Overview
1) Lens Overview
When it comes to telephoto lenses, the Nikon 300mm f/2.8 line of lenses has always been a metric of sharpness, contrast and acuity. The Nikon 300mm f/2.8G VR II is no exception – it sports top of the line optical design and technology that are capable of resolving tons of details, delivering outstanding results for any kind of long-range photography. The Nikon 300mm f/2.8G VR II was released as a minor update to the existing Nikon 300mm f/2.8G IF-ED – the optical design stayed the same, with the exception of Vibration Reduction II (VR II) technology and a new A/M focus mode.
Although the Nikon 300mm f/2.8G VR II is primarily marketed for sports, action and wildlife photographers, it is also an ideal lens for portraiture. Its magical optical design beautifully renders the background elements known as “bokeh“, while retaining maximum sharpness on the subject. The large maximum aperture of f/2.8 is very useful for low-light environments and coupled with the VR II technology, allows photographers to capture tack-sharp images hand-held without introducing blur to the images due to camera shake.
The Nikon 300mm f/2.8G VR II works equally well on both FX and DX sensors, with a 1.5x narrower field of view on DX sensor, which is equivalent to 450mm. All current Nikon teleconverters are known to work exceptionally well on this lens, even the 2x teleconverter, which is known to significantly degrade image quality on most other Nikon lenses. The Nikon 1.4x TC-14E II teleconverter increases the focal length of the lens to 420mm while increasing the maximum aperture to f/4.0, the Nikon 1.7x TC-14E II teleconverter increases the focal length to 510mm and maxumum aperture to f/4.8, and the Nikon 2.x TC-20E III doubles the focal length of the lens to 600mm and stops down the lens by two stops at maximum aperture of f/5.6. What this essentially means, is that while you get more total focal length with the teleconverters, you end up losing some light at the same time.
The two letters “ED” in the lens name stand for “extra-low dispersion”, as explained in my Nikon lens naming convention article, which means that the lens delivers superior sharpness and reduced “chromatic aberration” or color fringing in photographs when compared to non-ED lenses. In addition to the Silent Wave Motor (SWM/AF-S) that provides fast and quiet auto focus, the Nikon 300mm f/2.8G VR II also features the Nano Crystal Coating technology, which reduces ghosting and flare. When it comes to weather sealing, the Nikon 300mm easily withstands dust, moisture and tough weather conditions – usual environments for nature and wildlife photographers.
2) Lens Specifications
Main Features:
- Fast-aperture of f/2.8, professional telephoto performance, optimized for edge-to-edge sharpness for both FX and DX-format Nikon D-SLRs – perfect for action and sports photojournalism, wildlife photography and more.
- Exclusive Nano Crystal Coat further reduces ghosting and internal flare for even greater image clarity.
- Nikon Silent Wave Motor (SWM) delivers fast, accurate and quiet autofocusing.
- Nikon Super Integrated Coating (SIC) enhances light transmission efficiency and offers superior color consistency and reduced flare.
- Features enhanced dust and moisture-resistance, magnesium die-cast barrel construction and a protective meniscus front lens.
- Fully compatible with Nikon TC-14E II, TC-17E II and TC-20E II (III) Teleconverters.
- Nikon VR II (Vibration Reduction), engineered specifically for each VR NIKKOR lens, enables handheld shooting at up to 4 shutter speeds slower than would otherwise be possible, assuring dramatically sharper still images and video capture.
- Three Extra-low Dispersion (ED) elements offer superior sharpness and color correction by effectively minimizing chromatic aberration, even at wide apertures.
- A/M mode joins the familiar M/A and M modes, enhancing AF control versatility with fast, secure switching between auto and manual focus to accommodate personal shooting techniques.
- AF Memory Recall allows instant return to a predetermined point of focus.
- Close focusing to 7.2 feet in manual focus or 7.5 feet in autofocus, enabling striking image perspectives.
- Rounded 9-blade diaphragm renders more natural appearance of out-of-focus image areas.
Technical Specifications:
- Mount Type: Nikon F-Bayonet
- Focal Length: 300mm
- Maximum Aperture: 2.8
- Minimum Aperture: 22
- Maximum Angle of View (DX-format): 5°20′
- Maximum Angle of View (FX-format): 8°10′
- Maximum Reproduction Ratio: 0.16x
- Lens (Elements): 11
- Lens (Groups): 8
- Compatible Format(s): FX, DX, FX in DX Crop Mode, 35mm Film
- VR (Vibration Reduction)/Image Stabilization: Yes
- Distance Information: Yes
- Nano Crystal Coat: Yes
- ED Glass (Elements): 3
- Super Integrated Coating: Yes
- Autofocus: Yes
- AF-S (Silent Wave Motor): Yes
- Internal Focusing: Yes
- Minimum Focus Distance: 7.5 ft. (2.3m) AF / 7.2 ft. (2.2m) MF
- Focus Mode: Auto, Manual, Manual/Auto, Auto/Manual
- Filter Size: 52mm
- Accepts Filter Type: Slip-in
- Dimensions (Approx.): 4.9×10.5 in. (Diameter x Length), 124×267.5mm (Diameter x Length)
- Weight (Approx.): 102.3 oz. (2900g)
- Lens Case: CL-L1
- Lens Hood: HK-30
- Supplied Accessories: 52mm filter holder, 52mm Nikon NC Filter, LN-1 strap, HK-30 Slip-on lens hood, CL-L1 semi-soft case, Slip-on Front lens cover, Rear lens cap
3) Lens handling
The Nikon 300mm f/2.8G VR II is a rugged professional lens made of tough magnesium material, designed to withstand physical abuse in various weather conditions and tough environments. I took it with me in very hot, dry weather and also used it in humid, rainy environments without any protection – the lens functioned flawlessly and I did not see any water accumulation inside the lens. Weighing 2.9 kilograms, it is certainly a heavy lens that feels very solid and durable. Although it will easily take occasional bumps during professional use, if you are worried about scratches and other potential damage, I would recommend to get a LensCoat Lens Cover for it. I use LensCoat on the Nikon 200-400mm f/4.0 VR and it certainly does a very good job at not only protecting the lens, but also in keeping my hands warm when shooting in colder environments.
When used on a tripod with a ball head, the lens balances very well on the Nikon D3s body. If you have a lighter camera body like Nikon D700, I suggest attaching the MB-D10 camera grip for better balance. When it comes to hand-holding though, I do have two complaints. First of all, due to the lens body being relatively short (compared to 200-400 and 400mm+ lenses), the area that you hold with your left hand (between the focus ring and the rear end of the lens) is also short. Because of this, if you are not careful with your thumb and index fingers, you will most likely end up touching the focus ring and potentially messing up your focus while shooting. Keeping the hand on the focus ring is not a good idea, especially when tracking birds in flight – your hand movements will most likely alter the focus at the same time. The second complaint also has to do with the short area of the lens that is used for hand-holding. When I shoot telephoto lenses hand-held, I always rotate the tripod collar upwards so that it is not on my way. Doing the same with this lens leaves the large circular rotator on the bottom right side of the lens, which makes holding the lens uncomfortable. I found a workaround to the problem though – rotating the tripod collar to around 120-135 degrees clockwise, where the tripod mount points at around 10-10:30 o’clock when viewed from the rear, leaves some clear area for the left hand. Nikon could address this problem by making the focus ring shorter in size and keeping it closer to the barrel of the lens.
When it comes to manual focus operation, the focus ring is smooth and very easy to operate when mounted on a tripod. When shooting hand-held, using the thumb and index fingers works well, but still not very convenient, due to the above-mentioned problems. When you move the focus ring and reach the focus limit, the ring continues rotation with no resistance in either direction. In addition to the normal AF and other switches on the side of the lens, there is a separate VR ring to turn VR on and off. To be honest, I have never been a fan of these types of rings, since they have a “plastic” feel to them and seem to easily break. On top of that, I did manage to accidentally turn VR off while hand-holding the lens, so I certainly prefer a switch for VR instead, like on the Nikon 70-200mm f/2.8 and Nikon 200-400mm f/4.0 lenses.
Nikon 70-200mm, Nikon 200-400mm and Nikon 300mm compared
The HK-30 carbon fiber hood that is also used on the Nikon 200-400mm f/4.0 VR II lens works great against flare and protects the front element of the lens, so I suggest leaving it on the lens at all times when shooting in the field. The hood can also be mounted in the reverse position, shortening the length of the lens, which is very useful for transporting the lens in a camera bag. The included CL-L1 lens case works fine for storing the lens and will accommodate a DSLR body as well.
4) Focus acquisition speed and accuracy
Like all long-range Nikon telephoto lenses, the Nikon 300mm f/2.8G VR II is equipped with Internal Focus (IF), which drives the AF performance to its limits. The lens snaps into focus instantly and silently, thanks to the Silent Wave Motor. Focusing works very well, even in low-light environments. I primarily used the lens on the Nikon D3s professional camera body and it produced exceptional results at all apertures. Even with the Nikon TCs attached, the lens did not have any problems acquiring focus (more on the subject below) for both stationary and moving subjects.
5) Lens sharpness and contrast
When it comes to sharpness and contrast, the Nikon 300mm is often regarded as one of the sharpest Nikon lenses ever produced and is considered to be a sharpness “reference” lens. It took Nikon 40 years to make it what it is today – a highly regarded work of art and engineering that delivers outstanding images to sports, action and wildlife photographers that need maximum sharpness for print. As shown in the subsequent pages of this review, both center and corner frames are razor sharp at all apertures, which is simply incredible. Contrast is top of the class and colors are stunningly beautiful, definitely Nikon’s best, thanks to the clever optical design of the lens.
