If that is true, the lens will be between $2000-2500 USD. No longer an "affordable" lens for amateurs. Too bad.
Buy Nikon 300 f4 now or wait for possible 300 f4 VR by Christmas or PMA 2010?
(55 posts) (21 voices)-
Posted 1 year ago #
-
PB PM said:
If that is true, the lens will be between $2000-2500 USD. No longer an "affordable" lens for amateurs. Too bad.I am excited for an update of this lens, but that is a bit of change for me or the average amateur. The original retail for the 300 F4 is $1494 or something...so with the added features it isn't that much of a jump. It would still be well below any of the other super telephoto primes.
It kind of makes me sad though as I really want the updated lens, but I am not sure if I will ever convince my wife I need a $2000 lens until I start making money from the pictures.
Posted 1 year ago # -
The 300 F4 is a fantastic lens,and a steal compared to Nikon's other long primes....I always shoot it on a monopod or tripod so I don't need VR,and with the 1.4TC always attached on a cropped sensor....it's the perfect poor mans wildlife lens.I personally wouldn't spend the extra bucks on a VR version!
Posted 1 year ago # -
At that price I couldn't see myself upgrading from the current lens either, I'd rather save for the f2.8VR II.
Posted 1 year ago # -
for $2000 it would be a deal of the year, although the old one is also nice, considering it's price - I just got one for $730 with P&S :)
Posted 1 year ago # -
I think VR would be highly useful on this lens. It isn't always convenient to have or use a tripod or monopod and VR can be a life saver in these situations...for instance shooting from inside a car. Especially with a longer lens it becomes increasingly more helpful. Not saying it is essential, but it is something I and I believe others have been waiting for. It will make an already great lens a very awesome lens. I will keep my fingers crossed that it comes in under $2000.
Posted 1 year ago # -
VR is useful, and I enjoy using it, but not necessary in many situations. I used a 70-300mm VR for a over a year, loved it, but it was really soft at the long end, I opted for a used AF-S 300 f/4, and love it. It's fast enough that my shots are consistently high shutter speeds (above 500, 1000-2000 much of the time) so VR is not necessary. I've been able to take much better, sharper pictures with the AF-S 300 f/4 compared to the AF-S 70-300 VR, due to the 70-300 being f/5.6 at 300mm (and soft).
Daylight, f/4 is fast with little need for VR. There are really only a handful of times where I had wished I had VR, (later evening shots of moving wildlife).
So, really, you need to think about what you are shooting, and the conditions. If it's always outside daylight shots, with plenty of light, if you shoot with auto-ISO, auto-shutter speed, your camera will not very often drop below the shutter speed threshold where VR becomes a very useful feature.
So, consider:
1) Your shooting conditions
2) Your budgetIf your budget is sub-$1500, the non-VR is pretty much your only option, and you will just have to live with it in those handful of situations.
If you can afford more, get the VR, you will be happy when you run into those situations. If you have a large budget, by all means, get the best possible - go for the VR. As mentioned by others, the 300 f/4 is a steal compared to the other long-glass.For me, I was budget impaired, just married, one child, another on the way...
I picked up a 300 f/4 for about $750 used. Amazing value.
If I want longer reach, for daylight shooting, I can get the 1.4TC and get 420 f/5.6 equivalent. Conditions have to be right for that combo, but most of the time it will be fine. I saw a 1.4TC today on an auction site for $340 used, which brings my total cost for a 420mm f/5.6 to $1090 if I go for it.I shoot with and without a monopod. My % of good shots with a monopod is high (birds), less obviously handheld, but I still have some amazing pictures handheld with this lens - my kitties catching mice in late afternoon light are some of my favorites.
Until I can afford the 400mm 2.8 VR, this will be my lens. It really is a great poor mans wildlife lens.
Posted 1 year ago # -
Is there anyone else who knows something about a possible new 300mm f4? Thanks
Posted 1 year ago # -
-
tcole1983 said:
I think VR would be highly useful on this lens. It isn't always convenient to have or use a tripod or monopod and VR can be a life saver in these situations...for instance shooting from inside a car.IMHO, using VR in car is less needed than using VR in the field. In car You can easily find some support, which sometimes it's hard to do in the fields. Also for cars I encourage You to use beanbags, just open the window, put a big V/U-shaped beanbag and You have the best support one can imagine.
Posted 1 year ago # -
I'm not sure how useful VR is on a long lens. If you're shooting action or wildlife, you'd certainly want a fast shutter speed, which means that you wouldn't need VR anyway.
