New lens purchase - 300mm F/4+TC2 vs 80-400mmF4.5

I am think of getting a longer telephoto and would appreciate any suggestions and comments. I normally do mostly macro and flora and currently have the 105mm micro and the 18-200mm zoom. Occasionally I wish for a longer lens for nervous critters and flowers which are difficult to get close to such as lotus in a pond or public park. I am thinking of getting the 300mm F4 and the TC2E III. The rationale is one could use the 300mm F4 or 105mm +/- TC2 which will cover 105mm, 210, 300 and 600 for the occasional bird shot (can't use TC2III on the 18-200 so there is still a gap between 300-600). I know the 300 F2.8 is probably better but it is also too heavy for lugging around at 3 Kg and also 4x more expensive. The alternative is just to get the 80-400mm F4.5-5.6. I would like to hear from anyone who have experience with these lens combination and also any general comments from anyone about whether the above reasoning is sound.

Gary,

I'd advise against the 300 + 2X and suggest the 300 + 1.7X. The 2X almost certainly won't AF unless you have intense amounts of light and the resultant aperture would be f/8

A lot of your choice will depend on your preferred shooting style, too. The 300 with or without a TC will greatly limit your framing options when shooting from a fixed position. If you don't mind cropping files to achieve the framing you want, that's not an issue. But if you're as critical about your framing as I am, you might be happier in the long run with the zoom.

Gary: Since I'm spending your money how about both . Of course I'm a Sony shooter so can't comment specifically but I would love to have a 300 f4. I have a 300 f2.8 which I bought in my film days for the speed (ISO 100 slide film) but it is a load and a real pain to work with even though the optics are wonderful and I really like the reach. If Sony ever comes out with a 300 f4 I would sell the 2.8 in a heartbeat. Another consideration with the 300 f4 is how it can become a great long macro lens with extension tubes. Ronnie Gaubert in particular does some outstanding macro (mostly bugs, butterflies and dragonflies) with that rig. Ronnie almost always uses a tripod but one could hand hold an f4. Its really not practical with a 2.8. You could put tubes on the 80-400 but for moving subjects using tubes on a zoom ranks right up there with getting a root canal IMO. Good luck with your decision. >=))>

I love the 300mm ed f2.8 lens! It is an amazing lens and you can add a 1.4X teleconverter and get good results. Mine is the older manual focus and it is not heavy. I also have a 500mm P f4 lens and that is a bit bigger but I carry it around with no problems. As I said, I use manual focus lenses because of the action shots I like. It's really tough to get good readings on flying birds with autofucus since it will focus and meter on the background before it will catch a smaller bird on the wing. I even set the camera on manual everything with the 500P lens. The 500P lens is an amazing lens and it is not real heavy. A very nice one can be bought for a very reasonable price and you really can't beat the image quality. That said, I still use my 300mm f2.8 a great majority of the time. Now, here's a clue on a real sleeper of a lens! I have taken some of my best photos with Nikon's 400mm ED f5.6 MF lens. It is a very fine lens and a fine used one can be bought very cheap. It is compact, light and has the best Nikkor ED lens. I love mine and would never part with it. If I am going on a shoot that requires a very long hike, under tough conditions, I bring the 400MM. They are on eBay regularly and I would strongly recommend that lens. Of course you have to be willing to do everything manually unless you have a D300, then the camera will do the metering if you choose.

Anyway, I hope this helps.
Chris in Texas
www.chrishirsch.com

I absolutely swear by my 300 2.8 L but mostly for the birds. I used to have a 300 f8 that had a macro setting on it. It was great for macro from a distance. When i shoot macro now I love my Sigma 150 cause I can get far away shots or close at 2.8. Sells for about 600.00. I've never ut a converter on it though. Good luck on your decision and any new lens will be fun

Gary, Canon makes a 77 mm 500D close-up lens that fits on the Nikon 80-400. I use this combination for macro and close-up, and have gotten good, sharp photos of subjects like butterflies and moths (feeding, not flying), but you do have to be able to approach quite close - about 1 ft.

Gary: You may know this already but if you do put a 500D on the end of a zoom or any other lens you will not be able to focus beyond 1/2 meter (18-19 inches).

