Nikon 300f4 plus 1:4 tc vs 80-400 vr
- Thread starter Teagan
- Start date
- Messages
- 661
- Edit My Images
- No
Hi Gerard
Most of the recent captive animal/bird shots on my Flickr stream were taken with my 80-400 and a D3x
I rate it very highly as a versatile and light(ish!) lens.
It doesn't lock onto birds in flight as quickly as a 2.8 but it is considerably cheaper, and having the zoom is very useful.
The VR works a treat - I can handhold at 1/80 at 400mm - http://www.flickr.com/photos/50797501@N04/13195854003/
If I can help at all let me know.
cheers, cw
Most of the recent captive animal/bird shots on my Flickr stream were taken with my 80-400 and a D3x
I rate it very highly as a versatile and light(ish!) lens.
It doesn't lock onto birds in flight as quickly as a 2.8 but it is considerably cheaper, and having the zoom is very useful.
The VR works a treat - I can handhold at 1/80 at 400mm - http://www.flickr.com/photos/50797501@N04/13195854003/
If I can help at all let me know.
cheers, cw
Last edited:
OP
- Messages
- 195
- Name
- Gerard
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Excellent shots Chris. Trawling through the net on how the two lenses compare and opinions seem divided. Some say stick with the 300 plus tc others say the 80-400. Although iq wise there seems very little difference. The zoom and vr to me are advantageous when trying to decide.
Have you Chris used the 300 plus tc?
I don't have the option of renting so I have to base my choice on user reviews,stats and gut instinct.
Regards Gerard.
Have you Chris used the 300 plus tc?
I don't have the option of renting so I have to base my choice on user reviews,stats and gut instinct.
Regards Gerard.
- Messages
- 559
- Name
- Mirek
- Edit My Images
- No
The new 80-400G is a very good optically (as good if not better than the 300mm f/4 prime). It has a zoom/VR which is great.
The only issue I found it is that despite the fact it is a 400mm if often doesn't deliver better reach than the 300mm prime due to a strong focus breathing.
My short experience with the new 80-400G is that when focusing to distance ~5-6m at long end (which is my typical shooting distance for shooting birds, squirrels and other small creatures) I get about the same angle of view as my 300mm prime. Only at distances around infinity it gets closer to 400mm. Therefore the 80-400 designation is a bit misleading. However, this is not uncommon for variable aperture zoom lenses.
if all you need flexibility of zoom and VR and don't mind the price tag, go for it. If you look for IQ then I don't think there is any big difference. If you primarily want the 301-400mm range and shoot smaller subjects, surprisingly, it could be better to stick with 300mm and TC and they'll get you closer...
Personally I still prefer my 300mm f/4D prime with TC over the new 80-400G. But YMMV.
The only issue I found it is that despite the fact it is a 400mm if often doesn't deliver better reach than the 300mm prime due to a strong focus breathing.
My short experience with the new 80-400G is that when focusing to distance ~5-6m at long end (which is my typical shooting distance for shooting birds, squirrels and other small creatures) I get about the same angle of view as my 300mm prime. Only at distances around infinity it gets closer to 400mm. Therefore the 80-400 designation is a bit misleading. However, this is not uncommon for variable aperture zoom lenses.
if all you need flexibility of zoom and VR and don't mind the price tag, go for it. If you look for IQ then I don't think there is any big difference. If you primarily want the 301-400mm range and shoot smaller subjects, surprisingly, it could be better to stick with 300mm and TC and they'll get you closer...
Personally I still prefer my 300mm f/4D prime with TC over the new 80-400G. But YMMV.
Last edited:
OP
- Messages
- 195
- Name
- Gerard
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Thanks Mirek, Its a tough decision alright. In an ideal world I'd have the two but that's wishful thinking.
My main priority is iq followed by reach. But I do like the idea of vr and a zoom. I'll keep doing the homework on the pros and cons of either lens.
Regards Gerard.
My main priority is iq followed by reach. But I do like the idea of vr and a zoom. I'll keep doing the homework on the pros and cons of either lens.
Regards Gerard.
- Messages
- 661
- Edit My Images
- No
Hi Gerard
Glad you liked the shots and I hope that gave you some help.
I haven't used a 300 with tc so I can't make any comparisons, sorry.
Also I can't really add anything to Mirek's comments about it's lack of suitability for small subjects at close range cos I also have a 400 2.8 but it needs a tripod
Good luck!
cheers, cw
Glad you liked the shots and I hope that gave you some help.
I haven't used a 300 with tc so I can't make any comparisons, sorry.
Also I can't really add anything to Mirek's comments about it's lack of suitability for small subjects at close range cos I also have a 400 2.8 but it needs a tripod
Good luck!
cheers, cw