Nikon 300mm/f4 PF AF-S VR in Stock at Amazon

[ShunCheung]

<p>Yesterday, Amazon showed having 2 in stock. Currently it is "in stock" but may require an extra day or two for processing. It looks like they are receiving more shortly: http://www.amazon.com/Nikon-AF-S-NIKKOR-300MM-4E/dp/B00RUBKAS4/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1436968101&sr=8-1&keywords=nikon+300mm+pf</p>

<p>Meanwhile, at least I have never seen it in stock at B&H or Adorama so far, but it looks like the shortage is gradually over. We haven't discussed this lens lately; has anybody have any new experience with it?</p>

[ShunCheung]

<p>Amazon's status really changes quickly. About 30 minutes ago it was showing 1 in stock, down from 2 last night. When I started the thread, it was "in stock" but may take an extra day or two to deliver. Now it is temporary out of stock again.</p>

<p>In any case, it looks like supply is finally (almost) catching up with demand.</p>

[ilkka_nissila]

<p>I've been using it since mid-June, and find it a very good match for my long lens needs. It gives fabulous results in bright daylight (I've especially been impressed with the image quality in the situation where I have the sun lighting the hair of the subject from behind) but in dimmer, soft daylight during evenings of rainy days, if the subject has low contrast detail the results can be a bit disappointing (compared to e.g. VR 200/2 II). High contrast detail (such as hair) seems to be always well resolved. It's so much fun to walk around and shoot this lens as it is so compact, light weight, and well made.</p>

<p>I have mostly shot the lens with the D810 with no TC, but I have made some shots with the TC-14E III and TC-20 E III as well. I think the image quality with the 1.4X is good already wide open but in dim light the autofocus slow-down is noticeable and it can be challenging to use this setup hand held because of the light weight and long focal length. With the 2X I've made some tripod based shots (Bjorn Rorslett gave the suggestion that if you reverse the collar so that the foot points towards the camera it can be better balanced with the TC) and I find that there is a slight halo (internal flare) around high contrast edges with the 300 PF + TC-20E III but already by f/9 and f/10 this is much reduced, and I feel the image quality is good enough to be "useful" with the 2X for landscape details. I did use EFCS to reduce any shutter shake that might contribute to the shots. Autofocus is slowed down by the 2X though and I think it would be difficult to use the setup for moving subjects. Without TC the 300/4 PF autofocus is simply excellent, I find it to be a big improvement over my previous AF-S 300/4D.</p>

<p>I haven't performed systematic testing of the VR but I did run a few shutter speed series with VR from about 1/50s to 1/500s (D810+MB-D12) and felt the image quality improved in a straightforward manner as the shutter speed increased. There didn't seem to be any "dip" in sharpness around 1/160s that I experienced with a friend's copy prior to the firmware update, however my brief testing does not exclude the possibility that this might still exist, it just seemed that the behaviour of my lens was logical and "as expected" in a correctly functioning VR lens. It may well be the case that sometimes it's better to turn VR off to get the best sharpness of a lens, but VR does help stabilize the lens so it is easier to compose the image and hold the active AF point on the subject so it has practical value to me even if there may be a slight image quality reduction due to its use. I realize some users have a different opinion and think VR should always improve sharpness but I'm a realist and think the VR system has that OFF switch for a reason. If you observe better results without VR in some situation, turn VR off. I find that in e.g. capturing architectural details, VR in this lens allows me to stop down the lens for more depth of field and capture good sharpness which I could not do hand held if the lens did not have VR. I am also happy with the VR's performance in action photography situations; when following a moving subject that changes direction of movement, VR in NORMAL mode can resist that change of movement a bit, but VR in SPORT mode works better, it stabilizes the lens and does not resist changes in the direction of movement when you're maintaining the focus point on the subject. I did not so far observe any significant difference in image quality between the two modes. In other lenses I have the NORMAL/ACTIVE modes and in those lenses I've found that ACTIVE mode does not produce as good sharpness or consistency even if I'm on a boat, so I always use NORMAL mode or turn VR off with those lenses.</p>

<p>Out of focus rendering is generally good but occasionally a bit odd. I would say that there is some compromise in this area, but it's not so bad to be a real issue for me. I have only once managed to produce the "PF Flare" phenomena, I was pointing the lens towards a lamp at my home and it produced this coloured ring effect. I haven't seen this artifact in any real-world situation yet. I think the 300/4 PF is not the best lens if you are shooting in weak, low contrast lighting and the subject has low contrast detail (maybe there is some residual diffraction that gives a "hazy" appearance to skin in this situation) but if there is a bit more light, some directionality and colour to the light (cloudy bright or sunny weather) the 300/4 PF really shines, in my opinion.</p>

<p>Overall I am very happy with the lens and only regret that Nikon took so much time in making the update to the 300/4 AF-S. I think those users who regularly shoot in weak light will still prefer the f/2.8, and if you need to obtain longer focal lengths, the f/2.8 version is more generally usable with TCs. When I saw the patents on the rumor site some years ago regarding a diffractive optics 300/4, I felt a deep "sigh" and was afraid that the VR version of the lens would be compromised by the use of diffractive optics. However, having used the lens I now know better and think it's a fabulous performer in the right kind of light and a lens that I expect to use a lot in the coming years.</p>

[ShunCheung]

<p>I got to play around with a 300mm/f4 PF AF-S VR at a store a couple of months ago. That particular lens has no VR issue whosoever at various shutter speeds.</p>

<p>I would rather wait a bit longer until there is plenty in stock such that in case you get a lemon (defective lens), it is easy to exchange. I am afraid that we will not see any discount on this lens until either the Christmas season this year or in the US, the February/March Nikon lens rebate in 2016.</p>

[Dieter Schaefer]

<p>A couple of months ago, the local store had one on the shelf - I didn't have much time and played with it only briefly. Didn't test VR behavior; AF operation is a lot faster than with the old AF-S lens (I tested it on a store-demo D810). Short length and low weight make it really tempting; it doesn't look like a 300 and doesn't handle like one either. No way I'm paying $2K for it though :-(</p>

[nick_baker]

<p>Ilkka<br>

What do you think of this as a closeup lens? Any comparisons with the 300 f4 AFS?</p>

<p>thank you.</p>

[ilkka_nissila]

<p>It's very sharp at close-up distances and the light weight and compactness make it easy to work with at odd positions near the ground. Unfortunately I did not compare it side by side with the AF-S 300/4D. Most of my close-ups are of ice so it'll take me until winter to get more practical experience.</p>

<p>What kind of close-up subjects do you have in mind? Would you be hand-holding the lens or using a tripod? Although I don't have the 300/4D any more, I do have a 200mm AF Micro-Nikkor that I could compare the 300/4E PF with. Would that be helpful?</p>

[nick_baker]

<p>Dear Ilkka</p>

<p>Yes, any comments you have regarding the close-up use of the 300 PF VR would be useful (I remember reading your comments regarding the 300 F4 AFS and 200mm micro some years ago). I would use the lens for butterfly photography, primarily handheld. Currently I have the 200mm micro and have owned the 300 F4 AFS previously.</p>

<p>thanks</p>

[ShunCheung]

<p>While Amazon sometimes has the 300mm PF in stock, just checked with this person who received his order from B&H last week. It turns out that he ordered it from B&H way back in January: http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/56176885</p>

[ilkka_nissila]

<p>B&H must have a very long waiting list. At smaller stores the lens seems to pop up every once in a while.</p>

<p>Brad Hill made an interesting test on the VR of the 300/4 PF, comparing it with the 300/2.8 VR II using the D4s, D800E, and D7200 bodies and reported it in his blog. Basically his main findings were that VR in normal mode on the f/4 PF allowed sharp results to be obtained at slower speeds than the f/2.8 VR II especially if one shoots a burst and picks the sharpest image but with the f/4 PF in normal mode the image jumped around more between shots (than with 300/2.8 VR II) so the composition was not as consistent from frame to frame in a series than with the f/2.8 VR II in normal mode. In sports mode of the 300/4 PF, the composition was more consistent from shot to shot in a burst, but the stabilization performance was closer to that of the f/2.8 VR II (i.e. less of an advantage to the f/4 PF). It is an interesting test well worth reading. Of course, other lens samples may or may not perform in an identical way and different photographers will likely make different observations depending on the way they shoot and what their expectations are.</p>

[ShunCheung]

<p>Amazon is showing one in stock again, if anybody wants it ....</p>

[ilkka_nissila]

<p>In partial answer to Nick's question about close-up performance I shot a few images today at or near 1:4. This is full frame image hand held at 1/500s (VR NORMAL if I recall correctly), f/6.3, ISO 400 using a D810.</p><div></div>

[ilkka_nissila]

<p>This is 100% crop without sharpening applied.</p>

<p>There was some wind actually so this isn't ideal circumstances for obtaining good sharpness, but I think the lens did "ok". I used autofocus with 9 points to focus on the flowers with continuous focusing. It seemed to do a fairly good job of focus tracking at these close distances (between 1.7m and 1.4m).</p>

<p>I will try some other close-up subjects soon.</p><div></div>

[nick_baker]

<p>Thank you, that does look quite nice</p>

[ShunCheung]

<p>I haven't seen Amazon having it in stock again in the last month, but my local camera store had a couple of those in stock a few days ago. I tried both samples, and they have serial numbers in the 206xxx range, past the 205101 cut off point for the initial firmware/VR issue: https://support.nikonusa.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/19448</p>

<p>So far I have tried three samples since the firmware upgrade, and I can comfortably say that the initial VR issue is a thing of the past now. However, VR on this lens still seems to work a little better on the D750 and D7100/D7200 than on the D800E. I have compared it side by side with the 70-200mm/f4 AF-S VR, which has great VR. Around 1/30 sec and 1/60 sec, VR on both lenses performs very well.</p>

<p>Mounting the 300mm/f4 PF on a D7100 or D7200, with or without a 1.4x TC-14E, seems to be a great lens for birds in flight. That is still a fairly light-weight set up with good AF.</p>

<p>The PF element, along with the ED elements, is supposed to greatly reduce chromatic aberration. I happened to check VR capturing a black and white street sign. In the drastic black-to-white transitions, I can still see a hint of color fringing, but that is quite mild.</p>