What a monster…
Many have called me a retro pioneer, others, a glutton for punishment. Either way you may feel about my choice on using manual-focus lenses for sports photography (and photography in general), the Nikon 300mm f/2.8 AI-s ED is highly capable of some stunning photographs, even on today’s digital cameras.
Lenses such as this in the “exotic” category have been hyped up enough on their own with their fast apertures and long focal lengths (and cost at the time of release), so instead let’s move onto the main review!
Specifications
Full Name: Nikon 300mm 1:2.8 AI-s ED
Dimensions: 12 inches/305mm long (hood extended), 5.4 inches/137mm in diameter, with an extremely heavy weight of 5.3 pounds/2.4kg (with another ounce or two from the attached strap).
Close-Focus: Marked at 10 feet/3 meters. You can’t really get any closer, and this lens is by no means a macro lens.
Miscellaneous: 9 straight-bladed aperture, stopping down to f/22, 122mm front protection plate (no filter thread), 2 big elements of ED glass to suppress CA’s, built-in telescoping hood, focus click-stop, rear drop-in 39mm filter holder, rotating tripod collar, metal mount, carrying strap, leatherette front cap. This particular version (produced from 1986-2005) is actually the lightest 300mm f/2.8 Nikon has ever made. Go figure. 🙂
Sense of Scale–in this image the 300mm and a smaller 50mm f/2 are placed side-by-side (both at f/5.6) to show just how massive the front of this lens really is.
The “Feel”
The Nikon 300mm f/2.8 AI-s ED is one of those ginormous long and large-aperture optics that turn any camera attached into a mere accessory. It’s so massive, handheld shooting is nearly impossible due to the huge front elements shifting the center of gravity forwards. It’s so heavy, simply carrying it around for a shooting session longer than 15 minutes becomes a workout. It’s so long (with an even longer 450mm super telephoto FoV on APS-C, 600mm on m4/3), the only way to reliably get accurate focus is to shoot on a monopod/tripod. It’s built so well, in the event of dropping the lens, you’d break whatever it falls on well before any significant damage is done to the 300mm.
In other words, this lens is about as ridiculous as they come, and it’s really not a bad thing.
As far as operation, I couldn’t be happier as long as the lens is on a monopod/tripod to take the weight (and camera shake) off. Focusing is smooth (all internally, helping keep dust out of the lens), the aperture ring glides between apertures, and the telescoping hood has threads both at the base and in the extended position to lock into place. When transporting, use the attached strap, rather than the camera’s neck strap. This will help reduce the strain on the mounts. The focus click-stop underneath the front lens assembly can be locked into a certain position on the focus ring, giving tactile feedback when a chosen focus zone is hit. Personally I just move it out of the way. The rotating tripod collar is perfect, loosening and tightening up with only one oversized screw. Once locked in, it’s not going anywhere.
Oh, and just like every AI-s lens, everything is made of metal or glass, save for the rubber focus ring and carrying strap.
The big question here, why would someone in their right mind use a huge lens like this instead of more compact zooms that end up at f/5.6 at 300mm? Three reasons:
- Higher shutter speeds/lower ISOs, important to capture fast action while keeping digital noise at a minimum.
- Peak performance at a much larger aperture, important to pixel peepers who need the best performance at reasonable shutter speeds.
- Vastly superior depth-of-field control at long distances, important in creating extreme subject separation.
To illustrate that last point, here’s a couple boring shots of a plant, located about 50 feet from the camera:
f/5.6, the maximum aperture of normal 70-300mm zooms. Much of the grass is still in relative focus around the plant.
f/2.8, less of the grass is in focus, but the big deal here is the areas that are out of focus are really out of focus. This effect gives the focused subject “pop”.
If you are looking for a bargain, you aren’t likely to find it in the 300mm f/2.8. These regularly sell on eBay for well over a grand. Like new and mint condition copies can run as high as $1500, while “beaters” still sell for around $700. Keep in mind the modern autofocus version of this lens sells for $5700. Is autofocus really worth $4000 more? I obviously don’t think so. 🙂
Performance
Summary
As I mentioned in my first impressions, the Nikon 300mm f/2.8 is one of my favorite optics. Just like my 105mm f/1.8, this lens enables me to capture images in a way no slower zoom can. Optically speaking, I haven’t found any real issues with the 300mm in real-world use. Sure, it’s not perfect, as wide open there’s still a small amount of purple fringing (despite the ED glass), and there is a tiny bit of flare in the worst conditions. Other than that, optical performance is outstanding in nearly every respect. The 300mm isn’t a cheap lens, but is a great example of “you get what you pay for”.