My experience is with Olympus/Zuiko, but I've found there is a tradeoff. For a given photo, the fixed lens will consistently give you sharper photos than an equivalent zoom. The zoom, of course, gives you more flexibility. A high-quality fixed lens is usually sharp with a 1.7X TC and sometimes with a 2.0TC, although each costs you some stops. Zoom lenses tend to be pretty soft with any TC. I've found the Zuiko 90-250mm f2.8 to be too soft in all but the brightest light, for example, and hopeless with any TC.

Thanks everyone for your comments. The choice is really between 300mm F4 and the 80-400mm zoom. The 300mm F2.8 is probably too heavy for me to take along on hikes if you add a bigger tripod, water, snacks etc. I can manage a 7-10kg pack, anything heavy is starting to be uncomfortable.

I have a 500D diopter for my 18-200mm and it works nicely for close up with 0.4 mag. Using this on the 300 will give me 0.6 mag which is acceptable.

The TC is optional but will probably opt for the 1.7 rather than 2.0. Is there a real difference between Nikon and Kenko TC?

Gary,

Not to confuse matters but if you are thinking about the 80-400 you may want to consider the new 70-200 VR II 2.8 (not the VR I) version mated with the TC2E III. This newest version loves teleconverters like no other Nikon zoom. With the 2x you'll be at f5.6 and you will still have a working autofocus. The 300 f4, although will give you more reach, you will be at f6.3 with the 1.7x, and if you are using the D90, autofocus could be a problem. The 300 f4 also does not have VR.

Brad Hill, reviewed this combo and noted very little loss in image quality, and Brad is very discriminating. You didn't say if you are using a DX body but if you do you'll be at 600mm (1.5 multiplier) at the long end with this combo and VR to boot. The 300 with the 1.7x is going to need a very good tripod and would be best to replace the tripod foot, since the Nikon on this model has been noted to be quite flimsy.

Glenn

Gary,
I have a Nikon D300 and have had the 80-400 and was very disappointed in it, very slow focusing and sold it after 6 months. I bought the Nikkor 300 f4 with the Nikon 1.4 TC2 about 5 months ago and have been very pleased with it. Once you get use to shooting with this it is a great walk around combination for birds and wildlife. I would recommend replacing the tripod foot, I bought the Kirk collar and I started to get consistently good images.
Jim

Gary, I have a Nikon D90 and originally bought the 80-400mm zoom. It was very slow to focus and I did not like it very well. I eventually sold it and bought the 300mm f4 with the 1.7 TC (based a lot on Luke O's recommendation). I really like this set up. The lens works great attached to the camera, when using the TC sometimes you have to get the focus in the ballpark before the AF kicks in, but it gets you out there. I have not tried the lens with a 2TC but hear that the AF is even more difficult. The AF works well with a 1.4 TC.

Gary,

The biggest problem with the 80-400mm zoom is that it is very slow for autofocusing.

We have used the 300 f/4 with both the 1.4 and 2.0 TCs. The 2.0 TC does autofocus, but it is somewhat slow. Granted, that is with the high end DSLRs (D1X, D2X and D3) which have superior autofocusing systems. The 1.7 TC should be good with most any body.

Of everything, I believe the best bet would be the 70-200 mm f/2.8 VR II with the 2.0 TC. That would give you the greatest flexibility, though you won't have a 600 mm equivalent. But, the VR should be very handy. And, you would be covered with focal lengths from 70 to 400 mm with at least twice the quickness of the 80-400 mm.

2-cents late. I use an 80-400 with my D700 and love it. Focusing speed has not been a problem. Used to use it with my D200 also. 95% of my use of this lens is HANDHELD! on a boat! and a moving boat at that...and twin engine vibration no less. Using it with the D700 allows me to up my ISO to keep the images as sharp as they can be under those circumstances. Not especially pleased with it's VR...seem to do better without it. I would be lost without this lens. I use two different lenses 90% of the time out of about 10 lenses. Of course it really depends what you are shooting and what the circumstances are. Maybe I have a fortunately good sample of this lens.

Troup

Thanks everyone for your comments. I am going to get the 300mm F4 to start. Will decide on TC later, probably the 1.7x.