6) Bokeh and Vignetting / Light Falloff
One of the strengths of long telephoto lenses is the beautiful, creamy bokeh they are able to produce, due to the shallow depth of field, at even longer distances. The Nikon 300mm f/2.8G VR II is a bokeh champion – it produces exceptionally good-looking background blur, especially wide open at maximum aperture of f/2.8. I primarily used the Nikon 300mm f/2.8G VR II for birding and wildlife photography and I was stunned by the results. The bokeh looks creamy and beautiful and the lens does a superb job at isolating subjects at large apertures. Here is an example of subject isolation and bokeh for a portrait that was shot at f/2.8:
The amount of vignetting is very moderate at maximum aperture and is barely noticeable, especially when compared to Nikon 200-400mm @ 300mm f/4.0. The corners look much brighter by f/4.0 and vignetting is almost completely gone by f/5.6. Don’t get too concerned about vignetting though, since it can be very easily fixed in Adobe Photoshop or Lightroom. In Lightroom 3.0, there is an option to “Enable Profile Corrections” under “Lens Corrections”, which can be used to get rid of vignetting issues. Although there is no camera profile for the Nikon 300mm f/2.8 yet, you can type a custom value or move the slider to fix vignetting problems. I used +20 under “Amount” in “Lens Vignetting” and that removed all traces of vignetting on images shot at f/2.8.
7) Ghosting and Flare
Notice how big the hood on this lens is? Well, it is there for a reason – most long-range telephoto lenses do not perform well against the sun, when compared to wide angle lenses. So, if you shoot against the sun, you might get some large, nasty flares and plenty of ghosting, which is quite normal. The integrated “Nano Crystal Coat” certainly helps to reduce ghosting and flare, but does not eliminate it. Here is an image with the sun in the center frame:
And here is another one with the sun on top right side of the frame:
As you can see, the images contain lens flares and ghosts in both images, but the one with the sun in the center does not look bad at all.
8) Distortion
Forget about distortion on this lens – it is almost non-existent. If you put up straight lines on the wall and shoot some samples wide open, you might see a very minimal amount of pincushion distortion when shooting at close distances, but as soon as the focus point gets towards infinity or the lens is stopped down a little, distortion is completely eliminated. As I have pointed out in many of my other reviews and articles, distortion is generally not a problem, because it can be easily fixed in Photoshop or Lightroom 3 using Lens Correction.
9) Vibration Reduction
One of the biggest advantages of the Nikon 300mm f/2.8G VR II lens is its Vibration Reduction II system. When you shoot with long telephoto lenses, even the slightest camera shake can result in blurry images. Considering the size, weight and focal length of this lens, it is impossible for a human to hand-hold the Nikon 300mm f/2.8G VR II without normal vibrations. Even following the focal length rule, which states that the shutter speed of the camera should at a minimum be at the focal length of the lens (for example, at 300mm focal length, the shutter speed needs to be at least 1/300th of a second), does not always guarantee consistently sharp photos, again, due to vibrations caused by our hands. That’s where the VR system comes into play – it works its way against the motion, allowing to get sharp photos at slow shutter speeds. With the Vibration Reduction II system, Nikon claims a 4 stop improvement, which means that you should be able to obtain sharp images while shooting at around 1/30th of a second, hand-held at 300mm. It is certainly tough to get sharp images at 1/30th of a second, but doable if you use a proper hand-holding technique. I would say 1/60th of a second (around 3 stops) is a pretty reliable shutter speed with VR turned on and anything slower than that might introduce blurry images due to camera shake.
10) Performance with the Nikon TC-14E II teleconverter
As I have pointed out above, the Nikon 300mm f/2.8G VR II works great with all Nikon teleconverters. The Nikon TC-14E II teleconverter increases the focal length of the lens to 420mm total (300 x 1.4) and slows down the lens to f/4.0. Aside from the decreased maximum aperture, you will barely notice that the TC-14E II is attached to your camera – it has a very small effect on image quality, sharpness or color. The results with the TC-14E II are fantastic and I would not hesitate to shoot the lens wide open at f/4.0, although stopping down to f/5.6 certainly improves the sharpness. A detailed sharpness comparison with the TC-14E II can be found in the subsequent pages of this review.
11) Performance with the Nikon TC-17E II Teleconverter
The day I received the lens, I already knew that it would perform exceptionally well with the TC-14E II. So I attached my Nikon TC-17E II 1.7x teleconverter to the lens and went out shooting, while waiting for the TC-20E III to arrive. I was quite surprised to see how well the Nikon 300mm f/2.8G VR II performed with the TC-17E II in terms of sharpness and contrast. Compared to the Nikon 200-400mm f/4.0 VR (which does not work well with anything longer than the TC-14E II) the results were outstanding. Take a look at the following sample images shot with the Nikon TC-17E II:
Nikon 300mm f/2.8G VR II with TC-17E II @ f/5.6
Nikon 300mm f/2.8G VR II with TC-17E II @ f/6.3
If you are interested in seeing a detailed sharpness test, see the subsequent pages of this review.
12) Performance with the Nikon TC-20E III Teleconverter
It is no coincidence that Nikon released the new Nikon TC-20E III together with the Nikon 300mm f/2.8G VR II. The Nikon TC-20E III was specifically engineered to work well with the Nikon 300mm f/2.8G lens – one of the few Nikon lenses that historically performed well with the 2x teleconverter. I have heard a lot of good things about the TC-20E III and after one of our readers sent some sample images from the Nikon 70-200mm f/2.8G VR II + TC-20E III combo, I knew that I had to get the TC-20E III. The images looked unrealistically good, because the older version of the Nikon 70-200mm performed quite poorly with teleconverters, even with the TC-17E II.
It was darn hard to obtain the Nikon TC-20E III because of such a high demand on it and after waiting for a few weeks, I decided to just rent it for a week. My objective was to try the Nikon TC-20E III specifically with the Nikon 300mm f/2.8G VR II and with the Nikon 70-200mm f/2.8G VR II to see how it truly performs in an outdoor environment when photographing nature. It is one thing to shoot test charts with a lens sitting on a tripod, and another to get out and do some real shooting. Some lenses look great on paper and on test charts, but cannot perform equally well when used in an outdoor environment, especially with fast-moving subjects like birds. The primary reason is autofocus, which primarily depends on the speed of the AF motor inside the lens and camera’s AF system. Teleconverters generally negatively impact autofocus performance, due to a considerable loss of light and contrast and the 2x TC is the worst in this regard.
But what about the TC-20E III? Take a look at the following 100% crop:
The image was shot at maximum aperture of f/5.6, which is very impressive! Move the mouse over to see how it looks with some sharpening applied to the image using my “how to sharpen images in Lightroom” tutorial. To be honest, I did not expect the TC-20E III to work this well wit the Nikon 300mm f/2.8G VR II. After having some bad experience with the TC-17E II and TC-20E II TCs in the past, I subconsciously started stopping down the lens to f/8.0-f/10 in the beginning, thinking that I would not be able to obtain sharp images otherwise. Well, as you can see from the above example, shooting wide open is perfectly acceptable with the TC-20E III, although stopping down to f/8.0 does produce even sharper images:
Again, if you want to see some detailed sharpness tests, check out the subsequent pages of this review.
Let’s now move on to the good stuff – Sharpness tests and Comparisons. Select the next page below.
Sharpness Test
Sharpness Test
Some technical junk:
- White Balance: Auto
- ISO: 200
- EXIF information is preserved in the images
- Lens was mounted on Nikon D3s FX Camera and Gitzo tripod
- Subject distance is about 8 meters (approx. 26 feet)
- Focusing was performed through Live-View Contrast Detect.
- Mirror Lock-Up mode with Exposure Delay set to “On” and remote cable release to completely eliminate camera shake
- Long exposure NR: Off
- Image Format: RAW
- Lightroom settings: Default settings, but exposure had to be slightly adjusted for some images
- Lightroom export: sRGB JPEG Quality 80
- Testing was performed at f/2.8, f/4.0, f/5.6 and f/8.0 apertures
- Nothing was moved during testing
13) Sharpness Test – Nikon 300mm Center Frame
Either hover your mouse or click on each image to see the aperture settings. Top left: f/2.8, Top right: f/4.0, Bottom left: f/5.6, Bottom right: f/8.0.
Do you see a difference between any of the above images? Because I don’t – the center sharpness of the Nikon 300mm f/2.8G VR II is looking very good at all apertures.
14) Sharpness Test – Nikon 300mm Corner Frame
How about the extreme corners? Let’s take a look:
Again, the corners look as good as the center frame, which is simply incredible! No wonder why images from this lens look so crisp and sharp.
Lens Comparisons
Compared to Nikon 200-400mm f/4.0G VR
Many photographers who are interested in buying a telephoto lens wonder how the Nikon 300mm f/2.8G VR II compares to the Nikon 200-400mm f/4.0G VR lens. Lucky, I have the Nikon 200-400mm f/4.0 lens and I was able to perform some tests with it.
15) Nikon 300mm f/2.8G VR II vs Nikon 200-400mm f/4.0G VR
I have been shooting with the Nikon 200-400mm f/4.0 VR lens for several years now and I have been quite happy with it – it takes very sharp images wide open and performs exceptionally well throughout the zoom range. While the Nikon 200-400mm f/4.0 VR has recently been updated to the VR II version with no change in optics, VR is not the problem with the 200-400mm. The biggest issue for me is its weight and size. When you grab the 200-400mm on one hand and the 300mm lens on another, you immediately notice the difference in weight which is around 1 pound or ~400 grams. Those 400 grams do make a difference when hand-holding the lens. I typically hand-hold my 200-400mm and after a short while, my left hand starts to get sore. Because of this, I typically shoot in “bursts” of 5-10 seconds and then I have to rest. With the Nikon 300mm f/2.8G VR II, I was able to hand-hold the lens for longer periods of time and it was very apparent when I did some birding in local parks.