Sharpness
Though sharpness is supposed to be only a small component in a lens’ performance, many feel it is the deciding factor between a good or bad optic. I personally fall somewhere in the middle. I love seeing pixel-level sharpness (especially with a 24MP sensor), but it isn’t terribly important that all my shots are sharp when viewing at 100% on screen. With the 300mm, sharpness is always high (at the larger apertures) with great contrast. Focus shift isn’t a problem and field curvature isn’t noticeable. The real limit to sharpness will be your ability to nail focus, the depth of field at f/2.8 is super shallow at most focus distances. The following chart was used to assess sharpness and contrast.
Focus distance for these tests was about 20 feet. This test chart prints well above 300 dpi on an 8×12. The file can be found at the site at the top of the chart. It technically prints at 12×18 at 300 dpi, but the prints I try making at that size do not come out sharp enough for lens tests. A small direct light was used to enhance contrast.
First up, some 100% crops (meaning, clicking on them won’t make them bigger) from the center by aperture:
f/2.8
f/4
f/5.6
f/8
f/11
f/16
f/22
Starting out wide-open, there is plenty of detail present (surprising for the focal length and aperture), but contrast is severely lacking due to veiling haze. Thankfully, while sharpness can’t be helped too much in post, contrast can. Stopped down only once, detail in the center is very sharp, with good contrast to boot. By f/5.6, optimum contrast and sharpness have been reached, and it truly is razor-sharp. F/8 is about the same as f/5.6 (perhaps a bit worse), and diffraction comes into effect from f/11 on, degrading both sharpness and contrast. F/22 looks very bad. Then again, why would you purchase a 300mm f/2.8 to shoot at f/22?
Onto corner 100% crops by aperture:
Left: f/2.8 Right: f/4
Left: f/5.6 Right: f/8
Left: f/11 Right: f/16
f/22
Corner performance on long, fast legacy glass (designed to cover “full frame” 35mm film/sensors) is typically very good on APS-C and smaller sensors, as more of the center of the lens is used for the perceived corners. The 300mm f/2.8 fits within this norm well, even wide-open, there is no detail smearing. Due to some vignetting and veiling haze, detail and contrast seem lacking, but the corners here at f/2.8 are better in most ways than the corners at optimum aperture with the 28mm E! At f/4, detail and contrast improve to a good degree, and at f/5.6, detail and contrast have peaked. Unfortunately, detail in the corners with the 300mm never gets anywhere close to the performance in the centers, but it’s no big deal–rarely are the corners in focus anyway when used for portraits (headshots in particular) or when trying to center a baseball player in the frame. From f/8 on, diffraction sets in taking a hit on contrast and sharpness, and at f/22, detail is again pretty mushy.
For critical pixel-level work, I would stick to f/5.6 for any and everything. For optimum depth of field control and high shutter speeds, f/2.8 is pretty great even zoomed in–I shoot at this aperture most of the time.
Sharpness at Infinity
The only way to focus at true infinity with the 300mm f/2.8 is to either find a cliff to photograph a far-off town, or to shoot at the moon. Since my area of Kentucky is hilly, rather than “cliffy”, I chose the latter. The optimum aperture of f/5.6 carries over to this focus distance, and the difference in detail between the razor-sharp centers and slightly dull corners is visible in these unedited 100% crops. At this magnification, you can see the heat shimmer from the reflecting sun rays on the right side of the moon.
Center
Corner
For astrophotography, f/5.6 is your aperture!
Sharpness at Macro
As mentioned, the 300mm f/2.8 is by no means a macro lens, despite this later AI-s version focusing the closest of all the other manual-focus 300mms by Nikon. For the times you need to get close though, knowing what works best is important.
As close as you can get
In this 100% crop near the center, detail and contrast are quite good. Though if you want to use f/8 at or near base ISO on your camera, a tripod is a must.
It’s great to see the overall consistency in sharpness at all focus distances. At macro, f/5.6 is almost as good as f/8, the only difference between the two is contrast.
In this shot, taken at f/4 near close-focus, one of the other effects of the 300mm becomes apparent. Backgrounds aren’t just blurred, they’re gone. This is why headshots work so well with this lens, anything behind the subject turns into a wash of color.
Bokeh
“Bokeh” is an artistic term of Japanese origin for the character of anything in the image that is not in focus. Smooth bokeh, where out of focus objects and highlights seem to “melt” into the background, is typically favorable. With the 300mm, bokeh in most respects is great. Thanks to the focal length and large aperture, out of focus backgrounds are extremely blurry, but in this lens’ case, are also rendered smoothly.
In this shot, taken at f/22 for maximum depth-of-field, the Altoids box is set as a focus point, while the russian dolls are arranged from far behind to close in front of the focus zone.
