2x Nikon Lenses Peformance ?

[Rocket]

Anyone using either of the below, I am looking to go for the coming rut , which will mean plenty of wood areas, so looking for something over my 70-300VR.
How do you find the performance of either of the below.

1; Nikon AF 80-400mm f/4.5-5.6 D ED VR
or
2; Nikon AF-S 300mm f/2.8 G IF-ED VR
looking to add a teleconverter to the AF-S 300

With my D300

 

[kevshore]

The 300mm vr1 works extremely well with the new 2 x converter. I was very surprised when I used the combo for the first time.
The 300mm is outstanding on it's own!


Kev.

 

[gramps]

80-400 works well with handheld due to the VR and gives a good image.
It's not compatible with the newest 2x teleconverter, needing an older TC200 to avoid damage to the rear glass.

 

[Nawty]

Those lenses aren't really comparable - a slow zoom lens vs. a top of the range prime.

I've not used either but I understand the 80-400 is supposed to be pretty slow at focusing and also, it is slow in terms of light. The 300 f/2.8 is neither of these things.

 

[gramps]

Wouldn't agree that the 80-400 is unduly slow, perhaps for some sport but not for wildlife IMO.

 

[Rocket]

Thanks for the replies.
Undecided as yet, so it looks as though i will have to try them on my D300. I had the feeling that the 80-400 might well af faster on a D300 apposed to say a D80...

 

[barneyrubble]

The 80-400 was too slow on my D3 so I had to sell it. It really was painfully slow compared to the AF-S lenses. I now have the 300 and the diffeence is huge. I really think you're looking at two completely different classes of lens here - the 80-400 is about £6-700 second hand, the 300 over 2k

 

[Martyn...]

The 300mm f4 + 1.4 or 1.7TC is the better option to the 80-400VR, image quality and focus speed.

The 300mm f2.8 would be even better than the 300 f4, but at a price.