Rene11664880918 Posted March 6, 2008 Share Posted March 6, 2008 I have been using the old version AF 300 D and I really like it and that made me wonder how much better the AF S is. Well, I just came back from the store. The AF is as good as I thought it was. Now the down side. When I hold it it feels so cheap. It feels all like plastic. Even the lettering is painted instead of being engrave like the old one. I also like how cold the old tank is. Uhmm! In a way I am disappointed coz I had thought about it and I was planning to make it my next purchase but now I just don't know. Does any one feels that way with some of the newer lenses? Rene' Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
User_276104 Posted March 7, 2008 Share Posted March 7, 2008 I played around with the regular AF 300mm f/4 at a shop a few years ago. I remember that it felt like it was worth the money and the way you'd expect a lens like that to feel. On the other hand the AF-S version has some features that make it more attractive. It focuses to 5 feet and and gets away from the old drop-in filter style with its 77mm filter size. The tripod collar suffers from some instability, though. Plastics are part of progress, I guess. I went shopping for a decent portable AM/FM radio awhile back and was amazed how cheaply made they are now, but the prices sure don't reflect it. I was willing to spend up to $50 for one but passed on the whole thing. I ended up buying some batteries for an old Radio Shack pocket radio that I've had for years and still works fine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
juanjo_viagran Posted March 7, 2008 Share Posted March 7, 2008 I have the 300mm 4 AFS and even with on element with some dust still tack sharp, love that lens. Here is a picture I took last weekend with this lens on the D2Hs. <img src="http://i215.photobucket.com/albums/cc112/Juanjo_Viagran/BS/DSC_0116-3.jpg"> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
juanjo_viagran Posted March 7, 2008 Share Posted March 7, 2008 <img src="http://i215.photobucket.com/albums/cc112/Juanjo_Viagran/BS/DSC_0065-2.jpg"> D2H/300mm 4 AFS @ f:4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
juanjo_viagran Posted March 7, 2008 Share Posted March 7, 2008 3 more with the D2H and 300mm 4 AFS <img src="http://i215.photobucket.com/albums/cc112/Juanjo_Viagran/BS/DSC_0054-2.jpg"> <img src="http://i215.photobucket.com/albums/cc112/Juanjo_Viagran/BS/DSC_0100-3.jpg"> <img src="http://i215.photobucket.com/albums/cc112/Juanjo_Viagran/BS/DSC_0034-2.jpg"> sorry if I got a little carry away. ;) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rene11664880918 Posted March 7, 2008 Author Share Posted March 7, 2008 Nice shots Juanjo! I am surprised! You actually used your equipment! He!He! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
juanjo_viagran Posted March 7, 2008 Share Posted March 7, 2008 thanks rene', wonder what make you think I don't use my equipment..! ;) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rene11664880918 Posted March 7, 2008 Author Share Posted March 7, 2008 Juanjo... just having fun man! Have you used the NO AF S lens? It is really sharp to, check this out http://www.photo.net/photodb/folder?folder_id=813567 I think all those shots were my 300 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jose_angel Posted March 7, 2008 Share Posted March 7, 2008 We must be worried about image quality and functionality... embroidery looks to be a thing of the past, thought. If plastics are combined with metals and other materials to optimize performance, that`s good. If plastics are used to have only lower production costs at the expense of quality, that`s bad (but unavoidable). Reality is that most AF lenses, even plastic ones, are ugly to my taste but highly functional. I hate that painted letterings. It is a nonsense to engrave on plastics, thought. Notice that some Hasselblad super-expensive lenses have also painted lettering over high-quality metal barrels. Mamiya have very very good optics with really ugly mixed painted-engraved letterings. Leica M lenses are a wonder, perfect and beautiful engravings over the finest quality materials, some of them in four kinds of finish. My latest AF-S lenses have engraved letterings. I`m sorry I didn`t owned&used other 300mm than my AiS, which I consider a wonderful construction. IMHO giving up the aperture ring on the newest AF-S lenses give them a very beautiful look that was lost on the AF and AFD lenses. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
james_symington1 Posted March 7, 2008 Share Posted March 7, 2008 I think this lens is pretty well made and certainly chunky enough and the image quality is first rate. However, its tripod collar is completely crap though and is effectively unusable - the Kirk replacement collar is obligatory. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ShunCheung Posted March 7, 2008 Share Posted March 7, 2008 Rene, are we talking about the same lens? There is only one version of Nikon's 300mm/f4 AF-S, and it has a solid, all metal design: http://www.nikonusa.com/Find-Your-Nikon/ProductDetail.page?pid=1909 I upgraded to this version from the earlier AF but non-AF-S version about 6 years ago. It is an excellent lens with one major weakness, namely its tripod collar that has already been pointed out. But I can also see Nikon upgrade it to an AF-S VR. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jwhite3.0 Posted March 7, 2008 Share Posted March 7, 2008 The build quality of the 300mm f/4 is very good but that's subjective. However it is metal and doesn't feel like plastic to me. I do understand what you mean though. For a time I had the 24-70 and now the 28-70. The 24-70 had a different feel, maybe a different mix or density of metals to that of the 28-70. In the end I think a lot of people like or appreciate the new 24-70 with it's lighter components. I'm subjective too, I like the old feel of metals from primes like the 20mm f/2.8 AIS over the newer AF version. However, it is all in the mind and the glass matters in addition to good mechanics. "You can't judge a book by its...." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
