I know, another 300 f4 vs 120-300 lens...but

fordpop

fordpop

Messages
240
Name
Dave
Edit My Images
Yes
I'd appreciate a little advise from the motorsport togs here.

I feel need more length, and after studying the various threads on here have concluded the choice is down to, either:

Sigma 120-300 F2.8
Or Nikon 300 f4 AF-S.

I'd be looking to buy the Siggy secondhand but maybe able to stretch new for the 300 f4.

Im just after a few general consensuses of opinion on which would work better, and give better IQ for the money.

I already have the 80-200 f2.8, so Im thinking if I go the 300 f4 route, I could add a 1.4 teleconverter and cover 80 - 420.

Cheers
 
The Nikkor 300 f4 is IMHO the sharper and faster focusing of the two lenses, ever though technically the sigma is a stop wider. Its also quite a bit lighter and usually quite a bit cheaper.

Ok, so the Sigma is a zoom but you'll get over it :D

TC's are a sensible option too - you can use the 1.4x on a fairly gloomy day and even the 1.7x provided its not like the black hole of calcutta. Just avoid the 2x...
 
as you already have a 80-200mm f/2.8 the 300mm af-s would be the better choice though you'll probably need a 2nd body for the other lens as 300mm is a bit limiting , the 120-300mm is very good but heavy

also the 300mm is like finding hens teeth secondhand,they're £950 at WHE, the secondhand ones i've seen have gone for around £800, for £150 i'd buy a new one

http://www.warehouseexpress.com/buy...xtag&utm_medium=comparison&utm_campaign=12882
 
Second body??!

Unless you are planning on capturing something in a hurry, don't worry about that!

Think what you are going to shoot, fit lens accordingly and don't worry about what you miss if you've got the wrong one on.

This message is brought to you by BLZEEBUB - "saving you money in the credit crunch"
 
Having owned both, I prefer the Nikkor 300mm f/4 AF-S.

The Nikkor is a stunning lens - their is nothing wrong with the Sigma at all apart from its weight (and price nowadays too)

I dis-agree the Nikkor focuses faster, its possible Nikon's slowest ever AF-S.
 
I have had both as well,I prefer the 120-300 simply for its flexibility. There is very little,if any, difference in image quality between the two, unless you are really pixel peeping.
 
cheers for the reply's, it looks like a slight tilt in favour of the 300 f4, which is as I expected.

How do the earlier 300 f4's compare to the AF-S?

And one final question m'lord, would the same converter be compatible with the 300 f4 AF-S(say) and the 80-200 ED AF D?
 
fordpop said:
cheers for the reply's, it looks like a slight tilt in favour of the 300 f4, which is as I expected.

How do the earlier 300 f4's compare to the AF-S?

And one final question m'lord, would the same converter be compatible with the 300 f4 AF-S(say) and the 80-200 ED AF D?
Click to expand...

The 300mm f/4 AF-S murders the 300mm AF with a 1.4x TC.

If you use a Kenko 1.4x TC you can use it on both lenses. Don't buy a Nikkor TC if you want AF on your 80-200.
 
I mainly use my telephoto for aviation stuff, I've owned the 120-300 and the 300 AF-S - I kept the 300 AF-S - it is sharper, more contrasty and the AF is a bit faster *but* you loose the flexibility of the zoom and the extra light gathering capabilities.

The 300 wins on IQ for £££ compared to the 120-300 but depending on your usage, the zoom might be the better deal
 
fordpop said:
I'd appreciate a little advise from the motorsport togs here.

I feel need more length, and after studying the various threads on here have concluded the choice is down to, either:

Sigma 120-300 F2.8
Or Nikon 300 f4 AF-S.

I'd be looking to buy the Siggy secondhand but maybe able to stretch new for the 300 f4.

Im just after a few general consensuses of opinion on which would work better, and give better IQ for the money.

I already have the 80-200 f2.8, so Im thinking if I go the 300 f4 route, I could add a 1.4 teleconverter and cover 80 - 420.

Cheers
Click to expand...

Having owned both the 300mm AS-S lens in miles ahead of the Siggy, motor sport is generally long lens use so negates the need for a zoom really. Also you may find the siggy slow to focus (certainly slower than the Nikon). Not going to go into much more details as I got shot down in flames last time I questioned the quality and performance of the 120-300 :D and I have had two copy's.
 
I too use the 120-300 for motorsport and hand hold it most of the day, I find it more that good enough and very versatile, also with the 1.4x tc on it's gives a nice extra reach but given you have the 80-200 already, the 300f4 afs is a no-brainer
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top