david_felser Posted October 7, 2009 Share Posted October 7, 2009 <p>I purchased this wonderful, used Nikon 50-300mm 4.5 ED Ais lens which I have fallen in love with. I purchased it knowing that it had fallen or been hit on the side of the front at the screw thread area.<br> 99% of the time it has produced wonderfully sharp, contrasty shots with great color. My only problem seems to be @ 300mm while focused to infinity where the focus softens slightly and lacks the snap, crackle and pop of most everywhere else throughout the zoom range. This occurs stopped down from f4.5 - f22.<br> I just want to make sure that it suffers from the usual softness most every other lens exhibits at its extremes and not an alignment problem I' should look into.<br> I write to those with more experience because this wonderful lens deserves to be taken care of.<br> Thank you.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
p3nnst8r Posted October 7, 2009 Share Posted October 7, 2009 <p>A 50-300mm lens? I never knew that Nikon made one. I know only of the 70-300mm.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnw63 Posted October 7, 2009 Share Posted October 7, 2009 <p>You need to get off the current Nikon lens list and look back into the 1980s to find that lens. It's really big, as I recall, from pictures and lens review sites.</p> <p> </p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael R Freeman Posted October 7, 2009 Share Posted October 7, 2009 <blockquote> <p><em>"I never knew that Nikon made one."</em></p> </blockquote> <p>Life did exist before autofocus and digital. ;-)</p> <p>The original 50~300mm f/4.5 (no ED glass) debuted more than 40 years ago in 1968. It was quite a revolutionary lens at the time (a 6X zoom from normal to long telephoto). The significantly revised ED version debuted in 1977 and was available new until around 1999 or so. The older plastic mount AF 70~300mm f/4-5.6G is a literal lightweight compared to this metal and glass beast, which is nearly FIVE times the mass.<br /> <img src="http://www.mir.com.my/rb/photography/companies/nikon/nikkoresources/zoomsMF/Nikkor50300mmf45EDadorama2.JPG" alt="" width="640" height="480" /></p> <p>Sorry David, I can't answer your question as I have never had the opportunity to try this finely crafted optic. One would think though that if there were issues with optical alignment due to an impact, it would show up at other focal lengths and distances and not just at 300mm and infinity.</p> <p>However, Bjorn Rorslett, who does own and use this lens, has this comment on his site:</p> <blockquote> <ul> <li><em>"The front lens assembly can be misaligned if the lens is subjected to heavy knocks and blows from the side - if this happens, the lens needs to be reassembled to a proper orientation again. My sample had to have the front lens group replaced before top result could be produced."</em> </li> </ul> </blockquote> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Crowe Posted October 7, 2009 Share Posted October 7, 2009 <p>As you suggest it is likely the performance of the lens design itself. Zoom lenses, no matter how good, and this one is rated very highly, do not maintain the same image quality throughout their zoom range. It is logical that at both extremes of 300mm and infinity that it could be soft.</p> <p>A ding/dent in the screw thread area of these tank-like lenses usually means very little.</p> <p>Bjorn Rorslett rates this lens very highly but he is not specific about it's performance through the zoom range but he may be able to add some insight.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
david_felser Posted October 8, 2009 Author Share Posted October 8, 2009 <p>Thanks to everyone for responding and a great thanks to Michael for providing that beautiful photo so that the guys can see what a beauty this is. <br> And you're absolutely correct about it being a brute - like four pounds. Also, the ED version of the 300mm F4 & the 50-300mm 4.5 ED both show what looks to be a gold line around the front element. I think I read on mir.com that that line IS really made out of gold!<br> Very few Nikon lenses are made like this + the great rotating tripod socket so you can rotate it out of the way if you want to hand hold it - which is quite possible in good light. <br> The thing is so well made - I think that's why I feel responsible for this really being kept as good as it can be.<br> Again thanks to everyone for responding.<br> Here's a small example of its ability - (Hope it translates this small.)</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
david_felser Posted October 8, 2009 Author Share Posted October 8, 2009 <p>Sorry - didn't like the way small pics uploaded</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
david_felser Posted October 8, 2009 Author Share Posted October 8, 2009 <p><img src="http://dff3.com/LemonTreePot.jpg" alt="" width="302" height="371" /><br> Oh well... maybe you can get an idea from this<br> small crop @50mm. (Hope the 50-300mm ED forgives me.)</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