Now in terms of size, the Nikon 200-400mm f/4.0G is about 25% longer than the 300mm f/2.8G, which does present a few problems. First of all, not many camera bags can fit the 200-400mm with its hood in reverse position, while the 300mm fits in many types of bags. When I travel, I have to take the CL-L2 case with the lens and it is painful to get it in and out of the bag. Gladly, the bottom material can be removed from the CL-L2 and even the D3s fits together with the lens, however, it is still another bag to lurk around with. There are some bags that fit both the 200-400mm and a camera, but they are rather large and expensive. For hand-holding, as I have stated earlier, I do prefer the larger hand-holding area of the 200-400mm – if only the Nikon 300mm had a shorter focus ring that is closer to the end of the barrel!
Compared to the Nikon 300mm f/2.8, The Nikon 200-400mm f/4.0 is a versatile lens, offering the ability to zoom from 200mm to 400mm, which is very useful for sports and wildlife photographers. Being able to zoom in and out is useful for large mammals and I know that many photographers that do safari trips to Africa and travel to Alaska to photograph bears love the 200-400 for this particular feature. But what about sharpness, and how does the 300mm with teleconverters compare to the 200-400mm? Let’s take a look.
16) Sharpness Test – Nikon 300mm f/2.8 vs Nikon 200-400mm f/4.0
Let’s see how both lenses perform at 300mm @ f/4.0 (Left: 300mm, Right: 200-400mm):
I did not want to move around or change zoom on the 200-400mm, so there is a slight difference in the field of view due to differences in lengths of both lenses. As you can see, both lenses perform exceptionally well in the center and there are no major differences in sharpness. The same goes for f/5.6 and f/8.0 apertures.
What about the corners? Let’s see extreme corners at the same aperture of f/4.0:
The Nikon 300mm certainly performs better than the 200-400mm in the extreme corners – it is noticeably sharper.
But shooting both lenses at 300mm is not very useful – photographers are mostly interested in finding out how images from the Nikon 300mm f/2.8G with various teleconverters perform against the Nikon 200-400mm. Let’s take a look at some examples with teleconverters.
17) Nikon 300mm f/2.8 + TC-14E II vs Nikon 200-400mm f/4.0
Let’s see how the Nikon 300mm f/2.8 + TC-14E II (1.4x – 420mm total) compares against the Nikon 200-400m at 400mm:
The Nikon 200-400mm f/4.0 wins at f/4.0, which is expected, since we are comparing a lens with a teleconverter to another without one. The TC-14E II is superb, but it is another piece of glass in front of the camera, which certainly does impact the overall sharpness and acuity of the combo.
Here is a comparison at f/5.6:
Stopped down to f/5.6, the sharpness on the Nikon 300mm f/2.8 improves and gets very comparable to the 200-400mm.
18) Nikon 300mm f/2.8 + TC-17E II vs Nikon 200-400mm f/4.0 + TC-14E II
Now here is an interesting comparison – if we take the Nikon 300mm f/2.8 and add the TC-17E II, we end up at 510mm. If we take the 200-400mm and add the TC-14E II, we get to 560mm. This time, I tried to match the field of view, because 50mm was too big of a difference. Let’s see how both compare at 510mm (Left: 300mm, Right: 200-400mm):
The Nikon 300mm f/2.8 with TC-17E II at 510mm performs almost equally well as the Nikon 200-400mm f/4.0 with TC-14E II. The 300mm image is a tad softer, but perfectly acceptable. Don’t forget that the Nikon 300mm f/2.8 with the TC-17E II is at maximum aperture of f/4.8, while the Nikon 200-400mm is at f/5.6, so the 300mm is slightly stopped down. Here is how f/4.8 compares against f/5.6 on the 300mm + TC-17E II:
As you can see, there is almost no difference between f/4.8 and f/5.6 on the 300mm, so I can conclude that there is a half stop advantage on the 300mm when shooting with the TC-17E II.
19) Nikon 300mm f/2.8 + TC-20E III vs Nikon 200-400mm f/4.0 + TC-17E II
Now here is another interesting comparison – how does the 300mm with the TC-20E III compare with the Nikon 200-400mm with the TC-17E II? Again, I had to match the field of view on both to get comparable results (Left: 300mm f/5.6, Right: 200-400 f/6.7):
When shooting test charts, both look very similar, with a slight edge on the Nikon 200-400mm. However, results in the field are quite different – the Nikon 200-400mm with TC-17E II does not autofocus as well as the 300mm with TC-20E III and as a result, the number of keepers on the 300mm is much higher. Furthermore, stopping down the Nikon 300mm f/2.8 + TC-20E III to f/8.0 and higher yields sharper results than the 200-400mm + TC-17E II at the same apertures. Take a look at these two image samples at f/11:
As you can see, the image from the 300mm at 600mm is sharper.
20) Nikon 300mm f/2.8 + TC-20E III vs Nikon 200-400mm f/4.0 + TC-20E III
What about Nikon 200-400mm f/4.0 with the TC-20E III? Forget about it – autofocus on the 200-400mm does not work, period. I couldn’t even get D3s to acquire focus through liveview contrast detect with the TC-20E III and it took me several tries to get good focus:
As can be seen from the above images, the Nikon 200-400mm performs poorly with the TC-20E III, in addition to not being able to autofocus with it.
21) Summary of the comparison
So, which is a better lens to buy – the Nikon 300mm with 1.4x, 1.7x and 2.0x teleconverters, or the Nikon 200-400mm with 1.4x and 1.7x teleconverters? If you need the reach, go for the Nikon 300mm f/2.8G VR II. Why? Because with the TC-20E III, you will reliably get to 600mm, while the Nikon 200-400mm f/4.0 VR will give you 560mm with the TC-14E II. Autofocus with the TC-17E II on the Nikon 200-400mm is very unreliable and unless you are OK with manual focus, I would not count on the Nikon 200-400mm f/4.0 + TC-17E II combo. Forget about using the TC-20E II on the Nikon 200-400mm – it will not autofocus.
Compared to Nikon 300mm f/4.0D AF-S
What about my favorite Nikon 300mm f/4.0 AF-S lens? How does it compare to the Nikon 300mm f/2.8G VR II with and without teleconverters? Let’s take a look.
22) Nikon 300mm f/2.8G VR II vs Nikon 300mm f/4.0D AF-S
Let’s compare both at 300mm f/4.0 (Left: Nikon 300mm f/2.8, Right: Nikon 300mm f/4.0):
I love the Nikon 300mm f/4.0 AF-S for a reason – it is almost as good as the Nikon 300mm f/2.8 at f/4.0! How about the corners?
The corners are looking equally good, which is very impressive for Nikon 300mm f/4.0 AF-S. So, the only difference here is the one stop advantage on the Nikon 300mm f/2.8G VR II.
23) Nikon 300mm f/2.8G + TC-14E II vs Nikon 300mm f/4.0 + TC-14E
How does the Nikon 300mm f/4.0 AF-S + TC-14E compare against the 300mm f/2.8G + TC-14E?
The results, again, are almost identical. The Nikon 300mm f/4.0 AF-S performs exceptionally well with the TC-14E II and the only advantage of the 300mm f/2.8G VR II is one stop, i.e. maximum aperture of f/4.0 vs f/5.6. No need to show the corner performance with the TC-14E II, because it looks the same.
What about TC-17E II and TC-20E III on the Nikon 300mm f/4.0 AF-S? The situation is very similar as with the Nikon 200-400mm f/4.0 lens – the TC-17E II yields unreliable results, while with the TC-20E III, the lens does not autofocus.
24) Summary of the comparison
As can be seen from the above image samples, the Nikon 300m f/4.0 AF-S is a superb lens and is almost on par with the Nikon 300mm f/2.8G VR II performance when it comes to sharpness. The Nikon 300mm f/2.8G still yields better colors and bokeh though, because it has superior optics and shallower depth of field. When it comes to teleconverters, the Nikon 300mm f/4.0 AF-S marries the TC-14E II pretty well, but that’s about it. TC-17E II yields poor and soft results due to slow and unreliable autofocus and with the TC-20E III, the lens does not focus at all. The biggest advantage of the 300mm f/2.8 lens is obviously VR – it is extremely tough to make sharp images with the 300mm f/4.0 AF-S when the shutter speed is slower than 1/250th of a second, due to lack of VR system.
Compared to Nikon 70-200mm f/2.8G VR II
The next test is comparing the Nikon 300mm f/2.8G VR II with the excellent Nikon 70-200mm f/2.8G VR II with TC-17E II and TC-20E III.
25) Nikon 300mm f/2.8G vs Nikon 70-200mm + TC-17E II
Left: Nikon 300mm f/2.8 @ f/5.6, Right: Nikon 70-200mm f/2.8 + TC-17E II @ f/5.6.
As expected, the Nikon 300mm f/2.8G rips the 70-200mm f/2.8G + TC-17E II apart at 300mm f/5.6. In addition, the Nikon 70-200mm f/2.8G is also showing signs of purple fringing.