By aperture (these are NOT 100% crops):
f/2.8
f/4
f/5.6
f/8
f/11
With the exception of doubling in near-focus-point foreground bokeh (second from right) at f/2.8 and close foreground bokeh (far right) at f/8, bokeh is smooth everywhere. The extremely blurred-out backgrounds at f/2.8-4 are especially welcome, creating a 3-D effect on objects that are in focus even at a distance.
The Little Guy
300mm, ISO 200, f/2.8, 1/1250
Focus Distance: 50 feet. If this had been shot at f/5.6, the cars in the background would probably be more defined and distracting.
Now, let’s take a look at how the 300mm handles out of focus highlights. To assess this characteristic, a sparkled decoration was photographed out of focus to get as many different colored point sources of light as possible. By aperture:
Left: f/2.8 Right: f/4
Left: f/5.6 Right: f/8
Another great feature of the 300mm f/2.8 is its handling of out-of-focus highlights at large apertures. Wide-open to f/5.6, most highlights have soft edges and are artifact-free. Only when stopped down from f/8 on do the brighter highlights begin to show obvious outer rings and artifacts. If bokeh highlights are a concern to your photography, shy away from using apertures smaller than f/8, they get progressively worse at each f/stop. Though…with the loss in sharpness and contrast, I wouldn’t want to use those apertures anyway.
Purple Fringing
A form of chromatic abberation (a type of distortion where certain colors do not hit the image sensor at the same convergence point), purple fringing is typically seen in fast lenses at their wider apertures when shooting scenes of high contrast, such as branches against sky. Though purple fringing can be cleaned up very well in post processing nowadays, it is still an important point to take into consideration if one either doesn’t have the time to post process, or has purple objects in the frame that does not want to be desaturated. To assess purple fringing, I used this (boring) scene of high contrast:
All 100% crops taken from the center in this worst-case scenario. Each shot was overexposed by 2 stops.
f/2.8–Acceptable levels of purple fringing. In this worst-case scenario, the fringing is only 3 pixels wide, this is very easy to correct with little image degradation.
f/4–Very little purple fringing. At only 1/2 pixel wide on the small branches, it’s not even worth correcting.
f/5.6–Perfect. No fringing at all.
The big elements of ED glass do their job well here, purple fringing even at the exotic f/2.8 aperture appears more as a haze than obvious purple discoloration. Anyway, here’s a quick 15-second adjustment in Lightroom 4 to correct for the fringing:
f/2.8 again, with a value of 8 added to the purple fringing adjustment slider in Lightroom 4. Detailed is a little hazy, but remember, this is at pixel level.
Next I would usually make a point about other purple and green longitudinal chromatic aberrations with this lens, tinging objects out of focus both in the foreground and background. Thanks again to the ED elements, there’s nothing to worry about (at least, they aren’t noticeable in actual shooting).
Robin at Sunset
300mm, ISO 100, f/2.8, 1/1000
When exposed properly, purple fringing isn’t really present at all, no fringing adjustments were made to this photograph. To also get a sense of the sharpness capable at f/2.8, I’ve uploaded this shot in its full resolution (it was cropped from a larger image), with only a moderate amount of sharpening applied. Fun fact: this was one of my first captures with the NEX-7 and this lens!
Flare
I was a little worried with regards to flare with the 300mm, despite it having Nikon’s excellent multi-coatings. The biggest worry is due to the huge front element. The whole point of it is to capture as much light as possible for the f/2.8 aperture speed, but it is more prone to capture off-camera sources of light as well. Great news though, flare performance is quite good with the 300mm (with hood extended, I wouldn’t use it any other way).
Sun just out of the frame, no problem!
Sun in corner of frame, still no flare blobs!
Sun centered, no blobs again, but veiling flare is prominent with the extreme lack of contrast seen in the tree to the right.
In just the wrong conditions…
- …I managed to get ONE medium-sized flare blob. Oh well.
What I’m getting at here, don’t ever worry about flare artifacts, though with the sun (or a strong light source) in the frame, contrast heavily decreases from veiling flare. Nikon actually sold a lens hood (HE-4) to put on the built-in hood to probably help alleviate veiling flare. And yes, it looks rather ridiculous.
Vignetting
Vignetting is the look of darkened corners as a result of shooting near the wide open aperture (sometimes photographers add vignetting in post processing for effect). Most full-frame designed lenses tend to have little to no vignetting when used on APS-C or smaller sensors. The 300mm does a super job here with little vignetting even wide open:
In this infinity-focused shot of a wall at f/2.8, vignetting is negligible, requiring only a +10 correction in LR4’s vignetting correction slider. By f/4, no correction is needed.
Distortion
One of the many advantages of using prime lenses over zooms is to usually observe less distortion, especially with wide-angle and telephoto lenses. The 300mm does extremely well here, with only a bit of pincushion distortion. If you are picky, an adjustment of -1 to the distortion correction slider in LR4 will correct the small amount there is at closer focusing distances. As the lens is focused towards infinity, the distortion (or lack thereof) goes away.
Now…let’s hit the old recap on this exotic optic.
Pros and Cons
Pros
- Stellar build quality, a true masterpiece of mechanical construction by Nikon
- Smooth operation in all respects
- Internal focusing helps keep dust and other unwanted particles out of the lens
- Sharpness is consistently great from f/2.8-8 (contrast from f/4-8), with corner sharpness being very good all-around as well. The optimum aperture for sharpness and contrast across the frame is f/5.6, only two stops down from wide-open.
- Consistent performance at all focus distances
- Out-of-focus areas are not only extremely out-of-focus at the larger apertures, but the quality of the bokeh is almost always smooth
- Bokeh highlights are great from f/2.8-5.6
- Purple fringing and other LoCAs are a non-issue even wide open in real-world shooting thanks to the ED elements, it has less fringing than the 180mm f/2.8 AI-s ED
- Flare artifacts rarely show up in photographs
- Vignetting is a non-issue
- There is no real distortion
- With its exotic f/2.8 aperture, the amount of depth-of-field control is superb compared to zooms or other primes with slower f/5.6 maximum apertures. Having two stops more light to hit the sensor means higher shutter speeds to freeze action easier, as well as the ability to keep ISOs as low as possible.
- Sporting an optical construction of 8 elements in 6 groups, the 300mm f/2.8 AI-s probably has more light transmission than the modern 300mm f/2.8s with their design of 11 elements in 8 groups
- The only faster 300mm is the $25,000 Nikon 300mm f/2 AI-s ED. Good luck finding one and being able to afford it.
Cons
- You will break whatever or whoever the lens hits in the event of dropping it. The lens itself should still be okay.
- Unless you have Olympian arms and shoulders, handheld shooting longer than 5 minutes is next to impossible
- Corners never sharpen up to the level of the center
- Bokeh highlights from f/8 on are distracting
- Veiling flare is very strong. Despite not suffering from flare artifacts, avoid shooting with the sun or other bright light sources in the frame
- Nailing critical focus at f/2.8 is a challenge even with focus peaking and magnification. The single focus confirmation dot on cameras such as the Nikon d300 are never accurate enough.
- Even as a 20 year-old lens, bargains are difficult to find. Most sellers on eBay are outside the U.S., too.
The Bottom Line
When I was deciding on going through with the purchase of this now-ancient optic, I was rather hesitant. “Do I really want to give this a gamble, using a clunky manual-focus lens for fast-action sports on a compact mirrorless?” Thankfully in a few practice games I nailed my methods on accurately using this lens for its purpose. Is this the ideal lens for long distance general-photography? NO! Unless of course you don’t mind hauling it around with your monopod or tripod. That said, the Nikon 300mm f/2.8 AI-s ED is an absolute stunning performer in most all respects, giving images a 3-D pop that isn’t possible to obtain with other lenses. Compared to its autofocus younger brothers, this lens is a steal, and one that will have a place in my photography for a long time to come. Back in the film days, this was the professional 300mm–even today it hasn’t lost any of its quality. For APS-C cameras, this lens is dynamite in every way. For m4/3 cameras, I would only use this with some form of IBIS; at 600mm equivalent FoV, good luck keeping everything steady, even on a tripod!
To wrap things up here are a couple more recent captures with the lens, a little abstract if you will:
Unclear Color
300mm, ISO 100, f/5.6, 1/160
Tree-Snake
300mm, ISO 100, f/5.6, 5 seconds
But I couldn’t resist a few of my still-favorite sports pictures captured with this lens from last spring:
Chaos at Home Plate
300mm, ISO 400, f/2.8, 1/3200
Back to First
300mm, ISO 100, f/2.8, 1/4000
Locked-On
300mm, ISO 100, f/2.8, 1/4000
Well…that’s all for this one guys and gals, nice to take a break and have a look at a “real” Nikkor during my continuing journey with the Series-Es. Up next will be the Series-E zooms. Should be interesting, it feels like I haven’t used a zoom lens in ages. 🙂
Thanks for dropping by, C&C welcome, and as always, have a great one!
Matthew Durr Photography 
I’ve been enjoying every one of your highly readable reviews. Thanks for your efforts.
