Calling all big lens users [Archive] - AusPhotography:: Australia's Premier Photography Forum::

View Full Version : Calling all big lens users

Belly

16-02-2013, 10:40am

ricktas

16-02-2013, 11:26am

I have the 300mm f4 and its a great lens, though quite heavy and I tend to use it where I can use a tripod or monopod cause hand holding it can be a bitch.

My guess is your plan would be to use this lens for the local wildlife etc, so I would hazard a guess (also) that you are hoping to see polar bears and the like. Having a high quality bit of glass with a decent length is going to be very important to you. I see no reason not to consider the 200-400, but be aware that if you are going to lug it around, it is a heavy beast.

ameerat42

16-02-2013, 2:17pm

I am not criticising your choice of lens, Belly, but I settled on 50-500 as fulfilling my ideas of FL flexibilty.
As for weight and bulk, I agree you don't think of such a lens and then worry about that too. As a result, mine is almost a permanant
fixture on the camera now. (Sometimes I interpose a 2X converter.)

What other lensery would you be taking? For what sort of photography?

I have found that you have to re-interpret your scenery if you want to take vistas with mine, but that makes you think about your pictures.
It can get down to 1:3 macro, too.

Lastly, I would assume this lens has optical stabilisation?
Am.

Steve Axford

16-02-2013, 2:23pm

Wow! 50-500, that's a big range. And with a 2x converter? and a macro too. What's the quality like with all that flexibility?

ameerat42

16-02-2013, 2:59pm

Steve, for a quick reply watch this place - or most of it. (http://www.ausphotography.net.au/forum/search.php?searchid=476)
Am.

Sifor

16-02-2013, 5:52pm

Have you considered the Nikon 300 2.8? Add some TCs and you'll get good reach and some flexibility.

Alternatively, the new Sigma 120-300 2.8 should tick the box and save you quite a bit of cash.

Wayne

16-02-2013, 6:54pm

I have the 200/2VR and 400/2.8VR on D4 and D800 bodies. I also have all 3 current teleconverters.

I have owned the 200-400/4VR (not version II) and whilst it is a pretty good lens, it is sharp, and sharper on closer subjects. I sold it because despite the attraction to the flexibility of the zoom, I most often found it wasn't used in a manner of zoom in/out all the time, and it's flexibility is limited for use with converters. I found I was shooting it at the 400mm end all the time. Using it with a 1.4xTC is about the limit of autofocus for anything but slow-medium movement unless you are shooting it on a pro body, and on the D4 or D800 with the new f8 AF capability, it should now AF on those bodies even with the 2xTCIII, but it will probably be dog slow @ 800/f8.

I find the 200/2 superior in all aspects with the 2xTCIII attached. It will AF as fast as the bare 200-400/4 and deliver 400/4. I also find the 400/2.8VR as flexible, perhaps no Nikkor can focus as fast as this lens, the 200/2VR the only real competitor. Slap the 2xTCIII on the 400/2.8VR and enjoy fast AF with 800/5.6, which is unachievable on the 200-400/4 with any TC combo.
I often will shoot the D800 with the 200/2VR + 2xTCIII and the D4 with the 400/2.8VR + TC1.7II giving 400/4 and 650/4.8(exif reports 650mm not 680mm) respectively, or the other way around giving 340/3.4 and 800/5.6.
This solution however does require 2 FX bodies, 2 Nikkor exotic supertele's, 2 Teleconverters and about $21,500 but it is an exceptional combination. There are of course options to mix/match the lenses with the TC's or shoot them bare giving alot of flexibility.

If you want a good idea of what the 200-400/4 can do in skilled hands, search for posts by member SarNop who owns this lens and uses it bare and in combination with different TC's with both AF and manual focus but gets exceptional results all the time.
Sar also has the 200/2VR and 600/4VR on the D800 and a D2 series (HX or SX).
Mongo also uses this lens and gets exceptional results.

If we knew what bodie/s and other glass you have, we may be able to recommend a suitable combo. Also remember you could just rent the lens if you only want it for a couple of weeks, or perhaps rent it and see what it can do before dropping the hard earned on it. I personally wouldn't bother with any 3rd party glass, although some do produce excellent results regularly. One bit of advice if you are shooting in the sub-Arctic where ice isalways present, make sure whatever lens you get, the drop in CPL for the Nikkor super Tele's is a must.

Hope that helps.

kiwi

16-02-2013, 7:11pm

500 f/4, no brainer, with a 1.7tc

Oh, I've got the 400 2.8, and have used 300, 120-300, 500 and the 600

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

knumbnutz

17-02-2013, 9:13pm

I have a sigma 120-300mm 2.8 which is a great lens and works well with a 2xTC.
Not sure how it holds out against the nikon fixed focal, but it is better than its price would have you believe.

Lance B

18-02-2013, 1:18am

The 200-400 is an exceptional zoom and I have been lucky enough to try it out a few times, thanks to Sar Nop (of this forum) for letting me have a few tries at it. The 200-400 will accept TC's and the 1.4x TCII will give you a handy 280-560 f5.6 zoom. The 1.7x TC and 2x TC will work, but they do impact on IQ and AF speed and accuracy. You really need to have top class lens technique to get the TC's to work best on this lens.

2.5 years ago, I was in a similar dilemma to you, wondering what super tele or tele zoom to get, I was deciding between the 300 f2.8 VRII and the 200-400 f4. After much consternation, I settled on the 300 f2.8 VRII as I thought it the most versatile of the two. Using the 300 f2.8 bare, I had an f2.8 lens for low light and for shallow DOF and creative purposes, I could add the 1.4x TCII and have a 420mm f4 lens that has better IQ than the 200-400 f4 bare and I could also add either the 1.7x TCII and the 2x TCIII for 510mm f5 and 600mm f5.6 respectively. The 300 bare is more compact and lighter than the 200-400 f4 and thus easier to store and travel with. The fact that the 300 is 100mm shorter in length than the 200-400 was another consideration that was important as it meant that it could be more easily fitted into a back pack with my other lenses. I can fit into my Lowepro Flipside 500 backpack, the 300 f2.8, 70-200 f2.8, 24-70 f2.8, 14-24 f2.8, all 3 TC's and my D800E. I would struggle putting the 200-400 in there with the rest of the lenses (not including the 300 of course).

Another deciding factor was, as I had the 70-200 f2.8 VRII, having a 200-400 sort of meant that I was doubling up the focal length around the 200mm mark and on FX, 200mm really isn't a focal length that is of much use in birding and not all that used in wildlife either, IMO. In fact, my 70-200 f2.8 doesn't get used much at all except when I travel overseas and I leave the 300 f2.8 at home due to wanting to travel relatively light, I then use the 70-200 with the TC's to obtain reach. So, for me, out in the field shooting birds and wildlife etc, 200mm is not really all that useful and the minimum is generally 300mm.

Since I made the decision, I couldn't be happier and I would do the same thing again if I had to. The fact I can use TC's really makes it a very versatile kit with superb IQ. With the 300, if I add a TC to it, I still have the excellent close focus of 2.2mts, so, if I add the 1.4x TCII, I have a 420mm that focuses to 2.2mts of the native 300. Using a 1.7x TCII, I have a 510mm f5 that focuses to 2.2mts and using the 2x TCIII, I have a 600mm lens tht focuses to 2.2mts! However, this applies to all lenses that you add a TC to, ie that it will focus as close as the native lens bare.

The 300 is also excellent for BIF as the f2.8 max aperture means that it is very responsive and the fact that it is lighter than the other lenses means that it is very easy to track birds. When I use my 500 f4, it is difficult to track birds simply because they are difficult to follow due to the narrow angle of view and the fact that it is a heavier lens.

I now have the 500 f4 VR and with the 300 f2.8, this is an excellent twin lens super tele combo for my purposes, which is mainly birding, but also any wildlife. I can put both the 300 and 500 in my other Lowepro Flipside 500 backpack that I have set up for these two lenses.