26) Nikon 300mm f/2.8G + TC-14E II vs Nikon 70-200mm + TC-20E III
What if we compare 70-200mm + TC-20E III with the Nikon 300mm + TC-14E II? Let’s take a look (Left: 300mm, Right: 70-200mm):
Obviously, the field of view is different due to 400mm vs 420mm math, but again, as expected, the Nikon 300mm with TC-14E II beats the Nikon 70-200mm with TC-20E III. I must confess, the Nikon 70-200mm f/2.8G + TC-20E III looks really good though. When the 70-200mm is stopped down to f/8.0+, the purple fringing goes away and the image gets sharper. But more on that later – I will post my findings in my Nikon 70-200mm f/2.8 VR II Review later.
27) Summary of the comparison
Many of our readers ask if it is better to get the Nikon 70-200mm f/2.8G VR II with the TC-20E III teleconverter, or get Nikon 300mm f/2.8G / f/4.0 AF-S lens. As can be seen from the above image samples, sharpness-wise, both Nikon 300mm lenses are better than the 70-200mm with a teleconverter. Just like I keep saying, if you need the reach, go for the 300mm lenses – they are always sharper with or without the teleconverters.
Compared to Sigma 150-500mm f/5-6.3
I borrowed the Sigma 150-500mm f/5-6.3 lens from a good friend of mine and performed some additional tests, comparing it to the Nikon 300mm f/2.8G VR II at various focal lengths.
28) Nikon 300mm f/2.8G VR II vs Sigma 150-500mm f/3.5-6.3
Let’s see how the Sigma 150-500mm stands up against the Nikon 300mm at 300mm (Left: Nikon 300mm, Right: Sigma 150-500mm):
And here is the extreme corner with the same settings @ 300mm:
Although the Sigma looks surprisingly good at 300mm (especially in the corners), as you can see, it is nowhere close to the 300mm in terms of sharpness. The 300mm focal length seems to be a “sweet spot”, at least when compared to the horrid 500mm performance:
The corners at 500mm look even softer, with plenty of color fringing all over the place.
29) Summary of the comparison
To be honest, I am not a big fan of telephoto Sigma lenses. They are definitely of good value, but their QA problems, inconsistent autofocus and often poor performance sets them apart from Nikon telephoto lenses. Just take a look at the horrible image of the 150-500mm at 500mm. I don’t know if I have a bad lens sample, but I certainly find this kind of performance unacceptable. I’m pretty sure Nikon would rather cut the lens to a shorter focal length, then release a lens that yields soft images.
Compared to Nikon 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6G VR
The last test is to see how the Nikon 70-300 f/4.5-5.6G VR performs against the Nikon 300mm f/2.8G VR II at 300mm.
30) Nikon 300mm f/2.8G VR II vs Nikon 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6G VR
Let’s take a look at the center frame at f/5.6 (Left: 300mm, Right: 70-300mm):
The Nikon 70-300mm yields very comparable results to the Sigma 150-500mm, but is no match to the 300mm f/2.8G in terms of sharpness in the center. What about the corners?
Similar story here, except the 70-300mm is showing some nasty yellow/blue color fringing. These problems are reduced when the lens is stopped down to f/8.0, but sharpness-wise, the Nikon 70-300mm barely catches up with the Nikon 300mm at f/2.8 (Left: Nikon 300mm @ f/2.8, Right: Nikon 70-300mm @ f/8.0):
So, if you were to shoot the Nikon 300mm f/2.8G VR II wide open at f/2.8, it would yield sharper results than the Nikon 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6G VR at f/8.0!
31) Summary of the comparison
The Nikon 70-300mm is overall a good lens, but no match to the superb performance of the Nikon 300mm f/2.8G, even when stopped down. In addition, as I have pointed out in my Nikon 70-300mm Review, the 70-300mm has problems focusing in low-light situations and does not work as well as the Nikon 300mm for shooting moving subjects such as birds. It is unfair to compare the 70-300mm with the 300mm f/2.8 due to such a large difference in price, but I still wanted to compare both anyway, for those who are interested.
Summary and Image Samples
Summary and Image Samples
32) Summary
Before I got my hands on the Nikon 300mm f/2.8G VR II lens, I already had high expectations. Having seen the legendary performance of the earlier 300mm f/2.8 models, I knew that the new 300mm would not disappoint. My primary interest in obtaining this lens, was to find out how it performed with the new TC-20E III and other teleconverters, and how it performed against comparable and cheaper telephoto lenses. As you can see, the Nikon 300mm f/2.8G VR II not only meets, but exceeds all expectations. Its first-class contrast and colors yield beautiful images with exceptional bokeh, thanks to the magical design of the lens. Sharpness-wise, it is without a doubt the sharpest telephoto lens I have held in my hands and its performance with all Nikon teleconverters is beyond this world. The VR II system is very effective and certainly does a great job at preventing camera shake. That’s why top photographers use and love this lens – they know what to expect of it.
Is it a perfect lens? I would almost say “yes”, except there is one little thing I did not like about the 300mm barrel design. Since I shoot hand-held a lot, I found it a little inconvenient that the lens focus ring is so large and too close to the tripod collar, which leaves very little space to hold the lens with the left hand. I don’t know if I’m just very used to the Nikon 200-400mm, but I kept on accidentally touching the focus ring with my thumb and index filters a lot, which messed up my focus several times in the field. The focus ring is not very useful for wildlife photography, because most photographers rely on the autofocus system and only get to use manual focus in rare situations. Aside from this particular issue, I have nothing else to complain about – the lens is truly a work of art and deserves a spot in the hall of fame of best lenses.
Overall, I am very impressed with the Nikon 300mm f/2.8G VR II, most notably with its performance with the Nikon 1.4x, 1.7x and 2.0x teleconverters. During the time of testing, I shot primarily with teleconverters and I really liked the fact that the lens focused fast and accurately on my subjects, even with challenging light conditions. Whether you shoot sports, wildlife, portraits or other type of photography where you need to use a telephoto lens, you should seriously consider the Nikon 300mm f/2.8G VR II for your work – it is well worth the money.
33) Where to buy and availability
You can order your copy of the Nikon 300mm f/2.8G VR II lens at B&H – they occasionally have it in stock. The lens is currently selling for $5,899.
34) More image samples
All Images Copyright © Nasim Mansurov, All Rights Reserved. Copying or reproduction is not permitted without written permission from the author.
About Nasim Mansurov
Great review, thanks for the work. I love that pika with grass shot!
Thank you Tom! Can’t wait to get out and shoot more :)
Great review!
I am using the 300f/4 + TC-20E III and it does autofocus for me, except sometimes I have to prefocus manually. I do not see loss in image quality for non-flying birds with the TC-20E III.
Before buying the 300f/2.8, I would like to find comparisons vs the 300f/4 with the TC-20E III for flying and non-flying birds.
Nasim, excellent article as usual. I agree with your comments across the board. I absolutely love this lens and when I go to photograph sports, wildlife or nature it automatically gets mounted on the D3s. I rented the TC20 III but still unable to purchase one, so I am hoping they will become available soon. I wanted to let you know that I use the Manfrotto 393 Telephoto support system on my monopod and my tripod and the results have been excellent. With the range of motion I can get with the 393 and the support, I am able to shoot for hours at a time without breaking my back. Thanks for your hard work and time on these articles.
Tim
Thank you for your feedback Tim, I appreciate it :) I spent a week writing this article and I rushed it last night, since it was already 3 AM, LOL :)
Let me know if you want me to get the TC-20E III for you – I will ask my B&H rep.
Great review Nasim – i’m very impressed by the combination with converters, especially the TC20 EIII – looks like a combo I’ll need to add to my arsenal.
On the subject of new lenses – I’m really looking forward to the Nikkor 24-120mm F4.0 – i hope its as good a the Nikkor 16-35mm f4.0, which I use a lot.
@Pasquier that 24-120 f/4 will be Nikon’s version of similar Canon’s 24-105 f/4? Any ideia of the price range for it?
Very good review Nasim, I really like the way you match it against different “price/quality” ranges so we can get a better notion of what comes with the price tag.
This is one of those lens that in my personal catalog will go to the ‘you can dream but you won’t get’ section :) Still, is good to know that the 300 f/4 with the 1.4 TC also does a great job (this one is on the ‘you can dream, so save and you will get’ section )
Rodrigo, can’t confirm the prices on the 24-120mm f/4.0 yet, but it will be in the $1,200-1,400 range.
Thank you for your feedback! And regarding the 300mm f/4.0 – it once again proved to be an excellent lens for the price! I just wish Nikon updated it with VR…
Pasquier, I am sure the 24-120mm f/4.0 will be superb – better than the Canon version. I will be getting it very soon, so stay tuned brother! :)
Mine is already on order – so you’ll have to be fast.
I’ll give the new 85mm f1.4 AFS a miss – I still got my old one for $900 at B&H, and the new one will cost close to 2K – too steep for my needs.
Am intrigued by the 24mm f1.4 though…. ah, NAS is a bad sickness.
Pasquier, same here, let’s see who gets it first :)
The Nikon 85mm f/1.4G is going to be selling at $1,700, around $500 more than what the current 85mm is selling for…
Yes, NAS is bad, somebody needs to cure me ASAP!
Hi Nasim,
Thanks for such a comprehensive review, always good to get some feedback on how the lens performs in the field vs the studio. The photos from the lens look amazing and clear, I love the Nutcracker feeding her chick.
Especially appreciate the comparison vs the Sigma lens. I own the Sigma 150-500mm f5-6.3 VR after my first lens was the Sigma 70-200mm f2.8 which I found a really good lens for my sports photos and completely love. However the 150-500mm was very dissapointing in comparison and even at 300mm where the ‘sweet spot’ is on this lens I far prefer my Nikor 80-300mm f4.5-5.6 lens (even without the VR on this lens), even better I picked this lens up 2nd hand for only 270 CHF vs 1700 CHF for the (dust collecting) Sigma. So I don’t think that your poor experience withthe Sigma relates to your particular lens.
