to me you are getting close enough to overfill the frame with 300mm with or without 1.4, and cannot zoom out, hence the need for the zoom. 70-200 would make sense.

2.i understand that the IQ of this lens is uperb

Native, yes.

3. VRII is very helpful in my shaking hands

Agreed.

4 i am told that this lens gives great results even with 1.7 TC and the new 2.0 version 3 Tc please advise

I have seen reviews of the 70-200 with 2x which was directly compared to the superzooms (150-500mm, 50-500mm, 200-500mm) and it came up short IQ wise against all of those.
With a 1.7 it may perform better.

My concern is that when you are not close enough and you need to get closer, if the 200 + 1.7 will satisfy you as you now have 420mm and will have to live with 340mm.
Seems you need something to cover the 100-400/500mm range.

This I base on the fact that you said you would need to SWITCH, and not acquire additionally.

 TheronFamily's gear list:TheronFamily's gear list
Sigma 150-500mm F5-6.3 DG OS HSM
nikkorwatcher Contributing Member • Posts: 684
Re: hmmmm

I'm surprised at what I'm reading. Even in wildlife parks I don't think I would find 300mm enough for birds. And the beast of a 2.8 zoom + 1.4x converter is something I only see my sports shooting chums using when they have to. I would have more have expected the 300mm + 1.4 TC!

TheronFamily Forum Pro • Posts: 19,983
as I see it ...

I too was surprised. The OP did however state that large mammals and large birds are the subject, so the 70-200 may just work OK there.
If reach was/is an issue, we may have a different conversation
--
Kevin - Photos 'n Prose: http://the-photo-muse.blogspot.com/
WSSA member #104
DPR on pic posting ...

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1034&message=30968734&q=simon&qf=m

 TheronFamily's gear list:TheronFamily's gear list
Sigma 150-500mm F5-6.3 DG OS HSM
Joe Porto Senior Member • Posts: 1,064
Re: hmmmm

TheronFamily wrote:

stadimiri wrote:

hi guys

My interest is mainly wild life,birding and landscapes.i shoot with Nikon D300 + nikon 300 f 4+14.tc and 16-85, tokina 11-16 for landscapes

i am seriously considering switching to 70- 200 VR II f2.8 + 1.4 TC instead because
1. better range especially shooting large mammals and large BIF

so, this says to me you are getting close enough to overfill the frame with 300mm with or without 1.4, and cannot zoom out, hence the need for the zoom. 70-200 would make sense.

If this is the case, then focus breathing of the 70-200mm should be taken onto account, as you really aren't getting anything close to 200mm at closer distances. Per Thom Hogan:

Marked 200mm is really:

1.4m 134mm
2m 147mm
3m 164mm
5m 176mm
10m 186mm
Infinity 192mm

 Joe Porto's gear list:Joe Porto's gear list
Canon PowerShot G15 Nikon D7000 Nikon D750 Nikon AF-S Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8G ED VR II Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 10-24mm f/3-5-4.5G ED +5 more
TheronFamily Forum Pro • Posts: 19,983
wow

focus breathing steals a lot of FOV.
Interesting, thanks.
--
Kevin - Photos 'n Prose: http://the-photo-muse.blogspot.com/
WSSA member #104
DPR on pic posting ...

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1034&message=30968734&q=simon&qf=m

 TheronFamily's gear list:TheronFamily's gear list
Sigma 150-500mm F5-6.3 DG OS HSM
OP stadimiri Regular Member • Posts: 348
Re: wow

hi guys

many many times you guys have come to my rescue and cleared the cobwebs.cant really appreciate you guys enough.i will stick to my 300 F/4 and when i become rich(it better be soon as i am pushing 70) will probably buy a 200-400 f2.8 and a 400 f/4
thank you guys
best regards
srini

TheronFamily Forum Pro • Posts: 19,983
Re: wow

just check the 200-400 srini, it's an f/4 lens, not f/2.8
--
Kevin - Photos 'n Prose: http://the-photo-muse.blogspot.com/
WSSA member #104
DPR on pic posting ...

