@guitarvirtuosoab - as for the focusing on N300, well... it's not a speed freak but it performs well and You have the manual override function which works excellent

If I were You, I would sell the sigma 120-300/2.8 and got the d800+N300/4 af-s combo (with the Kirk replacement collar). I have the N300/4 and it works like a charm on d800 (though I do not recommend to use any TC with that combo). Also if You still have the N70-300vr than it's a nice addition to that combo, as that lens is almost perfect in 70-200 range and works on full frame.
below a shot taken with d800+N300/4af-s

Thanks for the answers...yes, B & H is where I shop as well. Very good people. Maybe they can ship a D800 by September. Apparently NIKON is now shipping cameras. However, it sounds like on this D800 thread,

http://nikonrumors.com/forum/topic.php?id=5297&page=29

some are getting the D800 through various local shops as well as the big stores like B & H, Adorama, etc.

I can see now the reason for the f/2.8 300mm. And the solution to your fiancé's problem may be a monopod. An f/2.8 is simply going to be heavy in the longer focal lengths. While you are ordering, the 16-35mm f/4.0 VR NIKKOR is a super wide angle on FX. Might as well order it along with your D800.

Just remind you fiancé that a female has made these suggestions... ha, ha, ha,.... cameras, handbags, no difference....

guitarvirtuosoab said:
it's interesting you say that about the 300f4. Most users have nothing but good things to say about it. not to cut on the d7000 because I've not used one, but is it possible that it's the body's AF rather than the lens' AF.

My copy of the D7000 seems to work fine in all regards. I had a D300S before the D7000, and I had borrowed a D700 for a month as well. Tried the 300 f4 with both, and the lens just lost it too many times at the critical moment. The 70-300 VR instead nailed the pics in terms of AF speed and accuracy in the same lighting conditions with both bodies. Too bad the 70-300 was indeed too soft for my use in the longest range.

As for the main design flaw (apart from not having VR), the 300mm f4 has no rear lens. Any loose crap can get straight to the shutter blades and through them into the depths of the lens. Lack of VR - yesterday that would have meant trouble as I was shooting songbirds with the Sigma. In the bush it was dark, but OS and f/2.8 saved the day. Although mine has a significant back-focus issue (I set -12 on the body), I love the images this thing produces when it hits.

guitarvirtuosoab said: Although i would think the 120-300 would be giving you the same issue if it was the body rather than the 300f4. What are you carrying your gear in now? Or are you still using the supplied sigma case for the 120-300 like me?

When I go out for the birds, most of the time I leave the case at home or in the car trunk. When I go for general nature photos and have other gear with me, I carry the Sigma in the case strapped on my back.

SquamishPhoto said:
Hands down the D800 and the 300f4 prime will produce significantly better quality in sharpness, color, contrast and detail. This is also true if you compared the same lens on your D300 to the Sigma on the same camera. The D800 & 300mm combo will keep you smiling for years, so I'd totally go for it if you can manage it. Then save up for a while and you'll be able to fill the other focal lengths if you feel the need to.

What are your thoughts on the 300mm f4 focusing? As stated above, that person wasn't too happy with it. The bad thing is they are out of stock EVERYWHERE,.. ha maybe this actually means they're updating it. I can swing buying a few more things, but i can't justify 6000-7000 on one lens, which was the reason for the sigma 2.8 tele over the nikon. I would like to get this stuff by September 9th for our honeymoon if possible. I don't know if i order a D800 today if i'll get it by september. Amazon says ships in 1 to 2 months, but who knows the accuracy of that.

msmoto said:
Maybe it would be helpful, as you have asked a question, to let the folks know what you want to photograph. And, what was the reason you bought a new 120-300mm when you had a 70-300mm? Also, you have purchased the lens, so how can you just take it back unless you lose 20% of your money?

And, the difference between a D300, DX and D800, FX is a lot. Even if you crop to DX, you then have paid for a lot of camera you are not using. Maybe you should think about waiting until the D400 is announced, assuming this is going to come in the next few months, and then decide. I am always a bit concerned when someone purchases an expensive lens, then ask questions about whether to keep it or not.

So, give us more info, please.

I'll start with the return. B&H sales rep stated that there is a full money back refund if returned in 30 days. I'm well within that range. just have to pay shipping back. we ship all the time through work so that should be no problem. I saw no reason to spend 150 bucks + shipping to rent for less than a week when i could buy and return with near no penalty for 30 days. I did not buy it with the intention of returning though.