Here are a few samples using the 300mm + TC's, so you can see that the IQ is still superb.

This is using the D7000 + 300mm f2.8 VRII + 2x TCIII

http://www.pbase.com/lance_b/image/140197293/original.jpg

D7000 + 300mm f2.8 VRII + 2x TCIII

http://www.pbase.com/lance_b/image/136095730/original.jpg

This was shot WIDE OPEN at f5.6!

D700 + 300mm f2.8 + 2x TCIII

http://www.pbase.com/lance_b/image/134385502/original.jpg

D7000 + 300mm f2.8 VRII + 2x TCIII

http://www.pbase.com/lance_b/image/137625252/original.jpg

This young male wren was getting so close to me that my 500 f4 VR wouldn't focus down that close (it's minimum focus distance is 3.85mts), so I put on the 300 + 1.4x TCII and was able to focus down to it's minimu focus distance of 2.2mts if required.

D800 + 300mm f2.8 VRII + 1.4x TCII

http://www.pbase.com/lance_b/image/143804446/original.jpg

The bokeh is still beautiful even using the TC's

D800 + 300mm f2.8 VRII + 1.4x TCII

http://www.pbase.com/lance_b/image/142242398/original.jpg

Here is the 300 bare on the D800 @ f4

http://www.pbase.com/lance_b/image/147840863/original.jpg

D800 + 300mm f2.8 VRII @ f5

http://www.pbase.com/lance_b/image/147881845/original.jpg

Norman

18-02-2013, 7:24am

I have had the 200-400 for just on 4 years and have travelled to Europe and the USA with it using it mainly at airshows firstly on D300 and then D3 and now D3s / D700 with 1.4 and 1.7 converters

I previously owned a Nikon 300mm 2.8 but upon going to full frame i found i needed to extra reach , i tested the Nikon 400mm and 500mm extensively and whilst they delivered fantastic results i chose the 200-400 as it SUITED ''MY'' USE i do zoom a lot and mostly have a new 1.7 converter on it and i am very happy with what ''i'' get from it , it folds up so i can get it in my backpack for airline overhead lockers which is a big plus

And this is what i consider the main thing that differentiates the lenses , it is what YOU feel comfortable with and find delivers the results YOU feel is what you want everyone is different, i have friends who shoot Cannon and use a huge range of lenses and it works for them, i have tried that sytem and found i was more comfortable with my Nikons

All lenses have their sweet spots, their problems etc so i urge you to try before you buy

Hope this helps, if i can be of any further assistance or you want to talk about it please feel free to P.M me

cheers

Sar NOP

19-02-2013, 1:08pm

Hi everyone,

Me and a few mates are embarking on a sub artic photography trip later in the year and I've almost convinced myself into a 200-400 f4 NIKKOR as my big lens to purchase. The reason is I like the flexibility of the focal length it will provide me. I don't care about the weight or physical size.

Does anyone out there use one on a regular enough basis to provide some constructive feedback? I've read a few reviews but am interested in what you have to say in this forum.

However, I'm open to all feedback on "big lens users" so if you use one can you please provide me with the reasons you chose what you chose, it may open my eyes to something I've completely overlooked or am not even aware of.

Cheers, BELLY:D
If you consider going to your sub artic photography trip late this year with the 200-400/4, try it first to see if you're comfortable with it and can get the best of its optical quality with or without TCs (not many users/owners manage to get the most of this zoom with distance subject and/or with TCs).

Among all the lenses I own, have owned and have used, the 200-400/4 will be the one if I have to keep only one lens.
I've been using this exceptional zoom-lens for 7 years and feel very comfortable with it for my usual subjects (I handhold this lens 99.9% of the times, with or without TCs).
I've also extensively used the combo 200/2 VRII+TC-20EIII on both D800 and D4 and have never managed to get the same level of IQ of the 200-400/4 @f/4 : at 400mm f/4, the big zoom still outperforms the prime 200/2 + x2 TC !

The biggest downside of the 200-400/4 (like all the zoom-lenses) is its T/Stop, much lower than an equivalent prime (because of its 27 elements !). So compared to the prime, you actually will need higher ISO (for a given f/Stop) or slower shutter speed to get the same well-exposed image.

kiwi

19-02-2013, 1:10pm

maybe considering hiring anyhow.

Sar NOP

19-02-2013, 1:37pm

For a distance subject (over 100 metres), here's for example the kind of IQ I can get from the 200-400/4 with a TC on the D800 :

D800, 200-400/4 VRI+TC-14-EII, @f/6.3, handheld.
http://img822.imageshack.us/img822/5870/d8f5534resize3.jpg

Crop 100%
http://img545.imageshack.us/img545/633/d8f5534crop1001.jpg

Another full-size crop
http://img441.imageshack.us/img441/6863/d8f5534crop1002.jpg

Belly

20-02-2013, 10:36pm

HI everyone,

I've been watching this thread with interest and am very thankful I asked the question. But firstly thanks to everyone who participated and my dilema is no longer thanks to a couple exceptional replies. There's nothing quite like someone eles's experiences to guide you in a direction that enables you to make an informed and excellent decision.
So, I already have a D700 with a f2.8 70-200, f2.8 24-70, f2.8 14-24 and thanks to Lance. B I have ordered the breath-taking f2.8 300 prime with all the latest teleconvertors for my new D4. I reckon I have a formidible cache for the Barron Grounds of Northern Quebec.Lance's experiences with this lens is further backed up by a review on the following site. Lance, thankyou for your detailed, thoughtful and non-biased views. http://photographylife.com/reviews/nikon-300mm-f2-8g-vr-ii

Cheers all
BELLY:D

Lance B

21-02-2013, 3:37pm

Miss Jane

05-03-2013, 11:24am

Very interesting read. I have been looking for a a bigger lens as I have been doing a bit more small animal photography and my 80-2002.8 just doesn't cut it. I am not able to afford anything like has been mentioned above. My brother told me to get a 1.4xTC for my lens but from what I have read I don't think they are compatible? My dream lens would be the 300/2.8 but it would take a few years to save for that. Then I found the 300/4 which I could afford. I have just had a quick look and it seems these are compatible with TC. i have a D700, also would like to get the D600 as my 2nd camera.
I also looked at the sigma 120-300 as mentioned above, it is more affordable but would still take a while to save up and not sure if I want to go to a 3rd party lens.
Any comments on the 300/4 with TC? or if any TC work with the D700 and my 80-200?

Wayne

05-03-2013, 1:11pm

Lance B

05-03-2013, 1:49pm

I did have the 300 f4 before I obtained the 300 f2.8 VRII, and as Wayne states, the 300 f4 will work very well with the 1.4x TCII so you will have a 420mm f5.6. It will work with the 2x TCIII as well and in good light the AF is quite OK, but in low light it is a little slow. I highly recommend the 300 f4 as it is a very sharp lens with overall excellent IQ and adding the 1.4x TCII is a good way to get to 400mm with very little impact on image quality.

Miss Jane

05-03-2013, 2:02pm

The current Nikon TC line-up all work with the AF-S 80-200/2.8 lens. The AF-S 300/4 is a great lens and takes all 3 current TC's as well, but AF will be limited with all but the 1.4x unless you have a D800 or D4.
Mine is the AF, not AFS. I read something about filing off something on the ring to make it fit and that it wouldn't AF??

So depending on a reply to this, looks like the 300 f4 might be a good choice with the 1.4xTC.

Thanks for your replies :)

ameerat42

05-03-2013, 2:07pm

...and not sure if I want to go to a 3rd party lens...
Intriguing!
Do you know why?
Am.