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1034&message=30968734&q=simon&qf=m

 TheronFamily's gear list:TheronFamily's gear list
Sigma 150-500mm F5-6.3 DG OS HSM
Son Of Waldo Regular Member • Posts: 421
Re: wow

what about a 70-300 VR for the larger / closer stuff (as you're waiting to get rich) and keep the 300/4 (with and without the TC) for the rest?

I can certainly understand you wanting VR with those focal lengths as I have enough difficulties handholding a 180/2.8 plus 1.4 TC with any consistency. Without some sort of support / leaning against something etc., that is. And that's on a D700...

Continue to remind yourself of the money you're currently saving while you're at it, too. I have the Kenko 300 DGX 1.4 TC (very decent for the price IMO) and wish I had access to the older 300/4 IF-ED (and a D300) for the occasional use so consider yourself fortunate there as well.

Nikon will most likely come up with an upgrade to the 80-400 or add VR to the 300/4 fairly soon but I can't imagine either being much less than $2500.

Son Of Waldo Regular Member • Posts: 421
Re: wow

TheronFamily wrote:

just check the 200-400 srini, it's an f/4 lens, not f/2.8
--
Kevin - Photos 'n Prose: http://the-photo-muse.blogspot.com/
WSSA member #104
DPR on pic posting ...

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1034&message=30968734&q=simon&qf=m

Hey Kevin, it's been quite a while since I've come across one of your posts here.

Is Morris still kicking around somewhere with a Nikon?

slimandy Forum Pro • Posts: 17,149
Re: hmmmm

Joe Porto wrote:

i am seriously considering switching to 70- 200 VR II f2.8 + 1.4 TC instead because
1. better range especially shooting large mammals and large BIF

so, this says to me you are getting close enough to overfill the frame with 300mm with or without 1.4, and cannot zoom out, hence the need for the zoom. 70-200 would make sense.

If this is the case, then focus breathing of the 70-200mm should be taken onto account, as you really aren't getting anything close to 200mm at closer distances. Per Thom Hogan:

Marked 200mm is really:

1.4m 134mm
2m 147mm
3m 164mm
5m 176mm
10m 186mm
Infinity 192mm

How often are you going to be much closer than 10m to a large mammal or a BIF ?
I think the 70~200 is an excellent compliment to the 300mm f4.

 slimandy's gear list:slimandy's gear list
Sony RX100 II Fujifilm X-T1 Fujifilm X-E1 Nikon D700 Nikon D200
OP stadimiri Regular Member • Posts: 348
Re: wow

hi son of waldo

i bet you would do darn well as councilor .LOL. thank you kind sir. yes i am right now counting my blessings ( and my 300 f/4 and d300) they will see me thro and i will probably add a 70- 300 Vr as you suggest heres some thing as a token of thanks
best regards
srini

TheronFamily Forum Pro • Posts: 19,983
Re: wow

Son Of Waldo wrote:

Is Morris still kicking around somewhere with a Nikon?


Who be son of waldo again?
Morris still hangs at flicker and smugmug and most hang outs.

-- hide signature --
 TheronFamily's gear list:TheronFamily's gear list
Sigma 150-500mm F5-6.3 DG OS HSM
Paul Clark SJ Regular Member • Posts: 412
Look at the V1 and the FT-1 Adapter

If you want more reach, look at the V1 with the FT-1 adapter. It will give you a 840mm F4 lens with a DOF of around F11 for around $1000 or less.

-- hide signature --

Nikon D40
Nikon D300
AF-S 18-55 f3.5-5.6 G ED II DX
AF-S 55-200 f4.0-5.6 VR DX IF-ED
AF-S 300 F4 IF-ED
Sigma 10-20 4-5.6 EX DC NIKON HSM
Nikon AF-S 35 F1.8
Series E 36-72 F3.5
Series E 75-150 F3.5
SB-400

Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads