300mm or 400mm Fast Telephoto for Nikon

[larry_menzin]

I've searched through the threads on this issue and have not found an

answer to my specific issues. I'm looking for a fast telephoto in the

300mm/400mm range for sports and nature on an F5 body. My budget is

not unlimited. The best I can do now is a TC-14E on my 80-200 AF-S.

The options, in descending order are:

 

1) Find a used Nikon 300mm AF-I/AF-S lens for under $2500.

 

2) Find a new or used third party 300mm F2.8 for under $2000.

 

3) Find a used non-AF-S Nikon 300mm F2.8 (early versions).

 

4) Find a used Nikon 300mm F2.8 AIS or 400mm F3.5 AIS and get it

chipped (no AF).

 

Questions:

 

Does anyone have experience with the Sigma 300mm F2.8 EX APO HSM or

the 500mm F4.5 EX APO HSM? It appears that with these lenses

performance near the Nikon AF-S lenses can be obtained at about 1/2

the price. Sigma has matched converters with AF.

 

I've seen a review of the Tamron SP AF 300 F2.8. How does this match

up? I assume screw-based AF would be relatively slow.

 

Is there something wrong with my reasoning? The ideal situation would

be to purchase a Nikon 300mm or 400mm AF-S but my budget precludes

this. I can spend about $2000 ($2500 max before divorce papers are

served). If possible, my solution would include a fast telephoto and

matched converter that would provide AF-S level autofocus and

transmit full metering via the electrical interface. Any ideas?

[Rick Waller]

I want to comment on your consideration of third party 300/2.8's, having recently undergone the same search. As for 3rd party lenses, allow me to recommend the Tokina as better than the Tamron and the Sigma. Optically, the Sigma was quite a good lens. I really had little problem with that aspect and it does have the USM motor driven AF which worked as advertised. I dismissed the Tamron without having shot an image. I did not care for the feel of the lens nor the mount and frankly, my other forays into Tamron (with the notable exception of the superb 90mm macro) have been disappointing.

 

Then I shot the Tokina. First thing you notice is that this thing is a real piece of equipment. It is every bit as substantially built as the Nikon or Canon version - I daresay better built. You could drive nails with this lens.

 

In addtition to feeling terrific in my hands and being more compact and easier to handle than the Sigma (subjective to be sure), let's face it. We buy lenses for the glass. I compared the Tokina to the Sigma and to my eye, while the differences were subtle to be sure, I thought the Tokina was sharper and had better color results. There was just something about the Tokina chromes that jumped out at me.

 

Now the decision about AF speed. No question, the Sigma was faster. But...I did not find the Tokina to be objectionably slow. I shoot sports often with this lens and have found that I have no trouble shooting football or soccer or baseball from the sidelines AF wise with the Tokina.

 

When I weighed out all of the facts, I kept coming back to Tokina. I just liked the lens better. So I bought it and have never regretted my choice.

 

As an aside, the Tokina mates very well with the Kenko (same company - Tokina, Hoya and Kenko) Pro 300 teleconverters. The 1.4X works exceptionally well - very sharp results with very little edge degradation. The 2X wokrs well too, especially in the center, but the edges are a bit soft and the lens/tc combo becomes a f5.6.

 

I am told that Sigma makes a fine set of TC's as well to mate to their 300, but I did not evaluate them personally. I would expect similar preference to the 1.4 over th 2X for reasons of physics, but I have not had the personal experience.

 

Hope this was of some help.

[larry_menzin]

Is the Tokina you mention the AT-X 300? Do you get decent AF speed with the 1.4x converter? I have a Nikon 80-400 VR that will get me the 400mm focal length at F5.6 but suffers from slow AF and a relatively dark viewfinder at the 400mm length.