At a price of 6K USD I imagine I won’t be getting this lens any time soon (I can’t see my wife being impressed if I did since photography is a love and not a business for me) but it looks like a beautiful lens, I hope you enjoy using it and make sure you keep publishing the pictures on your site so we can at least share the results from it and keep dreaming.
Thanks,
Mark.
Mark, thank you for your feedback on the article and opinion on the Sigma 150-500mm! I knew that it would not be as good as the 300mm, but did not have a clue about its 500mm performance…
Nasim, haven’t had a chance to finish the article yet, but wanted to say I love the coyote and marmot shots in particular. Incredible sharpness and detail in the fur. Great captures! Would love the hear the stories behind the images. :-)
Under 27) Summary: “…to get the Nikon 70-300mm f/2.8G VR II…”. I´d love that lens! ;-)
Great review!!!!!
Lars, thanks for catching that typo, I meant to say 70-200mm :)
I have just purchased a second hand Nikon 300mm F2.8 VR and could not agree with you more. In good light the shots barely need touching. Super sharp, super colours and contrast.
I hand hold too but just love using this beast. The weight was an adjustment since I came from a Nikon 300mm F4 but you get used to it. Thanks for the review – only wish I had found it 3 weeks ago before I bought my lense!
Thank you
Stevie
Stevie, thank you for your feedback! I’m glad you like your 300mm f/2.8 – it is one hell of a lens for sure :)
Hi
You say “with a 1.5x larger field of view on DX sensor”. This should be “with a 1.5x narrower field of view on a DX sensor”
:)
Neil, thank you so much for pointing it out…I fixed the article!
Hi Nasim,
Love your web site.
I am looking for a longer lens, up to 500-600mm but can not justify the size and weight of the 400mm f/2.8 or 500 f/4.0.
I am interested in the 300mm 2.8 VR II, with TC x1.4 and TC x2.0 compared to the 200-400 f/4 VR II with TC x1.4 only.
Both would cover the same focal length range up to around 600mm, with the 300mm lighter and easier to carry on long walks.
I would be interested in your comments on these two outfits in respect to sharpness and useability in the field for birds, animals nature etc.
Geoff, the 300mm f/2.8G VR II works great with all teleconverters, even TC-20E III, so I would certainly go for the 300mm instead. It is also a more practical wildlife lens, due to smaller size and lower weight.
Hi, Nasim.
Hope you and your family are doing well.
I have never used any teleconverter so far and have one question. From what focal length does it make sense to use a teleconverter? The longest lens I have is a 85 1.4. I am not going to buy any longer lens now but if I use a new TC20-E III teleconverter, will I have any good result from such a combo? As I guess I will then have a 170 mm f2.8 lens which would be long enough for me. How do you think how much the quality will decrease if I use it for height portraits?
PS: I have finally bought a new 16-35 zoom and really like the shots I make. Thanks a lot for your review!
Alisher, I apologize for a late response.
Teleconverters are specifically created for long-range lenses such as Nikon 300/400/500/600mm lenses. They are also known to work with some of the pro-level lenses such as Nikon 70-200mm f/2.8G VR and Nikon 105mm f/2.8 VR. They will not work with your 85mm f/1.4 – the TC will not event mount on top of your 85mm f/1.4….
Why would you want to use a teleconverter with the 85mm f/1.4 though? It works great without one…
Nasim,
I would like to have a big tele lens but am not going to spend much money on it now. So I supposed that a teleconverter would solve this problem. Now I see that there should be one good tele lens before you buy any teleconverter. Thanks for your advice.
I’m glad you are enjoying the 16-35mm – it is a beautiful lens!
Nasim,
I just got finished reading your review on the Nikon 300mm f/2.8 lens. I currently use the 70-200mm f/2.8 for sports photography and was looking for more reach. I shoot alot of indoor (low light)sports such as B/B,V/B and High School football (night games) with the 70-200 and being a f2.8, it works well but I’m wearing myself out moving around because of the lack of reach. I was on the fence as what to purchase next as the upgrade… 200-400mm f/4.0 or the 300mm f/2.8 but after reading your review I think the 300mm f/2.8 is the way to go !! Both are pricey, but I know that going in.. just want to spend that amount of $’s wisely !!
Thanks for your advice !!!
Ken
Ken, you are most welcome! Yes, the Nikon 300mm f/2.8G I believe is a better lens than the 200-400mm. I’m selling mine this week on Ebay to either get the 300mm or 400mm for wildlife.
By the way, I have just checked with B&H and they have the 300mm f/2.8G in stock. They just came back from holidays and they should be able to send the lens to you as soon as you order it.
Okay great… all of my gear comes from B&H, wouldn’t shop anywhere else !! Just a few more pieces of gear to sell and will have the $’s to order !! The 300mm f/2.8 and my D300 and D700 bodies should work well together !!
Thanks again !!
Ken
Sounds good Ken, good luck!
Thanks for a great review, Nasim. I actually read it when it first came out and before any comments were posted. I think I had ordered mine the day before and you confirmed my hopes and expectations with commendable precision.
Actually I had to send back the first copy I got because the autofocus failed on the second day and I didn’t get the replacement until a few weeks ago. I used it last weekend for many shots in a Blues Festival I cover and was most impressed with the clarity and isolation the lens delivers.
My primary reason for purchase was for a trip to Antarctica next year including shots from the deck of the ship and potentially with a TC14E or TC20E III.
Regards,
Murray
Murray, thank you for your feedback!
It is unfortunate that autofocus on your first copy failed…that does not happen very often with Nikon pro-level lenses ;-) But seems like you are quite happy with the replacement.
The Nikon 300mm f/2.8G is a superb lens and it will work perfectly well with all TCs. I’m sure you will capture beautiful images from Antarctica with this lens. Just make sure to stop down a little when you use the 2x TC and you will be in good shape.
Thanks Nazim for the tip about the 2xTC. When I get the time I intend to test the lens including with the two teleconverters at different apertures and also at different shutter speeds on a monopod, 5×4 studio tripod and carbon fibre tripod, and with different other factors such as mirror lockup and lens support. Hopefully that will give me a good sense of what I can do and what I can’t do.
Regards,
Murray
Murray, that’s a good idea – I also do test lenses in the beginning to see what they are capable of.
Good luck!
Excellent Review!! I also have the Nikon 300mm f2.8 VRII lens and agree that it is a stellar lens both alone or paired with the Nikon TC17EII (1.7x) teleconverter. I use this combination often and have been very pleased with my results. Thanks for taking the time to do such an in depth review. I do some short product reviews with sample image galleries (not nearly this in depth) on my blog and know that you put a great deal of time into it.
I admit to be a bit jealous that you have the Nikon TC-20EIII teleconverter to pair with this lens. This teleconverter has been on my wish list for several months now but it is never in stock. I wonder what is taking Nikon so long to get more of these new 2x teleconverters to the USA? Anyway, I plan on picking one up as soon as it is available.
Anyone who is interested in more sample photos with the Nikon 300mm f2.8 VRII both with and without the 1.7x teleconverter can check out my blog at : http://ksqphotography.wordpress.com/
Thanks again!
Kyle
KSQPhotography
Thank you for your feedback Kyle!
Hopefully Nikon will soon catch up with the demand on the TC-20E III – it is still unavailable anywhere in the US. I don’t think they were anticipating that much demand on it, since the TC-20E II was not a popular TC. Now that the TC-20E III performs so well with other lenses such as Nikon 70-200mm, more and more people want to buy it, hence creating such a huge demand.
Great review Nasim.
I was on the process to decide between 300mm f2.8 VRII and 200-400mm f4. Now it´s clear.
I use telephoto mostly for birds. Right now I have a 70-200 f2.8G VRII + TC-20II and have a lot of good captures, but in some conditions I feel I need more reach.
I have still one question related to the differences between TC-20II and TC-20III, do you have any feeling if it make sense to have the III having already the II. And is it better to use TC-17 with 300mm and then crop the image or use TC-20 and crop less.
Thanks again
Thank you Jose! If you do not mind cropping, then I would personally shoot the Nikon 300mm f/2.8G with the TC-17E II, instead of buying another TC.
I had the TC-20E II and upgraded to the TC-20E III … and I can tell you the latter is sharper.
Here is test … showing the TC-20E III + Nikon 300mm/2.8 … shooting across a lake at night.
See the range and sharpness …
http://www.mundy.ca/Miscellaneous/Tests/TC-20E-III/
Steve
Dear Nazim,
Congratulations for detailed review, well done.
I was thinking of getting the latest 200-400 vr, but now i am a little bit confused.
as i understood you switched from the 200-400 to the 300? am i right? what is the reason you do that?
is the 300 f/2.8 flexible enough on the field? is it handhandable enough to sacrifice the zoom advantage?
i currently use the 70-200 vr2 with tc20iii,and i like the results, but i would like to get to the next step. The issue is that here in Greece the distances to the objects are never too long, let say 30-50meters.
I like to take photos of medium large birds and mammals, in the wild.
What’s your opinion?
thanks in advance
nikos
Nikos, sorry for a late response!
I will write a lot more on the 200-400mm lens later when its review is complete, but a couple of things you should keep in mind – the Nikon 200-400mm is great for close-up shots, but not for subjects that are far away. I find its AF to be unreliable with subjects shot beyond 100 feet, which is certainly an inconvenience, because I have to watch my focus when shooting distant subjects. The Nikon 300mm f/2.8G does not have this problem and focuses dead on even with TCs.
And yes, the Nikon 300mm f/2.8G is handholdable compared to the 200-400mm. If you can be really close to your subjects, then the 200-400mm is terrific and certainly more flexible than the 300mm f/2.8G.
Hi Nazim,
thanks for responds.
i will consider your advice.
best regards
nikos
I just found your website and am reading many of the reviews with great interest. Lloyd Chambers reviewed this lens and reported receiving a bad copy, where sharpness at f2.8 was very bad. One of his readers also reported this with his lens. What do you make of this? It has caused me to delay this purchase, as I don’t want to deal with such issues….
Update: Primarily due to your fine review, I did go ahead and buy this lens (from B&H). I got a perfect copy and verified everything you said. I am just amazed how good this lens is with the TC-20E III, just amazed. What a great addition to my arsenal. Thanks for your fine reviews here!
I also got an Aquatech push on cap for this lens. They are wonderful, and much nicer than the bulky “sock” caps that come with these exotic lenses. Do you use the Aquatech caps?
I also got a Kirk replacement foot, which was a bit of a mistake. Usually I buy RRS foots, and should have done so here. The Kirk foot does work in all my clamps, but is a bit too snug in my Mongoose Gimbal Head, and way to snug in my RRS monopod head (with level release clamp), making it way to hard to close the clamps. It works fine in my Arca-Swiss clamps (C1 Cube and Monoball P1 S with Quick Set Device Flip-Lock).
The Semi-Soft Case (CL-L1) works great with my D3x attached to the lens, as you said. It is quite adjustable, and I think I’ve found a way to carry this combo with the doubler attached. I had to get an extension for the front closing mechanism at REI, as the supplied mechanism is too short. I’ll test it the next time I have the doubler on.
Paul, I personally use the LensCoat camo products to protect my lenses. For the lens cap, I bought the LensCoat “Hoodie” cap that works great for me.
As for the replacement foot, I personally use RRS and find it to be very good. I have used Kirk in the past, but for DSLR quick-release brackets, not for lenses.
Shweet! I am glad that you found my review helpful, the Nikon 300mm f/2.8G is truly superb!
Paul, Lloyd Chambers probably got a bad sample of the lens – mine was certainly a good one.
I can’t get the new 300mm 2.8 in time for my next trip, i can only get the previous version. I do own the TC-20E III, do you think it will work as well with the previous version of the 300mm. A lot of people say that Nano Coating is just marketing stuff but the colors and sharpness from the new lenses looks better for me. I have the 85mm 1.4g, the 16-35mm f4 and the new 70-200 vr II and my photos look better that my old lenses. That is why i’m willing to pay more for the new versions. But now I’m in a hurry and i don’t know if it the right move
Alejack, yes, the Nikon TC-20E III will work equally well with the previous version of the 300mm f/2.8G lens. If you cannot wait, the older 300mm f/2.8G is still a very good lens.
Mr. Nasim Do you or have you used the polarizing filter available for this remarkable lens?
Natasha, yes, a polarizing filter is available for this lens – it is a drop-in filter from Nikon.
Thanks for one of the more useful reviews I’ve seen for the 300 2.8 &/or the 200-400 compared. I had a 300 pre-VR & sold it several years back for the then-new 200-400. Like you, I enjoyed using the 200-400 for several years. I sold the 200-400 last year, and acquired the 400 2.8. I loved the fixed 400, but sold it: Just too large & heavy for most purposes other than the sidelines. Stil, a wonderful lens for subject isolation and brute AF accuracy & speed.
I have considered acquiring the updated 200-400, but am really on the fence vs. the 300. Your revealing review has me again leaning in the 300 direction, as it’s just really hard to see anything that isn’t a positive from this lens. Both lenses perform very well on DX, but the 300 seems to offer greater flexibility, as it’s more useful with the TC’s.
Thank you for a most comprehensive review. I borrowed a 300 from Nikon when shooting the Open golf at St Andrews last year. It was just terrific. I shot the winner on the final hole from the roof of the St Andrews Club (5 stories up) and got pin sharp results even in cropped images. Great colour, contrast and tone. I have coveted one ever since and now have the opportunity. Your review helped the rationalisation! The quality of the results with the 1.7x converter, which I often use with the 70-200 2.8, and the comparison with that lens is really the difference. The shots in the review say it all. Thanks again
I primarily shoot airshows and have been on the fence on which lens is best for this application, the 300 2.8 or the 200-400. While the 300 2.8 sounds like it is sharper, I think the the ability to zoom on the 200-400 would help follow fast moving aircraft with greater accuracy and flexibility. I wanted to see if you have used either of these lenses in this type of application and what are your thoughts in this area. Thanks for a great site.
Tom, I apologize for such a late response – I somehow missed your comment. For your situation, the 300mm f/2.8G VR II is still a better choice in my opinion. The 200-400mm has a problem with focusing on distant subjects, so I prefer the 300mm f/2.8G instead for that reason.
I shoot a lot of air shows, air races, and I find the 300mm/2.8 VR the perfect lens for this application. I was shooting with both the 300/2.8 and 500/f4 at the Red Bull, but found the 500 to be too close most of the time. If you have the 300/2.8, you can shoot at 510mm/4.8 with the TC-17, but you cannot shoot at 300/2.8 if you have the 500/4. I prefer a sharper prime lens to the slower zoom.
If you are planning to use your prime with TCs, starting at 2.8 is a huge advantage. Plus, it gives you the ability to shoot at a wider aperture. Most people concentrate on the speed advantage, but the wider aperture will give you a narrower DoF, and better background blur and bokeh. You cannot substitute that with higher ISO.
The 300/2.8 is my most used lens, and just a real dream to use.
With my 3 TCs, easily kept in pockets, this one lens gives me the following primes:
300mm/2.8
420mm/4
510mm/4.8
600mm/5.6
.
Thank you for your feedback Steve!
добрый день.
хотелось бы уточнить слегка озадачивший меня момент
- что значит в примерах “ФР 500 мм” ?
это описка, или округленные 300*1.7=510, или еще что-то ?
:)
и еще, очень интересно узнать у автора – “Since I shoot hand-held a lot” -
насколько все же реально снимать этой линзой с рук во время прогулок ,
в т.ч. в “зенитном” направлении ? :)
сильно ли устают руки при съемках, успеваете ли оперативно реагировать
с этой увесистой кучкой железа на пролетающую над головой птицу, ну и т.п.
спасибо!
Александр, что-то не вижу я 500mm…покажите где пожалуйста.
А снимать с рук очень даже реально – я постоянно с рук снимаю когда использую 300mm f/2.8. Рука устает конечно-же, но 10-15 секунд передышка и можно снимать дальше.
Hi Nazim,
“it is extremely tough to make sharp images with the 300mm f/4.0 AF-S when the shutter speed is slower than 1/250th of a second, due to lack of VR system.” , when handheld? or even on tripod?
Shanavas, when hand-held of course.
A basic question for you Nasim: If you set up the 300mm on a tripod and took a shot, then added a teleconverter behind the lenss and took the same shot, which would be the sharper image – a cropped image taken without the teleconverter, or the uncropped image using the teleconverter? Why would one be better than the other?
NikJ, it is hard to say which one would be better, because it all depends on what TC is used, what aperture, etc. It is always better to have the reach than having to crop…
Excellent review. However, I think the Nikon 200 f/2 edges out the 300 f/2.8 for sharpness and bokeh – only just though. I have both VR II versions.
Matt, the Nikon 200mm f/2.0 VR II is one hell of a lens for sure :) Very sharp, with any TC.
I hace the same lens and see a problem(wierd issue) with the bokeh. It makes a duplicating image of the defocused points, that looks unnatural and weird. I dont see this effect in other nikons like 70-180, 135 DC, 50f1.4, 24PC.
This effect is easy to see when the point not in focus is near the plane of focus and the focus plane is far (aprox 50mts). Try to take pictures of building in manual focus and look what happens when windows, brick or tension wires are not in focus.
The 400mm f2.8 VR II have the same issue?
Jony, try turning off VR and do another test – let me know if you still see the same problem
To me at least, the picture of the bird shot with the 300 TC20 combo just looks like the camera did not achieve perfect focus. I think a stationary object might show how sharp the lens is better. But that’s just my thoughts. Other than that, a great review!
Thank you for your feedback Devin! The picture you mentioned, is that the one with the hawk (before and after sharpening)?
My Friend,
You authorise me to call you my friend..? I am 67 and have been a passionate of photography since I was 8 and I still have my first camera to remind me of my beginning.To cut a long story short I have just come across your site in looking for a new prof monitor .I can see that we share the same feelings..I have the Nikon D3 ,70-200Vr2,24-70mm, 14-24mm,24-120mm ,85mm 1.4 ,and My dream is to handle either the 200mm f2 or the 300 f2.8 .My favourite category being landscape what do you suggest I shoulld get first…
Christian, of course you can call me a friend, it would only be an honor!
As for your lens dilemma, neither the 200mm f/2 nor the 300mm f/2.8 are landscape lenses – they are great for portraits and wildlife. Do you shoot wildlife? If you do, then the Nikon 300mm f/2.8G VR II is what you want, probably with the Nikon TC-20E III teleconverter.
The 300/2.8 is my most used lens, and I have all 3 Nikon TCs, including the TC-20E III.
If you are only buying one TC, or the first one you buy, I would say should be the TC-17E II. It is so sharp that I cannot even tell without looking at the EXIF, that I used a TC. The TC-20E III is good, but it does ever so slightly show a bit of sharpness loss. You cannot go wrong with any TC, but the TC-17 gives the best magnification without any quality loss. IMHO.
