|
| Accept Cookies | Customize | Refuse Cookies |
The following opinions have been automatically translated with Google Translate.user187800   | sent on September 08, 2021 Pros: Everything, really everything Cons: Nothing, nisba, the cosmic void Opinion: Exceptional lens. Purchased new on the nikon store (last example, at least in Italy), never more apt purchase. Incredible sharpness, microcontrasto from fear to full aperture. It completely solves the sensor of the z7ii and it is not enough! He would like more. Natural colors, made unique. Af very fast on z7ii via ftz (in short, this ftz is not so bad: made comparison on d500 and same speed). In short, very happy, I would never sell it again. |
 | sent on March 14, 2021 Pros: Sharpness, quite light, all metal construction, excellent workmanship. Cons: at the moment nobody Opinion: The lens in question, although it has no stabilization, can be used quietly freehand, even if it is not a feather. The yield is also excellent at TA free of chromatic aberrations. By mounting its dedicated CT (TC14EII, TC17EII) the sharpness does not degrade and the overall contrast remains equal to the smooth. To combine it with the TC17EII you have to have a machine body able to manage the AF at least up to f/8, it becomes a 510mm f/6.7. On the other hand, these information are also given in its attached manual. It should not be used with other TC !!! This is absolutely to be considered, except you can combine it with the Kenko 300Pro 1.4 DGX, where the results are very similar (almost equal) to the TC14EII. Its RR is 0.27x not as incorrectly mentioned in the card with 0.25x. Multiplying it with the TC17EII the RR becomes o.46x, which allows you to make really pushed close-ups (we could also call them macro) and of extreme image quality. |
  | sent on May 23, 2020 Pros: Construction, materials with which it is made Cons: Final result of the files , probably freehand the lack of VR is felt Opinion: I do not know maybe I was unlucky , I hear to say that it is a great lens but to me disappointed , I have a 70 200 F4 a 200 500 f5.6 with these 2 lenses I get sharper and more satisfying files in general , my advice is for those who are willing to buy to do some tests, and if possible compare it with other similar goals |
 | sent on September 23, 2019 Pros: Sharpness, MAF minimum distance, size, handling, Cons: to be fussy about the lack of VR Opinion: After using the first model ( Af 300/4 ) I switched to this model because it had an AF-S engine and because the first model could only be used with third-party CT. The Nikon AF-S 300/4 is an extraordinary optic, with a great smooth used yield, but it does really well with TC. I used it almost always with the Nikon TCII 1.7X and even at full opening the rendering was really super. |
 | sent on September 23, 2019 Pros: sharpness, minimum distance maf, price used fantastic, handling Cons: personally at the moment nobody, maybe the absence of VR and tropicalization but you survive Opinion: Taken used here on the market for 500 Euros in March 2019, I highly recommend it to anyone looking for the first canvas for nature. I was undecided between him and the 80-400 I version and I have absolutely no regrets, because if you do not have the versatility of zoom you still have in your hand a lens of much higher quality, brighter, that challenges you to look for the best frame, and with a minimum distance of maf that makes it widely usable even for flora, insects and details. It has all the pros of a fixed f4 (bright, fast, sharp, multipliable), it handles easily freehand. I haven't had any problems with the tripod ring yet. Everything has already been said about value for money to date. To want to be fussy and find limits I would say the absence of VR and tropicalization that would make him invincible (but at a much higher cost) |
  | sent on July 29, 2019 Pros: sharpness, maf speed, blurred great Cons: collar but doesn't make dani tropes, it doesn't vibrate as they say Opinion: otticha that I would not change at all,great also very homogeneous blurry , sharpness that should not be ashamed even with new generation supertele,great price,stabilizer imagine with optics of pocco weight is not needed either,recommendable for macro , small ucelli such as colibri ect...,the used to costa rica for the colibri where it takes distance close to seen smallness of the subject and behaved by God,excellent even with 1.4x and 1.7x,also works with 2x keeping with discreet sharpness |
 | sent on November 05, 2018 Pros: Minimum distance of MAF, quality/price ratio, sharpness and much more Cons: Nothing, or necessary change the attachment ring to the tripod to avoid any vibration that the one supplied unfortunately creates Opinion: I have been over half a century in the midst of the use of goals and I swear that ever I found a lens so perfect in everything.. The list of qualities of this lens sends those who try it: in short, try to believe. In sharpness beats even the Big Brother 2.8. Say mind-blowing is little and this confirms the lungotempo now that is on the Nikon catalog. |
 | sent on August 01, 2018 Pros: Excellent lens Cons: Nothing Opinion: Razor sharp lens and if it weren't for the more stop than the 2.8. I'd say take this whole life! Compared to Big brother, weighs infinitely less and the photos that you bring home are pretty much the same, with the difference that with each other without monopod, you do not go very far. Excellent build quality, excellent yield, excellent resolution, not in my opinion particular shortcomings, is an excellent optics that does almost everything you do with the 2.8 and APSC, maybe it works even better than the other, in term of strange halos around the silhouette. |