david_felser Posted October 8, 2009 Author Share Posted October 8, 2009 <p><img src="http://dff3.com/LemonTree.jpg" alt="" /><br> Maybe this one works a little better.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bill_stice1 Posted October 8, 2009 Share Posted October 8, 2009 <p>David, I shot this lens for almost fifteen years. The sample I had was as sharp at 300mm as it was at any other. It could be sample variation or it might be as described by Bjorn. I used mine for a lot of nature images including with a 1.4 converter. It worked superbly. I have attached an image of it at 300mm with an extension tube for focusing closer. Hope this helps.</p><div></div> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
david_felser Posted October 8, 2009 Author Share Posted October 8, 2009 <p>Bill, my lens workswonderfully throughout most of 300mm also. It only seems a bit soft in the area of what you used to call acutance (sp?) at great distance, even when I shoot mirror up with my D300. On the other hand, it might just be that you can't get that great snap. crackle and pop of your shot at 1000 yards. Could it be that - tiniest movement, atmosphere, haze etc</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bill_stice1 Posted October 9, 2009 Share Posted October 9, 2009 <p>David, it certainly could be atmospheric interference. I use a 600 F4 lens fairly often and atmospheric conditions can cause both loss of sharpness and distortion when shooting at long distances particularly in hot and hazy conditions. I no longer have the 50-300 but shot a lot of really great images with it.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bjørn rørslett Posted October 9, 2009 Share Posted October 9, 2009 <p>While the 50-300 ED was a breakthough in its day, it's beginning to show its age with the latest FX cameras.</p> <p>I used the 50-300 ED as a general-purpose travel lens with D2X and was very happy with the results. Due to the excellent tripod mount you always could rely on getting sharp and crisp images with it (assuming a decent tripod being used of course). It did soften slightly at 300mm, but usually proper post-processing improved the outcome immensely.</p> <p>However, with D3 and D3X, the 50-300 ED is not entirely up to the strict requirements set by these cameras. There is an increase in chromatic aberration, vignetting, and loss of image microcontrast that rob the final image of the quality one would expect from a high-end lens. Not all older lenses fare similar, though. The 35/1.4 AIS is an example of a lens that really shines on D3X. So does the 200-400 ED AIS by the way.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rafa batlle Posted February 19, 2011 Share Posted February 19, 2011 <p>There are some sample variations, i went through 4 of these lenses and kept the best, on the D3 it is as sharp as any other lens I own (40+) close down to f8 at any focal length, at 300mm it is tack sharp fully open and does not improve further closing down. Do not know how it does on D3x, but it is way sharper than my D3 (Camera pixels cannot resolve better than the lens). the two shots here are at f8 on D3, top at 50mm bottom at 300mm from same rock.</p> <p><a title="Navy Centennial Flight San Diego 2.11.11 2 small by Rafael CA, on Flickr" href=" src="http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5131/5441009668_b7a937e5c2_z.jpg" alt="Navy Centennial Flight San Diego 2.11.11 2 small" width="640" height="426" /></a><br /><br /></p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rafa batlle Posted February 19, 2011 Share Posted February 19, 2011 <p><a title="Navy Centennial Flight San Diego 2.11.11 4 small by Rafael CA, on Flickr" href=" src="http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5216/5441009934_5c23340559_b.jpg" alt="Navy Centennial Flight San Diego 2.11.11 4 small" width="1024" height="681" /></a></p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rafa batlle Posted January 21, 2012 Share Posted January 21, 2012 <p>Here are some shots of the 50-300 ED with an autofocusing TC-16A, need to close down to F8 for best results, but on a sunny day with monopod it is a useful 80-480mm Zoom<br> <a title="Sleepover by Rafael CA, on Flickr" href=" src="http://farm7.staticflickr.com/6228/6229172912_5e3bdc4117_o.jpg" alt="Sleepover " width="2047" height="1362" /></a><br> <a title="D-DAY DOLL by Rafael CA, on Flickr" href=" src="http://farm7.staticflickr.com/6157/6206536328_ce76b560e2_o.jpg" alt="D-DAY DOLL " width="2047" height="1362" /></a></p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rafa batlle Posted December 30, 2012 Share Posted December 30, 2012 <p>Here is the 50-300mm on a D800</p> <p><a title="nikon nikkor 50-300 ed ais san diego santa catalina d800 by Rafael CA, on Flickr" href=" src="http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8211/8323058074_6826cb72e9_b.jpg" alt="nikon nikkor 50-300 ed ais san diego santa catalina d800" width="1024" height="683" /></a></p> 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