I knew the specs of the sigma before i bought it, and like i said i'm fine with the weight while shooting. i didn't really take into consideration the size when NOT in use and how to fit it in bags i like. This lens is for both me and my fiance, and she has more trouble with it than i do when IN use, so it's probably not going to work. The reason for buying it was due to the slow shutter speeds of the 70-300 i was getting while photographing in dark woods. f5.6, for lack of a better word, sucks for what i do at least with the d300. Plus from 200-300, at least my copy of the 70-300 is fairly soft wide open. I've had to push the d300 to ISO3200 in order to expose correctly at a decent shutter speed and that also sucks. and by decent i'm talking 1/15th. I've already seen tremendous improvement with the 120-300 in that regard, which is exactly why i bought it. I planned to either replace the 70-300 or just keep it for doing some closer focus stuff since it focuses closer. Plus i wanted to be able to use teleconverters in decent light as i have no chance of affording lens larger than 120-300. Too much money into one item that i can't justify.

On the other side, i also like to shoot super wide angle landscapes and architecture which makes the FX format handy, although i already have an 11-16 2.8. I also prefer night time images. I think artificially lit architecture look much better than day-lit city shots, which also lends itself to full frame format. Because i like this as well, i don't really want to limit us to DX again when i plan on keeping the d300 as a backup. The only thing i really don't care to shoot is normal range, which is the only thing where both formats pretty much overlap

I'm not going to go off the assumption that nikon will release a d400 anytime soon, as i have expected a 300mm f4 replacement for the last 3-4 years and have seen nothing. so i'm going to work with what i can get now.

Hands down the D800 and the 300f4 prime will produce significantly better quality in sharpness, color, contrast and detail. This is also true if you compared the same lens on your D300 to the Sigma on the same camera. The D800 & 300mm combo will keep you smiling for years, so I'd totally go for it if you can manage it. Then save up for a while and you'll be able to fill the other focal lengths if you feel the need to.

Maybe it would be helpful, as you have asked a question, to let the folks know what you want to photograph. And, what was the reason you bought a new 120-300mm when you had a 70-300mm? Also, you have purchased the lens, so how can you just take it back unless you lose 20% of your money?

And, the difference between a D300, DX and D800, FX is a lot. Even if you crop to DX, you then have paid for a lot of camera you are not using. Maybe you should think about waiting until the D400 is announced, assuming this is going to come in the next few months, and then decide. I am always a bit concerned when someone purchases an expensive lens, then ask questions about whether to keep it or not.

So, give us more info, please.

it's interesting you say that about the 300f4. Most users have nothing but good things to say about it. not to cut on the d7000 because I've not used one, but is it possible that it's the body's AF rather than the lens' AF. I have heard complaints about inaccurate AF in the D7000, but like i said, I have no idea if those claims are warranted or not. Although i would think the 120-300 would be giving you the same issue if it was the body rather than the 300f4. What are you carrying your gear in now? Or are you still using the supplied sigma case for the 120-300 like me? Thanks for the comments.

I am in the same situation with a D7000 and the Sigma 120-300 OS. I have had the AF-S 300m f/4 IFED and I do not want to have that one again. It is optically excellent, but the design is flawed and the AF is worse than the Sigmas. And it has no VR either.
The Sigma is a better lens, albeit the quirky AF.

In a moment of madness I thought I´d dump both the D7000 and the 120-300 and get a good m4/3 + Panasonic 100-300 instead. Would be A LOT cheaper, A LOT lighter to carry and would give me 600mm equivalent in 35mm..

Like the post says i have a D300 and i just purchased a sigma 120-300 2.8 OS few days ago. So far i'm happy with the lens. It focuses accurately and fairly quickly, but not blazing fast. It does seem to have a little bit of trouble in AF-C mode when moving from infinity to close focus, however, so does my old 70-300 VR, so it's possible it's a body problem rather than lens problem. I actually have no trouble with the weight at all as far as shooting. I shot it handheld for about 2 hours the other morning and had no problems. The funny thing is I find the 120-300 easier to handhold and keep steady than my 70-300. The heavier weight keeps the body and lens from jiggling as much i guess. It is strange having to always keep one hand carrying the lens. It makes it difficult to press the ISO and WB buttons and roll the dials. I had to setup custom menus to do this more easily which kinda sucks, but this is no fault of the lens itself. all praise being said, 3200 is a lot of money to put into one lens, especially one with only above average AF speed and that I can't find a shoulder bag to fit it into.

My question for you guys is more of an opinion based question, but in my situation, would you keep the 120-300 os with the d300 (since now i can't afford another body for a long time) or upgrade to say a d800 which allows me to crop to higher Mpx than the D300 at same FOV, better ISO, better AF and such, and get something like a Nikon 300mm F4. I realize i lose a stop with f4, but really gain two stops of clean ISO back with the d800, and I'll still be able to autofocus with the 300 f4 with all TCs should i use ever decide to use use them. Plus i can more easily carry my gear. It's a dilemma because i do really like the 120-300 OS. Thoughts?