 | sent on May 07, 2018 Pros: Optical output, minimum distance of MAF, price, Lens hood Integrated Cons: Collar Opinion: Taken used for a couple of years, real occasion due to the fear of failures of the previous owner's AF that he had heard some whistle, I use it regularly without any problem. My favorite optics for butterflies and close-up flowers, often freehand even if it is VR-free, but the weight contained, using the machine with the BG, allows such use. With the TC1, 4 performs well, even if the AF becomes less responsive and the use of the limiter becomes almost obligated. In general a lens to have in the kit given the excellent price-performance ratio in the used; Council, to those who can, to replace the collar with an ad-hoc third party. Alessandro |
 | sent on February 06, 2018 Pros: Excellent sharpness and close focus Cons: Not very plastic on the out of focus, tripod support Opinion: It's a telephoto lens of very high optical quality, which used on FF (D800) no doubt deserves a nice 9+, mechanically it is well done - like the old Nikkor- but we must admit that the support for the tripod is not as robust as it should be, however, it is a fairly compact optics that can also be used freehand without feeling the need for a stabilizer. It is one of Nikon's first AFS systems, which is sometimes felt with the classic 'whistle'. And it is precisely the autofocus his Achilles heel, mine, which I found on the used market after having changed another that had malfunctions on autofocus (did not focus in AF with the 1.4x), yes the first day of trial is planted after a few hundred shots; repaired by LTR, now it's perfect with a 'razor' focus that does not need any calibration. So ... watch out! The minimum focusing distance is almost 'macro' pehe tries to shoot portraits of 'faces' at full frame with a very high sharpness, I would say brazen, because of the defects of the epidermis that highlights and that would otherwise be invisible. The only drawback, unfortunately, is the bokeh. The backgrounds are generally very soft, but not always ... sometimes the out of focus shows a strange texture that resembles a lattice with a fairly geometric and regular structure (of course, there are no lattices or other behind the subject); the problem, if it can be defined as such, is highlighted when there are leaves behind the subject and it is not very elegant. However: great optics that work very well even with the TC 14 E II and that is used on a very advantageous price-performance ratio. |
 | sent on July 30, 2017 Pros: Constructive quality, compactness, yield. Cons: Functional slope, collar Opinion: A very good lens built with care and quality materials is used at a very competitive price. I use it on the d610 and I'm excited to say it is very good also on a good dx.rn. It especially appreciates the sharpness, although it is not tropicalized it does not mind the ignorant outputs. True as it also made for a macro use, but not having the vr from the maximum in good light conditions. rnWelcome !! |
 | sent on February 13, 2017 Pros: build quality, performance, built-in hood, minimum distance of MAF Cons: Relative slowness, weight, collar, custody Opinion: I have owned this super telephoto for three years, before moving to the new version stabilized and relieved even 7-8 ounces. I think it is absolutely one of the objectives that I have used more than ever, despite the limitations that presented to me by arranging for traveling photo hunting, I have never been able to take it with me for the medium / long trekking excursions, saw the incriminating weighing about a three pounds to weigh on the neck. However, in the huts a short distance from the bird watching perches I made frequent use in bird life, at best freehand, without much difficulty. In hunting camp instead emerged problems when shooting in manual focus and looking out from the viewfinder, the wait times were made long before a person to fly or to land from / on the roost chosen ... that suffering by the wrist! Used with limited success with a multiplier of 2x Kenko D7100, I found in that case an excessive loss of brightness (f8), excessive delays in 'already autofocus itself no lightning and difficulty à huge in 'lock on subjects in low light. The strengths of this lens are made, the minimum focusing distance that deliver great close-ups even with subjects not particularly large, and the fixed hood, well proportioned and simply plug sending him forward, and turning it to the point of the block. You can not lose it or break it. The housing, in line with the new model, it seemed less professional and robust of some old versions which I have observed in the past, and given in combination with high-level Nikkor lenses. |
 | sent on July 18, 2016 Pros: Lens quality, clutter-speed content, weight, great shots also multiplies with 1.4 x 1.7x Cons: to my opinion none Opinion: optical quality excellent, quick and incisive in the pictures, really pleasant surprises offers when viewing shots fullscreen ... exceptional even for Macro, already just like that, this little gem can do even beautiful macro shots ... try to believe ;-), also the optic is very quick too exchange for rapid fire ...., put under stress succeeds very well in his work egregious form of photos can be printed. rnLo blur that is very nice and well pensato.rnIn conclusion, a point of view that everyone should have in the kit. |