Miss Jane

05-03-2013, 2:32pm

Here are some photos taken with my 80-200

https://fbcdn-sphotos-h-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-ash3/531538_213274058810881_1654292055_n.jpg
https://fbcdn-sphotos-f-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-snc7/377663_213274475477506_1666464598_n.jpg

William

05-03-2013, 2:34pm

Quote Miss Jane : not sure if I want to go to a 3rd party lens.

I'm with AM, Why :confused013

This was taken with a third party lens yesterday , Dont think a Canon lens would have done much better , And the Sigma is a third of the price

Miss Jane

05-03-2013, 2:36pm

Intriguing!
Do you know why?
Am.
Well i bought a sigma when I first got my camera and it zoomed in and out the opposite way to my nikons, I missed a couple of shots cos i zoomed in when I should have zoomed out :/ Also I haven't really used any apart from that one so don't know how they compare.

- - - Updated - - -

ok William and AM you could convince me otherwise :)

William

05-03-2013, 2:40pm

The different direction of the zoom ring is'nt really a problem, Just a new piece of equipment that after a couple of shots you wont notice the difference :) Not a worry

ameerat42

05-03-2013, 2:47pm

The different direction of the zoom ring is'nt really a problem, Just a new piece of equipment that after a couple of shots you wont notice the difference :) Not a worry
Agreed! E$pecially when there's a premium involved.

mongo

05-03-2013, 3:32pm

very interesting thread indeed fro such a less used lens (200-400 f4).

Mongo agrees with much of what has been said by Wayne, Sar, Lance and Norman.

the 200-400 can perform to give stunning images but it can be hit and miss in IQ. Sar’s is working fabulously. Mongo is too now that Nikon have adjusted it. It weights about 3.3 kgs and can be a handful. Mongo has only has very good results with the 1.4 converter and average results with the X2 converter on the D800. Have not tried and cannot say how it works with 1.7 converter. Focus can be slow with converters.

Mongo found (as Wayne did ) that he is constantly using this at 400mm. Have only needed less than 400mm on the zoom probably 3 or 4 times in the 4 years he has owned it. If Mongo had his time all over again, he would be buying this lens for that reason.

The best results Mongo has ever seen on any lens is the 200 f2 even with X2 converter but this was on Mongo’s old D200. This is limiting in the long end however at only 400mm even with a X2 converter.

The next best lens Mongo has used is the 300 f2.8 VR. Fantastic lens even with X2 converter. This would be a serious contender for Mongo these days if he did not have the 200-400mm.

As weight and mobility is an issue for Mongo (but it sound like it is not for you) he would not consider the 400 f 2.8 even though Mongo knows it to be a most superb lens even with converters. Mongo would consider the 500mm f4 and is looking to see what he can do in that respect. the 500 weights about the same as the 200-400mm.

If Mongo were going on your trip he would take a 20mm (or short range zoom covering the 20mm mark), the 70-200 f2.8 and he would buy the 300mm f4 just for this trip. the 300mm f4 is very sharp , very ,light, quick focusing (especially on your D4) and works great with converters. Failing that, in your case, as you are already getting the 300mm f2.8, take it in place of a 300mm f4.

completely out of left field, Mrs Mongo has a 50-500 sigma and it produces remarkable results in the right hands and only weighs about 1.8kgs. Do not know how it would work with converters but would be very slow “f” stop.

Mongo does not know that any of the above has helped you - it seems to have raised more questions than answers. Either way, good luck, happy trip and share the images when you return. A review of the gear you do take would also be nice on your return for all of our us to learn from.

I @ M

05-03-2013, 3:58pm

And then there is always the new
AF-S NIKKOR 80-400mm f/4.5-5.6G ED VR :rolleyes:
https://dl.dropbox.com/u/9582534/80-400%201.png

mongo

05-03-2013, 5:07pm

And then there is always the new
AF-S NIKKOR 80-400mm f/4.5-5.6G ED VR :rolleyes:
https://dl.dropbox.com/u/9582534/80-400%201.png

True Andrew - but it would want to be much much better than the original 80-400mm which had constantly very poor reports and comments by reviewers and owners from Mongo's memory and that is the reason Mongo has never purchased one.

I @ M

05-03-2013, 5:12pm

True Andrew - but it would want to be much much better than the original 80-400mm which had constantly very poor reports and comments by reviewers and owners from Mongo's memory and that is the reason Mongo has never purchased one.

Yep, the old ( ancient in lens terms ) version was always criticised for the slow / hunting AF and "wobbly" tripod foot.

I have seen some very good images taken with the old one on an APSC body so if Nikon have managed to fix the AF speed, now AFS, and weave a little optical magic in the form of modern day lens coatings etc it should be a good thing.
Price is another matter though. :o

arthurking83

06-03-2013, 6:05am

Mine is the AF, not AFS. I read something about filing off something on the ring to make it fit and that it wouldn't AF??

......

Your were told right. AF-D version of this lens isn't compatible with Nikon's current teleconverter range.

A better option would be to replace the 80-200 with either a Nikon 70-200VRII, the new AF-S 80-400 VR lens, even a Sigma 120-300/2.8.

300/4 + TC is a good option. This lens seems to work well with all the Nikon TC's.

Note too tho, that Kenko make a nice range of teleconverters that WILL autofocus with your 80-200/2.8. They're a damn sight cheaper than the Nikon TC's too!

Sar NOP

06-03-2013, 2:48pm

True Andrew - but it would want to be much much better than the original 80-400mm which had constantly very poor reports and comments by reviewers and owners from Mongo's memory and that is the reason Mongo has never purchased one.
Hi Mongo,
This new 80-400mm has a new optical formula and especially has a "Super ED Element" (used only in the famous 200/2 VR). Its MTF shows pretty good performances (quite close to those of the 200-400/4 at 400mm, f/4 vs f/5.6).
I expect very good results in the field from this new zoom-lens. It would be an ideal travel lens for wildlife and nature, especially for those who travel by plane !

Belly

08-03-2013, 10:59pm

OK everyone my new gear rocked up yesterday 300 f2.8, 24-70 f2.8, D4, 1.7TC and 1.4TC. mono pod etc etc. I had to get a shopping trolley from Coles!

The 300 on the D4 is amazing, it focuse's in a nano second. I know I've got the right lens.

Cheers to everyone again.

BELLY:th3:

A J Alderson

08-03-2013, 11:16pm

Drool....

Lance B

09-03-2013, 9:37am

True Andrew - but it would want to be much much better than the original 80-400mm which had constantly very poor reports and comments by reviewers and owners from Mongo's memory and that is the reason Mongo has never purchased one.

It is much better than the original 80-400 according to the MTF's. In fact it is right up there with the 300 f4 and close to the 200-400 f4. I think this could be a very good (read excellent) wildlife lens for those who want to travel light.

- - - Updated - - -

OK everyone my new gear rocked up yesterday 300 f2.8, 24-70 f2.8, D4, 1.7TC and 1.4TC. mono pod etc etc. I had to get a shopping trolley from Coles!

The 300 on the D4 is amazing, it focuse's in a nano second. I know I've got the right lens.

Cheers to everyone again.

BELLY:th3:

Well done, Belly! The 300 is stunning lens and my favourite. :D

Warren Ackary

10-03-2013, 3:55pm

Gearporn indeed!

Awesome to see anyway and personally I have learnt alot from just reading the pros/cons on this thread.

Congratulations on your purchase/s Belly :th3:

Belly

10-03-2013, 10:49pm

Cheers Warren...gearporn indeed:lol:

It ended up being a good question to ask, there's lots of helpful members out there.

I've decided to take with me both Camera bodies D4 & D700 plus the 14-24 f2.8, 24-70 f2.8 300 f2.8 plus all three teleconvertors. The Think Tank Airport Accelorator can carry the lot with lens fitted to both bodies and go on board as carry on luggage. I'll have to hide all facial expressions of straining of course!:D

Tommo1965

11-03-2013, 1:00pm

Nice gear Belly..make sure you have insurance ..

a D800 would make a nice addition to your current line up..the resolution is stunning

Belly

11-03-2013, 9:06pm

Hey thanks Steve,

mate I gave the D800 some serious thought and I've got the right sort of glass to justify one but I needed a decent frame rate. Maybe in a years time I'll see what Nikon are doing. I don't think I could ever part with my D700 though, it was first DSLR and such a reliable companion.

levers55

12-03-2013, 12:56pm

A great thread and congrats Belly.