Hi Nasim,
Thanks for a great review.
I have just bought Nikon 300mm f2.8 VR ll & wondered if you could give me a little advice.
I mainly shoot wildlife & birds in flight & have read many conflicting reviews regarding the VR ll.
Should I use the VR ll when handholding for BIF?
Should I leave VR ll on for tracking birds on a tripod or monopod on a Manfrotto Gimbal head?
Your advice would be appreciated.
Regrds,
Maria
Maria, if your shutter speed is above 1/300th of a second (which it should be for BIF), then turn off VR. VR should only be used when the shutter speed drops in low-light situations. And if you are using a monopod/tripod, then you should avoid VR unless the shutter speed is very low. When using VR, make sure that you half-press the shutter for at least 2-3 seconds for VR to fully stabilize.
For BIF, I would recommend at least 1/1000th of a second at the minimum.
After reading this review I took the plunge and bought this marvelous lens. I had been using the Nikon 300mm f/4 and had hit the wall with its limits time and time again. The f/2.8 VRII is much better in every regard. What most amazes me is
1.) How sharp images turn out, even handheld in soft light with a Nikon 1.4x TC attached.
2.) The gorgeous bokeh, even at apertures as small as f/8. How could this be?
3.) The confidence that such a superbly crafted instrument imparts. Just picking it up makes me feel
that I can accomplish anything.
4.) How well thought out every little detail is. Nikon must have set their best designers to work on
this one. And they even included a fully functional soft shell carrying case that is expandable so
that it can accommodate the lens with a camera attached. Finally!
The one and only disappointment has been that VRII does not help when the rig is mounted on a sturdy tripod and I’m photographing static subjects. Pictures definitely turn out sharper with it off. Other than that, all is bliss. Thanks, Nasim. – Kirk
Kirk, thank you for your feedback!
Why are you using VR when the lens is mounted on a tripod? You are not supposed to – even Nikon manual states that :) You should never use VR when the camera is on a tripod, or your shutter speed is faster than the focal length of the lens.
It depends which Nikon VR lens you have.
Some Nikon manuals tell you to leave VR set to ON when it is mounted on a tripod.
It is not a universal rule.
:)
I tried using VR with a tripod because a friend told me that it would compensate for vibration due to mirror slap, wind shake, my heart beat, Brownian movement and the fact that the earth wobbles on its axis: producing the sharpest images possible. Now I leave it off and get great results. The only unresolved problem with this lens is how to deal with the constant interruptions at public places like zoos and airshows when the hoi paloi see what I have in tow. It’s always goes the same…. “Dude: is that, like, a 1000mm lens?” My nemesis calls, with his beer fortified stammer. “Can I try it?” “Sure,” I tell him, ever the patient good will ambassador for the Photographic Arts. “If you can place $6000US in small bills in my hands right now, I’ll even let you take the lens home with you.” “Really?” he replies with unfeigned amazement. “Really.” I assure him, and start looking for the nearest exit.
Thanks for your very careful review. Your images are astounding; they validate your claims.
You are most welcome and thank you for your feedback!
Hi Nasim,
Your reviews are excellent and I thank you for them as they are very informative, easy to understand and from my own experience with the lenses you’ve tested and written about, that I also own, seem right on the mark.
Partly due to your excellent review of the 300 f2.8 VRII and TC’s attached as well, I ended up purchasing this lens and the three TC’s about 12 months ago and I have not bee disappointed. Even using the 2x TCIII attached to either my D700 or D7000 has resulted in exceptional IQ shots that I would have only ever dreamed about. It really is a cheap and compact way to get to 600mm with VR!
The beauty of this lens is that it is relatively compact, light and easy to carry round for long hikes, as well as the three TC’s, in it’s Nikon lens case. I actually have this attached onto the left side of the waist belt of my Lowepro Flipside 400 and it is at the right height on the belt for resting my left elbow for handheld shooting! It really is brilliant and makes for relatively unfatiguing shooting with the 300 f2.8. Even if you are not using the 300 itself, it can be used for resting your elbow for other lenses on the camera. I did have to make a slight modification to the waist belt of the Flipside 400 by getting the last part of the strap sewn to the waist belt pad in order for the two straps of the 300 f2.8 lens case to fit correctly. Any decent boot repairer or whatever should be able to do this for anyone who needs it done.
Also, with the lens on the waist belt, it is a more balanced set up if you are taking a few lenses with you in the Flipside 400. I have tried putting all my lenses, including the 300 f2.8 into a larger backpack, but I feel as though I am about to fall backwards due to all the weight being on my back!
Again, thank you for your accurate, well balanced in depth reviews and your excellent sample images. Your reviews are becoming the standard reference for me and an often linked reference for others that need assitance in lens purchase decision making.
Cheers!
Hi Lance,
I had something similar in mind when I manage to save up to purchase this lens. Ideally I would like to transport it at the front of my body to be quickly-accessible should any shooting situation suddenly arise, as I would often be on the move instead of having everything set up on a tripod for example. Do you think the provided case can be to attached to a chest harness? I don’t see any attachments on the cases, although I don’t personally own one. If there are none then do you figure it could be modified? Your idea sounds good but I would prefer it to be attached in a central position as I often go hiking for long distances.
Hi Shariff,
The 300mm f2.8 VRII lens case has two attachment straps at the rear about 4″ (100mm) apart running vertically and use velcro as the means of attachment. These work well with my Lowepro Flipside 400, but I did need to get an extra loop sewn into the waist belt as the current two loops available are not wide enough. I had a boot repair person do this for me or anyone similar with an indutrial sewing machine. I also did the same for my Lowepro Prorunner 350′s waist belt. It easy relatively easy to access the lens from the waist belt position without having to remove the backpack.
I have the lens case’s handle attached to a strap on the front of the shoulder strap of the backpack in order to keep the lens case upright when attached to the waist belt. I just use a strap with a slip lock on it from some other bag. You could use something else, though. I also use a similar slip lock strap to go around the lens case just below where the straps attach to the waist belt loops and this prevents the velcro form undoing and is another added piece of security.
I can provide photos of the system if you require.
The attachment straps of the lens case could be used to attach the lens case to some sort of harness for central positioning, but I have no experience of a harness for such a use. This is not to say that there isn’t anything available.
hi,
thanks for your precise review,bought this lens after reading it.
Cheers
Nasim,
Another great lens recommendation. Picked one up last weekend and was blown away. This lens was a valuable addition to the bag – fast, sharp and great with TCs.
Thanks
Hi Nasim,
Thank you very very very much for this in depth review, I am currently the owner of a Sigma 120-300 F/2.8 and I am not satisfied with its keeperratio due to lack of consistent autofocussing nor its performance with its dedicated 2X converter. ( a pity because the Sigma is a winner-concept in my book)
I am going to buy the Nikkor next month together with the 2.0 III TC .
Again much obliged Sir!
Greetings from Holland, Roger
Very interesting and a very useful review but I have one comment.
I have the Nikon 300mm f/4 and the TC20E III; with a D7000 or D700 I find this combination will autofocus with reasonable reliability in good light. So when you say it will not autofocus do you mean not accurately or not at all?
Thanks,
Keith
Hi Keith,
I have used the 300 f4 with the Nikon 2x TCIII on the D700 and it will AF, but generally in good light. AF speed is reasonable and accurate, but in low light it is sluggish and less accurate. I haven’t used this combo on the D7000.
The Nikon AF system is designed to AF with lenses up to f5.6/6.3, but at f8 the available light to the AF sensors is getting a bit low for accuracy and speed and this is especially evident in low light situations. You may find that it all works for you, but just be aware that it may have some AF issues.
Cheers,
Lance
Hi Lance,
Thanks for your comments. Yes, the AF is inconsistent but when it gets it right – wow. The combo on the D7000 is a bit of a handful being the equivalent of 900mm! I shall have to improve my technique, tripod etc I think to get the best out of it.
Regards,
Keith
Hi Nasim,
You are such an inspiration. Because of this review and my personal desire for a telephoto lens, I went out and pulled the trigger on this beast :)
The tripod that I am currently using for my other “smaller” lenses happens to be the Gitzo 2541, which according to Gitzo, holds a maximum capacity of 12kg. If you consider the following:
Camera: 1.22 kg
Lens (300 f/2.8 VRII): 2.90 kg
Gimbal head: 1.44 kg
Total Weight: 5.56 kg
Is 5.56kg out of a maximum capacity of 12kg good enough? In other words, do you think I can achieve good results with this setup? Can my tripod handle all the weight?
Hi Nasim,
Your review is excellent as always and forced me to seriously consider the 300mm 2.8 vrii. This is my first experience with Nikon telephoto primes and am simply blown away by the result. I finally bit the bullet and went for it though it meant some sort of a family warfare. But I am so happy. And once again thanks a lot.
hi nasim,
would you recommend the 300mm 2.8 VR II over the 200mm F2 VR II? I’m not sure which one is best for me. I mostly shoot concerts but i’m still into wildlife. What’s your opinion?
Hej Nasim,
congratulations to this great site with many interesting reviews and pictures!
I read your review and also the comments about the 300/2.8VRii with high interest. But i’m curious that nobody mentioned the Sigma 120-300/2.8 yet. Unlike the 150-500 this is very interesting competitor for me, especially when looking a the price and the higer versability… I think a comparison to the Nikkor would be very interesting.
Regards
Jens
Hi Nasim,
Is it worth to think about the AF-S 200-400 + TC-17II or TC-20III again when using a D800/D4 with AF that should work with a reduced number of AF points also at f8? Do you have experience with this combination?
Regards
Stefan
Dear Nassim,
Did you try your beloved Nikon 300mm f/4 AF-S, paired with the TC-17 II and the Nikon D800 ?
I have become a big fan of your reviews. They seem quite detailed and unbiased. Some of the best on the Internet. As I prepare for a trip to Brazil to (hopefully) photograph jaguars, I am considering traveling light and only carrying a Nikon 300mm VR rather than a 500mm. I was very interested in your use of the TCE-20III with the 300. However, when I checked the EXIF for the fox photo, it showed a 600mm lens. One possible explanation is that it didn’t reflect the teleconverter. However, when I checked the EXIF on the photos at the end of the review (pika, chipmunk, etc.) it showed the lens as a 500mm. If you’d used a TCE-17II and the 300mm lens, it should have shown as 510mm not 500mm. I’m just a bit confused and hope you can shed some light on this.
I have the 300mm f/4 and use it with the TC17E and it does show as 500mm ( not 510mm) in the EXIF data.
Hio Nasim,
I have just acquired this lens and frankly speaking, my deciding factor came mostly from your review and I glad I found your website last year. Thanks a lot !
My question is, the 4 focus buttons on the lens itself, when should I use it ? And how should I use it ? My 80-400mm VR lens doesn’t have this function hahaha so I’m not sure about it
My main subject would be birds, wildlife and hopefully sport
I am somewhat new to photography. I got into photography as a way to document birds and wildlife in Florida. i spend a lot of time outside and taking pictures helps me keep track of what I have seen and where. I am very interested in purchasing this lens. Right now, I am using a Nikon D300. I have several lenses, but none seem to give me the reach i am looking for. I have a difficult time with smaller birds and the such. My question is whether this lens will work well with my older dx camera or should I go another route to improve my pictures. of course, I would be getting the 2.0 teleconverter. Any advice would be greatly appreciated. Thanks.
In my opinion, it will be fine with your D300. However, in order to get the best from such long lens combo’s, you need fast shutter speeds, which will require the ramping up of the ISO at times and this is where the D300 will be somewhat limited. I have used the 300 f2.8 VRII with the 2x TCIII on my D7000 with superb results, but it did require the upping of the ISO at times which the D7000 can easily handle, even up to ISO6400 at times.
Hi Joseph, with the D300/D300s you have the flagship DX model … so it is not that old. There is currently no better model until the replacement (D400?) is announced. You have the fast frame rate and buffer size you won’t find on the lower ’000 consumer models. The ISO range is excellent, and you have the dedicated AF-ON button and superior focus system which is not available on the lower end, smaller, cheaper models. Your model is geared for the high end speed, performance, and build quality that the lower end models lack.
http://www.mundy.ca/Miscellaneous/Tests/Buttons/
You will most likely be using the 300/2.8 on a tripod or monopod, and as such you can shoot at much slower speeds easily. Plus on the professional lenses, the professional size body of the D300 balances a lot better than the lower models.
So enjoy the best of the DX world while you can … and know that your glass will have a far greater impact on your results than a newer model. Spend your money on the lenses …
As someone who owns all 3 Nikon TCs, I would suggest if you don’t own any TCs – to get the TC-17 first. I would recommend a good Gitzo platform and a Wimberley Head as well. The Wimberley head will also come in handy for high speed action shots which is an area your camera is designed to shine at.
Here is a test of the TC-20 III on a D300 with the 300/2.8 VR at night …
http://www.mundy.ca/Miscellaneous/Tests/TC-20E-III/
Thanks for the good information. I really appreciate the input. I ordered the lens. Hopefully, I will be able to figure it out.
Здравствуйте, Назим!
Thank you very much for your excellent web resource.
How worthwhile, in your view, is 300mm 2.8 VR II vs the smaller 300mm f/4?
I like the VR capability. That aside, is the 2.8 lens much faster than the 4.0 in terms of AF acquisition speed? Is it that much better optically too?
Thank you.
Здравствуйте Александр :)
If you shoot at 300mm without teleconverters, the Nikon 300mm f/4 is excellent and close in sharpness to the 300mm f/2.8G VR II. However, once you start adding teleconverters, that’s where the 300mm f/2.8G shines. Autofocus-wise, the 300mm f/2.8G is faster overall, especially with TCs. VR can be quite helpful, depending on what you photograph. For fast birds in flight, VR is often useless, since you will be shooting at very fast shutter speeds and you do not want to wait for VR to stabilize…
Exactly the kind of information I was looking for.
Thank you very much!
Спасибо огромное :)
Wow very interesting as usual!
What do you think Nasim of the VRI that came before? I’m about to meet a gentleman who has a clean one for sale (about $4000.00). Will it do as well with the TC’s as the VRII? Also why is the Canon so much more expensive? Is-it because of it’s performance wide open? I would prefer to have one for the D800 instead of the 5D MKII because of the extra MP. I’m getting similar reach on my 300mm F4 (with 36mp) as the 400mm 5.6 L (w/21mp).
thanks
Hey there, wonderfull reviews every time and alot of usefull info and great examples comparing several lenses.
I have 1 question about the 300 f2.8 vs the 200-400, why do you compare the 2II on the 300 2.8 against the 200-400 with 1.7 converter?
its 680 vs 600mm, and the other comparison is the 300 with 1.7 @ 510 against the 200-400 with 1.4 @ 560
I would really like to know if you intend to shoot the 300 f2.8 Vrii with 2III converter, or the 200-400 with 1.4 converter, which you would rather have?, if the IQ of the 200-400 is better then that of the 300 with 2III, then i know i will be making the right choice!
For trip to africa: , nikon d800 and a 70-200 vrII is what i have atm
Im looking to get either a 300 vrII (with 1.4 and 2III tc) or 200-400 vrII (with 1.4 and maybe 2III if it autofocuses on d800, seen some mixed opinions about the quality, you don’t like it while others say its not that bad, this is probably also determined by standards)
I think the 200-400 with 1.4 is the best option, it will give me 280-560@5.6 and 98-280 @ 4.0 ( when switching to the 70-200 during a game drive , i am able to leave the TC on to prevent dust entering)
But there are so many people complaining about the sharpness @ distance (200-400)
And the biggest problem is i see different numbers of @ what distance this happens
If it’s over 100 meters, i don’t really mind since i think you get the best quality pictures closer in any way.
But if its @ 40-60 meters ( like some say), im starting to get worried, hence i am also looking @
300 f2.8 vrII with 1.4 and 2III converter, giving a 600 f5.6 which ill shot @ f8 , and ill be able to switch to a 140-400 f5.6 (also shooting @ f8 like you advise in your review)
I can always get the 1.4 converter on if one would like to shoot @ 420mm, and f5.6 for good IQ
But the idea of having the 200-400 and shooting wide open @ f4 on the d800 is really appealing,
when used withouth TC, i don’t think i would need to change many times during a game drive , unless you encounter elephants really close
Thanks alot for your reply in advance, and keep up the good reviews!, i find them alot more informative then others, thom hogan is on par, but his website is just so bad lol :P
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=704&Camera=614&Sample=0&FLI=6&API=3&LensComp=626&CameraComp=614&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=6&APIComp=3
I was wondering if this site is any good for comparisons?
It seems the VRII takes TC’s alot better(200-400) and appears a lil bit sharper
is dit because: sample variation? / errors from the person who shot it?
apoplexia,
I may be too late in my reply.
You don’t mention where in africa your shooting will take place. I live in South Africa and use a 300/2.8 with a TC20 III on a D7000. It works great for me. Southern Africa is far bushier than East Africa, so you don’t see animals too far from the vehicle, and if you do there’s almost always going to be bush in the way. I do find that I can see a difference between humid summer conditions and drier winter months especially with the converter. If you’re with a lodge in Southern Africa they will also normally be able to get you up close to the game and then 300 on DX is all you’ll need for general game. Birding obviously is not as easy.
The difference between say 500 and 560 is really invisible in the field, don’t sweat over that. I sometimes don’t even bother to hall off the 2x converter. Just go for a different composition. I of course also don’t “have” to nail the shot as I can be abck in a few month time.
There are many professional SA photographers who use the 200-400 only. As you say you’ll need an elephant right by the truck for instance to need wider than 200 and wildlife / scenics. For that you have the 70-200.
Personally with DX, a 70-200 and a 300 are all I’d ever need for Southern Africa.
Hi,
Sorry if I am asking bit out of topic question here. But, I am planning to buy this lens from USA, but not sure about warranty and its duration. I am based out in India, so not sure if this gear carries international warranty so that in case of any issues I can get it resolved in India. I didn’t find good info on websites.
Would be great if someone can help to claarify this.
Hi,
Sorry if I am asking bit out of topic question here. But, I am planning to buy this lens from USA, but not sure about warranty and its duration. I am based out in India, so not sure if this gear carries international warranty so that in case of any issues I can get it resolved in India. I didn’t find good info on websites.
Would be great if someone can help to clarify this.
Hi Nasim,
You refer to the VR II as “a minor update to the existing Nikon 300mm f/2.8G IF-ED – the optical design stayed the same, with the exception of Vibration Reduction II (VR II) technology and a new A/M focus mode.”
I see a couple of the original VR versions on sale used near me for around $4,000 — far cheaper than the VR II new. Any thoughts on what I’d give up if I bought the older version? I do a lot of birding. Thanks.
Thanks for the excellent review – by far the most comprehensive! It was a deciding factor for me, especially the comparisons with and without teleconverters.
love it,the best lens i ever see