 | sent on February 04, 2016 Pros: optical quality. accurate and aesthetically beautiful building. not overweight, compactness. Does not stretch (IF). Excellent with 1.4X. Price Cons: If he had the VR would be another lens and would have another price. Opinion: Excellent lens combine a aps-c. 450 with a very good performance already at f4. Compatible with the lack of stabilizer especially if you're on the 400-800 ISO. The focus is not lightning but sufficient for the majority of cases. Really worth its cost. I use it often with the monopod, also excellent in close range, by a very pleasant blur practical use I have certainly not disappointed. |
| sent on December 10, 2015 Pros: Build quality, not exaggerated weight and price Cons: Inadequate but changeable collar Opinion: It ' a good lens and used in the right way can give much satisfaction, I changed the collar and I found considerable difference in the stability of the image. Also used with duplicator I got considerable results, of course using it with tripod. I recommend it extensively both for the quality and for the price that in the used is easily found. |
 | sent on November 08, 2015 Pros: Price, blurred, building optical lens solid and robust made the old fashioned way, with Tc 1.4 AF remains unchanged with 1.7 slows down a bit ', minimum distance of focus, I will also do the macro! Cons: Bracket, I put the kirk and I solved all problems, missing vr for those who feel the need .. Opinion: All in all a great goal relatively light, with a great fuzzy and a minimum distance of focus enviable af a fast and accurate when used with limiter to 3 m, at a price of used ragionevole.nel market is at great prices ! Very good already at full aperture it is great if you already closed to a stop, the bracket is certainly improvable I kirk collar that fits perfectly and is comfortable and meets the challenge generated by the original bracket. |
 | sent on May 11, 2015 Pros: weight, price, construction, optics Cons: Neck and leg tripod unsuitability stabilized. Opinion: I got the latest version of the 300 AF-S for five years and I sold it only to the new stabilized .rnUn 'optical beautiful that I used as a macro with the PN-11. rnCon the TC14 and TC17 going great although the decline of performance of 'auto-focus, especially with TC17 is considerably less sharpness that remains ottima.rnIl biggest flaw is the tripod collar, initially with the use of easel, lifted mirror preventive and cable release I obtained an unclear image with time not too slow, then bought the collar Kirk everything changed and I had always stunningly sharp shots if not for my sake .rnOggi is just in 'used and I I would recommend it to anyone who wants a professional tele without having to sell a kidney for comprarlo.rnrn |
 | sent on February 18, 2013 Pros: light weight, small footprint, made like the 2.8 price. Cons: missing vr Opinion: Use this glass for 4 years and not finding any problems with the bracket. with Tc 1.4 x loses nothing in quality but loses some 'speed in focus already not fast. personally the lack of vr, does not give me problems. if we consider that the zoom with 80-400 vr but without motor for focusing, it costs twice as much, I do not think it's worth to pay 2500 euro, for stabilization. |
 | sent on January 30, 2013 Pros: Outstanding optical quality since TA, constructed entirely of metal, AF highly accurate and fast enough if kept restricted from 3m to infinity, focheggia up to 1.45 m, approachable price. Cons: Improved tripod bracket, no VR Opinion: An excellent lens for photo hunting, imho clearly to be preferred '80-400vr.rnNon is close: quality is already at the top to f / 4, the only reason is to recover heat pump diaphragm, even with a lot of attack (tested with kenko 1.4 x 300 DGX). rnAutofocus thunderbolt of war such as glass professional, but limiting it to 3m is still very fast and tracks smoothly even animals movimento.rnUsando throughout the excursion, however, in the case of hunting becomes quite slow because there is still "a long way" between infinite and 1.45 m. If you do not need the 1.45 m, I highly recommend using the blocco.rnLa construction is great, it is all metal (almost improper weapon), the ring and the switches are in position to reach instinctively and always under control, the built-in hood is very comfortable and very well fatto.rnrnLa tripod bracket introduces vibration shutter speeds between 1/40 and 1'' if you do not use the presollevamento mirror. For me it's more of ano problem, since for times so slow (for a 300mm) I would have used the presollevamento. The fact remains that there is a problem progettuale.rnrnNon I would suck a minimum of tropicalization and a glass in the back to protect the diaframma.rnrnHo had the opportunity to compare it with the 300 f/2.8 VR2 and frankly I did not see all this difference in optical quality, the 300ino defended himself just fine (compared to TA vs shots. TA). Where he is clearly lost in the speed of focus, there was nothing to them: as the f / 4 is pretty fast, 300one is practically istantaneo.rnrnSe had the VR (also first generation) would be almost perfect. |