Of course if you're moving or hand holding that feature would be important, but if you aren't you probably won't need VR.
Posted 1 year ago # -
@NSX - IMHO, if You are serious about long teles than sooner or later You gonna put them on tripod and gimbal, where VR is not as important. Sure it's great for some, but at least for me it's not a seller feature.
Posted 1 year ago # -
/shrug...I am not a pro, what do I know? :)
Not saying VR is a necessity. I have 2 lenses with and 2 without. I think I shoot fine without, but on the other hand I think there are times it saves me when I do have it. Obviously tripod, monopod or something to steady on is ideal and I try to use that approach when I can. I doubt I do much photography by the books though. I have never taken a class and just do whatever I think I want or need to do...it is probably all wrong.
From the car was in a sense of not being able to balance and stuff well. It was just a shooting situation I came across not too long ago that didn't work that well (I was in a car, but it wasn't ideal and I had trouble hand holding it steady). Bean bag sounds like a good idea though...I might just have to get one.
Posted 1 year ago # -
OK finally enough talk about it and dreaming. I ordered the 300 F4 today. They are bound to release an updated VR version any time now since I finally purchased one ;)
I did have to sacrifice the Tokina 12-24 F4, but with my new 17-55 I didn't feel like I needed it as much. Probably shot myself in the foot, but we will see. It is kind of a better setup anyway if I want to move to FF (D600?). I would just need a lower mm zoom and I could transition to FF fairly easy now, and still have some good glass for my D5000.
Posted 10 months ago # -
Good choice, you could have been waiting a long time for a new one, and the current model is great.
Posted 10 months ago # -
I know that you're going to enjoy this lens tole,and once you get tired of mucking around with the stock Nikon lens collar.......I really tried to make it work.....buy the excellent Kirk replacement and you will be very happy!
Posted 10 months ago # -
I am super excited...lens is in town and to be delivered tomorrow...can't wait!
Posted 10 months ago # -
get the kirk collar replacement and You will not regret it.
Posted 10 months ago # -
Have been fooling around with a borrowed 300 2.8 vr2, amazing lens. VR really helps with handholding at night soccer games. Cant really afford to buy one myself (yet), so am really hoping f4 would be upgraded soon.
Any chance this would happen before March '13?
Tcole: How are you liking it for action, and portraits?
Posted 6 months ago # -
I have not shot tons of sports with it. I have 2 high school football games I took some pics at. I mostly wanted it for animals and I have become fond of it for portraits as well.
Overall my impressions so far. Have to keep the shutter speeds up on it without the VR. I need the kirks tripod collar, but haven't wanted to invest in it yet, but it will be the next step. For sports shooting it seems to work pretty well...the games were at night and I had to bump the ISO up pretty high to get the shutter speeds fast enough, but I think you would have to do this even with the F2.8. The bokeh is amazing and anything you want to single out it gives you great smooth bokeh. I have been pretty impressed so far and I am glad I got it and didn't wait. It it harder to shoot then any other lens I have with the shake, but it is tamable with some work. I think VR would be a helpful addition to the lens, but it would only be helpful in certain situations and the lens as is now is sharp, has great bokeh, and is excellent overall.
Here are some sample shots so far and I haven't uploaded any from the last football game I went to.
Posted 6 months ago # -
Tcole:
Thanks for your feedback and posting those shots. Bokeh is nice, I wonder if the diffraction optics to be used in the new version would affect the sharpness.
Posted 6 months ago # -
Has anyone else thought of purchasing this lens, lately?
I traded in my Nikkor 18-300mm to Adorama and was hoping to purchase a Nikkor 300mm f/4 as a replacement. But Adorama and BW photo have been sold out of the lens for at least a week, if not longer.
Is this a sign that Nikon has depleted their stock and we may see a VR version soon? I don't know if I should wait for news in the near future. Or jump on the AF-S version of the Nikkor 300mm f/4 when Nikon supply more stock to these companies...
Posted 5 months ago # -
Usually shipping times for the lens is a week or two, you'll just need to place and order and wait. A number of big retailers have them in stock, so I doubt production has stopped.
Posted 5 months ago # -
Thanks for the timely reply! Would you recommend a site other than Adorama or BW Photo? Their prices seemed much more competitive than Amazon. If Adorama is the best price I can get (not interested in 'gray market' item), I'll just pay the difference from trade-in.
Posted 5 months ago # -
I cannot speak about American dealers, as I'm not in the states, sorry no recommendations.
Posted 5 months ago #
Reply »
You must log in to post.
