Nikon Nikkor 300mm f/4.5 non AI

<p>Hi,<br>

Has anyone tried out a Nikon 300mm f/4.5 non AI manual focus lens, especially with a 1.4 TC. How does it compare with the 300mm f4 ED and 300mm f/4 AF-S, in terms of image quality. to be used on a D300.<br>

Thanks for your help,<br>

Simon. </p>

<p>Simon, I have had the 4.5 in both AI and non-AI, as well as the f/4 AF (non S). The 300mm f/4 is a spectacular lens (even with the slower non-AF-S focusing). I never got very good results from my f/4.5's. Plus, the older 300s are tanks, and I like the crinkle finish and fit of the newer f/4 version.</p>

<p>I have a 300mm f4.5 that has been ai'd that I occassionally use on my D300. I's not the sharpest 300mm around but it has it uses--especially since I think I only paid $60 for it.</p>

<p>Yup, tried the non-AI and pre-ED era AI versions of the 300/4.5 Nikkors. Nothing special but not bad either. They're soft wide open and don't get really sharp until f/8. The sweet spot is very narrow, only f/8-f/11, before diffraction sets in. Don't pay more than $100.</p>

<p>The later ED 300/4.5 AI and AI-S Nikkors are gems. Years ago I'd read Bjorn Rorselett's recommendation for the 300/4.5 ED non-IF AI and he wasn't exaggerating. When I found one in a local shop I tested it on the spot and didn't let go. It's every bit as good as he says and, yup, the long focus throw is a bit leisurely. Fine for my purposes since my hands aren't as steady as they once were, so the longer focus throw helps with fine tuning.</p>

<p>I also compared the 300/4.5 ED non-IF AI against the 300/4 AF Nikkor that same day. They're very comparable overall in terms of optical performance. The only reason I passed on the 300/4 AF is because that particular sample was cosmetically beat to pieces and loosey goosey. But the AF was plenty snappy on my D2H and the focus range limiter was very useful for close range stuff, such as tracking movement within approx. 10-20 feet of the camera.</p>

<p>BTW, I don't have any Nikon mount teleconverters but have used the 300/4.5 with the old M2 extension tube and it works fine as a close range lens, but not a true macro. I've used that trick to get closeups of foliage and flowers at the local botanic gardens, since the unadorned 300/4.5 does not focus very closely.</p>

<p>I have only used the AF 300/4, so can't offer my personal impressions of the 300/4.5. But I think the general consensus is pretty much that the non-ED versions of the 300/4.5 (non-AI, AI and AIS) are nothing special, with the early non-AI performing the poorest. Certainly the AF 300/4 IF-ED (I can concur with Michael Axel's assessment of this lens) and AF-S 300/4 IF-ED would outperform it by a wide margin. The very rare non-IF (less than 1000 units each) K and AI 300/4.5 ED is widely acknowledged to be the best of the 300/4.5 lenses, followed by the AI and AIS 300/4.5 IF-ED.</p>

<p>The 300/4.5 lenses are not noted for good performance with teleconverters, unlike the AF 300/4 IF-ED which does extremely well with the TC-14B 1.4X converter.</p>

<p>Bjorn Rorslett's assessment of the non-ED 300/4.5 (found <a href="http://www.naturfotograf.com/lens_tele.html">here</a> , he scores the non-AI at 2/5) is as follows:</p>

<blockquote>

<p>"This was a beautifully built telephoto released in the 60's, but the image quality would not raise eyebrows today. Acceptable pictures were produced when it was stopped down to f/8 or so. A redesigned model was brought on the market in 1981; it made a much less elegant impression but image quality was better."</p>

</blockquote>

<p>I suppose if you can pick one up for a real steal, it might be worth trying, but telephoto lens design and specialized optical glass (ED) has come a long way since 1969 when this lens was designed. FWIW Bjorn rates the lowly AF 70~300mm f4-5.6G zoom (plastic mount, no ED glass) better at 300mm (3.5/5) than the non-AI 300/4.5 (2/5).</p>

<p>I also left a statement out--one that I thought would be obvious, but one I should mention anyway. If the lens (the f/4.5) isn't great to start with, adding a TC isn't likely to help it at all<g>.</p>

<p>I have not undertaken a comparison as such, but I have the non AI version and I find that the lens is not as bad as some people say - especially stopped down to around f8 - but then again what lens is bad at that aperture? Here is an image example I shot mounted on Panasonic L1 with adapter. (My lens is non Ai not Ai converted so I dont use it on my Nikon D200.) You can make your own mind up as to whether its OK or not. I have no doubt the later ED ones are much better (as indeed are the later non ED ones according to everything I have read about them.) But there is not a lot to complain about in this image (apart from the subject of course which is pretty mundane.). It's sharp, the contrast and color is good and there is no distortion. (I cannot recall what the Bokeh looks like but am sure I woudl recall if it were dreadful as I look for that kind of thing.)<br>

I am afraid you will have to settle for a clickable link as this site seems no longer to recognise the HTML code from PhotoBucket for embedding the image in this post................................................</p>

<p><a href="http://i122.photobucket.com/albums/o251/peterm1_bucket/nikkor300mmf45f8_1.jpg">http://i122.photobucket.com/albums/o251/peterm1_bucket/nikkor300mmf45f8_1.jpg</a></p>

<blockquote>

<p>"... to be used on a D300."</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Something else that may or may not be obvious (and Peter's post above jogged my memory), but unless the non-AI 300/4.5 lens is converted to AI, <strong>it should NOT be mounted on the D300</strong> , as damage to the AI indexing ring on the D300 will be the eventual result.</p>

<p>Are the ED versions REALLY that much better ? I've triedto keep an eye out for one, but I already have the 300mm f4.5 AIS version, so it would need to be noticably better to make the purchase, and then sale of the olde on worth the time and money.</p>

<p> </p>

<p>I guess Its best to wait a bit longer for either the f/4 ED or the f/4 AF-S.<br>

Thanks very much for your help.</p>

<p>Simon.</p>

<p>Here is an image I took on with a Nikon F100 on Provia F. It was scanned with a Coolscan V ED. Thiswas taken with an old Nikkor 300mm non ai f 4.5 Lens and a Tamron 1.4 teleconverter. I've replaced it with a 300mm f 4.5 ais ed Nikkor. If your interested in the non ai I will let you have it if you pay shipping. It has been notched so that it woun't damage the index tap on any camera. Not ai'd.</p>

<p>Sorry, the image did not post.</p><div></div>