 | sent on October 21, 2012 Pros: Outstanding optical quality, robust af fast, slow down enough with TC17 but all in all just get your hand ... Minimum distance af only 1:45 speed and sharpness ... to top .. Cons: Bracket to be redone, very uncomfortable both x x transport support tripod, without vr ... Opinion: I just this slow but my opinion as a layman is a large bell optical not very heavy, very good price and quality eccellente.Ben built and robust in the bracket, af exceptionally precise and very fast, has a smooth blade, duplicate loses well little quality with the TC17 with tc 1.4 and perfetto..rn..Tutto in all I am very very very happy .... |
  | sent on November 05, 2011 Pros: Constructive and optical quality, modular MAF distance with limiter over 2 intervals (from 1.45 m or from 3 m to infinity), AF speed (in the limited range of 3m), brandability, transportability thanks to the built-in lampshade, sustainable weight for freehand photos/excursions, not excessive price, maintenance of value, resaleability. Cons: I mention the question of the poorly designed bracket more because it notices that because I verified Opinion: My opinion is expressed in the pros I have indicated and it is very very positive. If anything, in the implicit characteristics of the lens (fixed fire and F4) are the possible considerations on whether or not to adopt this objective: at the moment I would confirm the purchase by not existing in the NIKON house a viable alternative in the price range that I consider; for example, there is no 400 or a zoom (always in the price for me affordable) that have won the enthusiasm of those who have adopted them (it is easy to compare with the excellent 400 5.6 and the versatile 100-400 of THE CANON that are instead widely used). As for the diaphragm a 2.8 would certainly be desirable but the doubts about the price going up, with the quality but also with the weight, and the branding that would decrease have at the moment kept me away from this replacement. So Nikon AF-S 300mm f/4 D ED, Nikon TC-14E II, Nikon TC-17E II, with customary use of the pairing 300 th TC1.7 (diaphmmndo in general to F8) the kit that I use, mostly with satisfaction, during my outings. |
 | sent on October 30, 2011 Pros: Robust. Handy. Diatanza minimum focus. Quality / price ratio Cons: Tripod insane. Without VR Opinion: Very sturdy, virtually all metal, which is very useful since it is a lens that is on the "field". It is appreciated the minimum distance of focus. I abbinavo converter 1.7 and did a "macro" of insects that can not be easily approach. 's AF is not lightning, it gains in speed using the limiter. With 1.7x the quality is reduced compared optics smooth (but still good) AF continues to operate even if it becomes much slower. I consider it very good perspective that is worth all the money spent on the acqusto, able to give great satisfaction. It is a lens that I do not, I sold it (bad!) to finance the purchase of the 300 f/2.8, and for close-ups to tell the truth I feel sorely missed. |
 | sent on September 28, 2011 Pros: Exceptional optical performance in relation to price, light weight, minimum focus distance of 1.4 meters, can multiply without much loss in quality Cons: With the multiplier I noticed a little play between the same and the lens without loss of quality or shake Opinion: In my opinion it is a fantastic lens for those who practice nature photography "wandering". Lightweight, with a fast and accurate autofocus and with the possibility of focus when focus up to 1.4 m .. Ideal for those who climb mountains or makes long trips. Normally used freehand without the use of tripods and monopods makes unnecessary the stabilization considered the need for fast times with subject almost always moving. The images it produces are of high quality even compared with its older siblings (including the price sigh!) |
 | sent on September 28, 2011 Pros: Minimum distance of focus, affordable price, size and weight Cons: Optical performance very good but not at the top of its class, it lacks VR, AF is not lightning, Tripod stand for improvement Opinion: I took it and used it for about a year. Having (just) tried the 300 f / 2.8 AF-S I noticed two downsides: the optical performance, while very good are lower than the big brother, both with the same diaphragm is both wide open. Furthermore, the AF is slower than the verisone 2.8, maybe because the minimum focusing is greater. For the rest I find a perspective very successful and is a cheaper alternative for entering the world of Nikon telephoto focal length lenses. It feels a bit 'the lack of a VR and a tripod support for bill better. Ideal for close-ups with the focus really close. |
 | sent on September 27, 2011 Pros: Optical quality is really good, interesting minimum distance of focus, lightweight and affordable. Cons: Missing VR. Tripod socket is not perfect (according to some) Opinion: I have this lens for about three months and I'm excited. In my opinion it has a remarkable clarity and find it really perfect, not only for the photo hunt (especially on DX bodies like my D300s), also for photographs to medium-sized insects (butterflies and dragonflies) by the minimum distance focus of about 140 cm. According to many the bracket to the tripod transmit vibrations. In my case I would say no. Just tighten the screws and the sharpness is great, even with a long time and without raising before the mirror. Unfortunately does not have VR, otherwise it would be really almost perfect perspective. |
JuzaPhoto contains affiliate links from Amazon and Ebay and JuzaPhoto earn a commission in case of purchase through affiliate links.May Beauty Be Everywhere Around Me