[neil_lupin]

I've not got or used the Sigma EX 300mm f/2.8 but I've got the 17-35 f/2.8, 28-70 f/2.8 and 70-200 f/2.8 APO HSM. Its (the 70-200) an absolute beauty and I could not justify ever getting the AFS!!!! I use it with the 2x TC and its no slower and not noticeably softer in focusing with it on, although it becomes a 5.6. If I had the budget and need I'd have no hesitation in chosing the 300mm EX APO HSM f/2.8 from Sigma. In fact I'm going on safari soon adn I considered hiring one... Good luck chosing.

[ilkka_nissila]

I would probably try to find a second hand fast/long Nikkor such as a version of the 300/2.8, or the 400/3.5. If this fails, or you feel that AF-S is important to you vs. length, I would go for the 300/4 AF-S, which is an excellent and compact lens, though a bit slow with converters. The AF-I 300/2.8 is also a very good choice, I almost bought one myself but I figured that I'd have more use for the smaller f/4 version.

[larry_menzin]

I considered the 300 F4 AF-S but already have the 80-200 AF-S and with the TC-14E I already have a 300mm F4 solution. Putting the converter on the 300mm F4 AF-S would give me 420mm F5.6. The 400mm F5.6 is already covered by my 80-400VR. It still doesn't solve the dark viewfinder/slow AF problem at 400mm.

[Rick Waller]

Yes Larry - that is the Tokina I was speaking of. I have used the 80-400 VR Nikon and let me assure you that the viewfinder and AF in the Tokina is WAY brighter and faster than the 80-400. You are at 5.6 with your lens - the 300/2.8 + 1.4 TC loses only one stop which is way brighter than 5.6. By the way, I find that the 80-400 VR is so noisy when it autofocuses that it can literally scare away critters you are trying to photograph.

 

If you have ever looked through a 2.8 lens, you can have an idea as to the brightness and as I said, even with the 1.4 TC on the Tokina 300, AF speed is fast enough to shoot sports with.

 

Again my friend - try out the Sigma and the Tokina and the Nikon to get a feel for what is out there. The benchmark will unquestionably be the Nikon 300/2.8 AF-S II, but it is literally twice the price as the Tokina.

 

The Nikon is a great lens - one of the best I have ever shot with, but is it worth twice the price over the Tokina? You will have to decide that one yourself, unless you are married in which case I can pretty much guarantee that the answer will be "no it is not" no matter how you feel about the subject.

[paul_frank]

I think it depends what you're shooting. I shoot mostly slow moving mammals, so the 400/3.5 is ideal for me. I didn't have a fortune to spend, and AF was not a huge priority. If you intend to shoot fast moving things, need of AF might sway you a different direction. Let me tell you panning with birds in flight is not an easy task with this lens.

 

I think that a 3rd party lens can do very well for you. Some examples are very good. But I believe that part of the reason nikons cost more is not just brand name, but quality control. It costs alot to get consistancy in a product like this and 3rd party lenses will not be as consistantly good from lens to lens as will nikons.

 

Make sure you budget for tripod/head if you don't already have one. This lenses you are proposing to get will REQUIRE a ~800+ tripod/head investment(new).

[jemini_joseph]

<html>

<body>

 

I've Sigma 500/4.5 HSM with my F5, my only serious lens that I've I'd say. I've two more other lenses. One 50/1.8D and a 28-70/3.5-4.5D. 99% of time I take birds. I had Nikkor 600/5.6 lens when I bought this sigma lens. I'll tell you that you have to try really hard to find a difference in sharpness. Color is more nutral than Nikkor. Only one small thing I found was little low contrast. But that's nothing for the price difference you have to pay for Nikon or Canon. I bought a used like new condition lens for $1800

If you care please see my birds pictures at

 

 

<a href="http://www.color-pictures.com/pics.asp?Folder=Birds">color-pictures.com</a>

 

I never regretted buying this amazing lens. I never owned a sigma before this one. I got a chance to play with this lens from a friend of mine and I bougt it. Another good news is that Sigma will work with TC-20E with some but's.. Please see my detailed reponse to this

<a href="http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=005PIm">thread</a>

Good luck

</body>

</html>