markp Posted March 7, 2008 Share Posted March 7, 2008 Rene wrote: <i>I have been using the old version AF 300 D and I really like it</i> <p>Just a point of clarification for posterity: the "old version" of the 300mm f/4 EDIF-AF is _non_ D. The AFS version is the only version (so far) of the 300mm f/4 that is also "D". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bernie moore Posted March 7, 2008 Share Posted March 7, 2008 Jaunjo, looks like you bokehed a drumstick right off that seagoing chicken. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jeff_z. Posted March 7, 2008 Share Posted March 7, 2008 Juanjo, Great pics! I've been thinking about this lens, too, and am glad to see some actual posted images. Bokeh is a factor I've been giving some thought to, as I have the older 300 ED IF f4.5 manual version (AF is not important to me, right now, it's just that the only versions available after my model are AF lenses). My model seems bitingly sharp, and my only possible dissatisfaction is its bokeh. That is, if the main subject is somewhat close up in the frame leaving a lot of background, the farther back one looks the more harsh it appears. This is not as bad appearing when the lens is at 4.5-5.6, though (but from limited experience). In most situations, the bokeh seems okay. I should probably say too, that it's only in these certain situations where I have any dissatisfaction with this lens; it is very sharp and contrasty, easily handled, etc. I wondered if anyone could compare the subjective optical qualities of my lens with the two newer versions regarding bokeh, especially. In particular I am interested in the first 300mm f4.0 ED IF AF, as it's all I can probably hope to afford. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rene11664880918 Posted March 8, 2008 Author Share Posted March 8, 2008 Mark... OK! Thanks for that info, you are right. Shun... I don't know if you remember. Back in Dec. I was on a trip and on the way to my hotel I found a camera shop and found the old AF 300. I went to the hotel and asked for advice and you were 1 of the first one to reply. Next morning I bought it. Anyway, you told me about your AF-S and I've seen some of your pictures. Anyway, I only have 1 AF-S lens, 17-55 and I love how fast it is to focus. That is why I've been thinking about the 300 AF-S. I know you are right coz you are a Nikon encyclopedia :) but when I was holding the lens it felt so different. It was much different to my old 300 and as soon as I walk to my car I went to grab the 17-55. Maybe it is just me but It felt cheap. I am not saying IT IS or that is not well built, I am just talking about that feeling. Dunno, hard to explain. I took the 300 AF-S out from the store and went to shoot on the street, it is really great! So responsive and silent. I will most probably buy it but it will take longer. I'm a bit crazy, after I tried it and if it would had felt as solid as my old one, or at least like the 17-55 I must have probably just get my card out and paid for it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vivek iyer Posted March 8, 2008 Share Posted March 8, 2008 Juanjo, The bird flight image is very well caught. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anthony_valvo Posted March 8, 2008 Share Posted March 8, 2008 I still use the older version of this lens and love it. Its built like a tank and no tripod collar issues. Also, you can use 77MM filters on this lens with a step down ring. There is no vignetting if you do this. I will keep my AF version until Nikon comes out with a VR version of the lens. Even then I still will not sell it because it has an aperture ring and will work on my F3. The newer lens will certainly be a "G" version. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marco_p1 Posted March 10, 2008 Share Posted March 10, 2008 I have used the older 300/4 af for a short time and now have the 300/4 AFS. I really can't see where is all that difference in build quality aside from the tripod collar (mine replaced with kirk). The only main part of the new lens made of plastic is the hood and I appreciate it's made of that material for the ability to absorb small bangs without deforming. On the other side the older AF lens had a much inferior AF, there was a focus range delimiter which was supposed to mitigate the problem but I coud not really get it to be effective, no Nikon AF TCs, no manual focus override during AF, longer min focus distance, a silly condom-like front cap... I can't comment on the bokeh performance between the two or the older Ais version, all I can say is that I never had a nasty background with the AFS; at times it can be distracting like in the attached image, but I can't say it's a fault of the lens. To sum up my experience with the two I can say I am happy with my choice, but the older AF is selling at low prices, making it maybe a better value for the money, more so if you consider the extra money for the replacemente foot. Bye, Marco Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now