New Nikon 300mm f4 E AF-S VR Phase Fresnel Lens Announced

[polizonte]

<p>If this new 300mm lens is as good as my 70-200mm VRII is @ 200mm/ f5.6 -f8, I will go for it!</p>

[eric_brody]

<p>This lens sounds wonderful and I look forward to reviews by trusted sources. I had and foolishly sold an old 300mm f/4 non-AFS. It was slow to autofocus but I used it quite successfully in Africa in the film era. <br>

My only concern is that as an E lens, it will be impossible to adapt to any of the mirrorless cameras, regardless of adapter. I was and still am unhappy that I cannot use my huge investment in the three Nikon PC-E lenses on my Fuji X T-1. </p>

[JDMvW]

<p>Which do you prefer?<br>

<em>fresnel</em> |ˈfreznəl, frāˈnel|</p>

<p>Are you a peasant or a poet? ;)</p>

[kari_oinonen]

<p>JDM; If the lens does not squeak, it'll be fine ;-D</p>

[ShunCheung]

<p>Interestingly, the new lens is already available in Australia (at least to this one person). They are a couple of threads on DPReview with plenty of sample images: http://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/3787531</p>

<p>Those aren't exactly demanding images that can highlight the potential limitations of this lens, but so far things look good.</p>

[dan_brown4]

<p>Shun, there's a thread at FM.com, Nikon Forum, with some detail shots taken by a skilled photographer named Lance B. Worth a look. They include shots taken with the 1.4 and 1.7 TC's.</p>

[ShunCheung]

<p>Dan, thanks for the pointer. What I really would like to do is to test the 300 PF myself, and I have access to all sorts of Nikon teleconverters and 300mm lenses for comparison. Personally, I am not that excited about the TC-17E II. Any time the overall maximum aperture drops below f5.6, the usefulness of a long tele becomes somewhat limited. Additionally, at least I don't need VR above 300mm because for my subjects at that focal length, it is usually birds or animals that I need a fast shutter speed to freeze action anyway.</p>

[dan_brown4]

<p>Agree about the TC17. In my experience, it is worth comparing a cropped image to a TC17 or TC20 capture. Often times, the cropped version will look better, particularly with 36 MP sensors.</p>

<p>On the other hand, the quality of the TC images posted over there do give some insight into the lens' optical performance. The more I see from the 300/4E-PF, the more convinced I become. And let's not forger the VR, which is a very nice upgrade in and of itself.</p>

[Landrum Kelly]

<p>Well, I guess that some of us are just going to be left out of this new wave of technology.</p>

<p>My choice is still between the 1987 and the 2000 version of the 300mm f/4, as recounted in <a href="http://www.bythom.com/300AFSlens.htm"><em><strong>this 2003 post by Thom Hogan</strong></em></a>.</p>

<p>My idea of VR on a 300 is to stick one of these old diehards on a modern DSLR and turn up the ISO.</p>

<p>Works for me.</p>

<p>--Lannie</p>