Just to warn you, they do actually weigh hand baggage from time to time. If you're over, expect to pay steeply!

Best to be sure of the limits - which tend to be lower on the domestic airlines I've noticed.

kiwi

12-03-2013, 6:02pm

If they weigh you simply take the heaviest camera and heaviest lens and wear them around your neck, then shove your pockets with the other heavy things, cant do a thing about that then

Burnman

24-05-2013, 9:26pm

My 2c on this thread:

If you intend to walk more than 100m with a big lens and handhold, a 200 or 300 are the only really viable options. I have a 400 2.8. Unbelievable lens. But it does weigh a ton. Walking and attempting to shoot with it in overcast or darker conditions means your at 2.8 or higher iso. Its a hard lens to get pin sharp on handheld on a d800. On DX bodies its less critical. With a mono or tripod its a different story.

I have an 80-200 2.8 which is brilliant, but recently purchased a 200 2.0. Most would dismiss this lens as its not as "long" as the big boys or too similar to a zoom. While this chubby lens is certainly still a big boy by big lens standards, that extra stop over the zoom makes ALL the difference in the world. I rarely use the zoom anymore. The 200 (3kg) is no lightweight - its far more hand holdable than my 400. The extra stop of light means backgrounds blow out into nothing. The results are stunning. Your subject pops out of the frame regardless of the business of the background!

Couple this lens with teleconvertors, or a DX body, and the reach jumps to a 300 equivalent, and still faster than say a 300 F4. I cannot more highly recommend this particular lens for any wildlife or portraiture work. The additional flexibility by hand holding it allows you to get much closer to wildlife than lugging a mono or tripod along. I need not lament on about the sharpness as that goes without saying ;)

Miss Jane

02-08-2013, 9:42pm

Finally I have bought a sigma 120-300 f2.8! It's a monster in size and weight. I will try it out this weekend for the first time. One question for anyone else who has one, is the zoom stiff to move? Mine takes a bit of effort to zoom it in or out.

Sifor

02-08-2013, 10:49pm

The zoom ring of mine has more resistance than the focusing ring, although not by a great deal. It is moving big pieces of glass around, so a bit of resistance in the zoom ring is expected.

kiwi

03-08-2013, 6:54am

The lens used to be initially quite stiff to zoom but it got "better" over time

ameerat42

05-08-2013, 2:46pm

Does it have a zoom lock? If so, engage it when you're just carrying it around. My 50-500 tends to creep out if lock is left off. My experience is rather like Troy's (Sifor).
Am.

Sifor

05-08-2013, 4:25pm

The 120-300 2.8 is completely internal focus and zoom, so it doesn't require a zoom lock.

Pixley

07-08-2013, 6:41pm

I should not have read this thread - I now want both the 200-400 f4 and the 300 f2.8! Off to start saving some serious cash :lol:

Miss Jane

16-08-2013, 12:56am

Now after a weekend of using it I have found that it is easier to zoom in and out when it is on a tripod. There is a tiny bit of play when attached to the camera which now looks tiny in comparison. And the focus ring is a pain in the butt because it is opposite place to the nikon and i keep moving it unintentionally.
I still love my 80-200 2.8.

oneeyedphoto

16-08-2013, 10:31pm

Like the Burnman post above, I have had the 80-200mm 2.8 AF-S & was lucky enough to recently get hold of a used, but pristine 200/f2 VR1 model. Both take my 1.7TC. Still testing out the 'Fatboy' on my cropped D7000, but early reports suggest the zoom might not get back on my camera! God, that bokeh, there's just nothing to describe it. :D