First D300+AF-S 300mm f/4 bird shot

[Teddy Regpala]

Just testing my newly acquired AF-S 300mm f/4D then, I was in our backyard shooting anything I saw. Then this bird suddenly appeared as if he wants his photograph taken, so I obliged:



This was with a clunky and old bogen monopod, as I'm still getting familiar with the long lens technique.

Looks like it's a keeper, sharp and contrast is good. How I wish it has VR. I'm happy I didn't buy the VR 80-400 instead. I like the flexibility of the zoom, but I prefer a sharper glass.

I'll post some with the TC1.4E II teleconverter later, for an effective reach of 420mm (630mm, 35mm equivalent).

Regards,
Ted

[Mark Itol]

Hi Ted. I'm torn betwen this lens and the 150-500 OS Sigma (reviewed by our friends in another thread). I've read rave reviews about this lens about its IQ even wide open. Their only gripe is the tripod collar. What's your take on the collar? Is it really that bad?

Hoping to see more of your shots using this lens (and with the TC). Although I haven't heard any rumor yet, I'm hoping they'll release a VR version of this one.

Thanks,
Mark

[Teddy Regpala]

If I'm not mistaken, for this particular shot, the lens collar foot is on the monopod. It's still sharp though.
But from my recent trips at the park, I can see that the images are soft. It's definitely not the glass nor the D300, as I've seen sharp images from the combo.

Bjorn Rorslett suggested putting something rigid between the lens and the foot collar.
It could be my old Bogen mini ball head and monopod (which has a broken clip) combo. I'm not really sure.

I might buy a Kirk (or RRS) replacement collar for the 300/4. Then buy a new set of QR plates/head, tripod, and an L-bracket for the body. Oh well, the expenses never ends.

By the way, with the TC1.4 ... IQ is still sharp, as if you didn't put TC on it. A cheap quality 420mm (f/5.6). Thom Hogan said the 300+TC1.4 is sharper than the 80-400 @400mm. And he might be right.

My next purchase is to get a TC1.7, 510mm (f/6.7) ... I heard IQ is still good. By all means, avoid the TC2.0 like a plague.

The Sigma 150-500 is very tempting. But early reports said it's really soft. I guess I'll have to wait for the reviews, once the Nikon mount got released.

[Romy Ocon]

Looks like a winning combo, Ted... superb detail!

[Manny Illana]

excellent detail.... sharp and crisp. i'd second romy on that. congrats ted.

[Teddy Regpala]

Thanks for the comments everyone.

Please, if you have any comments or criticisms to improve my skills, fire ahead.

And Mark, here's a sample image from the combo D300+AF-S 300mm/4+TC1.4EII. Probably about 50% crop.
F/11 , 1/400s , (Auto) ISO 220, monopod



I apologize since it's not a bird, I'll post some once I processed them.
Oh yes, we have flies in America.

Regards.
Ted

[Mark Itol]

Thanks for sharing Ted. There's a guy I asked who uses the 300mm f/4 + 2x TC and the images still look good. You can see his images here: www.indianaturewatch.net/view_cat.php?tag=Rakesh%20Dhareshwar. He says he's had no problems with the combo and vouches for it. Standard post-processing on his images, as he said, is USM 70-1-0. Might as well check the combo if you want to go 600mm f/8.

[Manny Illana]

wow.... that's amazingly razor sharp. looks like you've got a copy that sings!

[Teddy Regpala]

Yeah, it sings, or whatever ...
I know what they can do now. The thing is, if I get soft or blurry shots ... it's in me where the problem is. Can't blame the gear anymore.

Maybe Ken Rockwell is right, "the camera doesn't matter".

[samieaggro]

Awww! This one is totally cool!