Thanks Eric, glad to hear many people are finding these readable. 🙂 You’ll never see an MTF chart in my reviews. Count on that.
I’ve been keeping my eyes open for one….
Sorry eths, not selling this baby for a looonnnggg time. 😀
Dang… 😉
That said, I’ll keep you in mind bud. 🙂
I have one of these big ol’ lenses that I’m thinking of parting with to a good home… if Mr. Eths is still interested. It’s old and looks it, but is in good shape where it counts. It only lacks a lens cap/cover – however it lives happily in a small, dedicated Pelican foam filled case.
I’ve been using it on a hi-def Sony DV camera with a Letus DOF adapter. Very pretty images, but with that arrangement it feels like filming with an outboard motor or a ground-to-air missile… I wish I could keep using it, the images are really pretty!
If he’s not interested I can doubtless find someone on ebay – that’s where it found me.
I doubt eths is getting an e-mail notification on this, so I’ll shoot him a line. 🙂
Thanks very much – btw, really appreciate the attention to details in your review! Excellent.
He’s responded below. 🙂 And thank you!
Hi Peter,
are you within European Union? If so then we should talk…
Excellent post! I have had this particular lens for 11+ years and used it with a Nikon F3 and D1x. Now I am in the market for a new camera body and want to know what model of Nikon would work best with this BadBoy Lens? Any suggestions? I have looked at the Nikon D800 and D7000. Thanks Hotrod
Thanks Hotrod. 🙂
According to Nikon’s compatibility listings, this lens will work in manual and aperture priority on both the D800 and D7000–after inputting the focal length and maximum aperture, of course. However, finding focus won’t exactly be easy or fast–even with both cameras having the more-precise 3-dot confirmation. If you’re dedicated to Nikon (I don’t blame you, haha!), I would personally go for the d800 to get the full use out of this lens. Granted, it will no longer act as the 450mm super telephoto it does on APS-C, but by f/4, you should be just fine with this lens on a FF sensor.
However, if you weren’t a die-hard Nikon guy, it works wonders on my NEX-7, as you’ve seen from my recent sports posts. Since I’m sure Sony will release a FF NEX-9 by the end of 2013, this lens will truly shine in time. 🙂
Matt,
Thanks for the quick reply and information. I will look into the NEX-7. I have several other Nikkor lens, this is why I leaning toward the NIKON.
Hotrod
Understood. If you use autofocus Nikkors more than manual-focus ones, I would go with an autofocus Nikon DSLR hands-down. But manual focus, definitely one of the NEX-series cameras.
Thanks for the review. f2.8 looks a little disappointing to me. I suspect the current Nikkor AF-S 300/4 to be better than the old AIS 2.8 at the same apertures which makes it look like a much better deal im ho… A real advantage of 2.8 vs 4 in a 300m lens I dont see with current sensor technology and high ISO that was impossible to think of in the days of film.
Anyway, a nice toy to nontheless.
Welcome, Icke. Keep in mind that the camera I’m testing this lens on has a sensor that is far more demanding than any other camera currently on the market (extremely high pixel density). On a high-end Nikon DSLR, you’ll be getting aberrations fixed automatically anyway regardless of lens (I found it very effective when using this lens on a d300). High ISO on today’s cameras is very good though, I’ll give you that. But as any sports shooter will tell you, the lower you can go, the better. 🙂
The only three reasons you might pick the AI-s version over the newer AF-S version is 1) You like manual focus 2) You don’t need the speed 3) You don’t need the shallower depth-of-field.
Other than that, the AF-S lens, though almost three times as expensive, is still a better buy.
Great review! Several comments (I now use a 300mm f/2.8 AF-I on a D600):
-The lens can be used comfortably without a monopod/tripod if you use the strap attached to the lens.
-Handling/balance might be improved with the larger grip and heavier weight of DSLR bodies (vs. the mirrorless cameras). That said, I’ve handled a 300/2.8 VR on a D3000, and thought it was perfectly usable.
-If you want fast AF without paying three times as much, you can get the AF-I version in decent condition for around $2000. AF won’t be as quiet, and MF override in M/A requires keeping the AF-ON button depressed, but I think it offers great value. There’s also a screw drive AF version that you might be able to get for a little less.
-I would never point my 300/2.8 at the sun if I can avoid it. I’m afraid that focusing such intense light onto the sensor could heat it up and damage it. And just looking at the sun tends to leave an imprint of the sun etched over my vision for the next few minutes, which could interfere with my ability to frame and focus quickly.
Thanks!
I have to agree with you, when you can use all the strength to only hold the lens up (rather than focusing), even the longer lenses become easier to use. I’ll have to keep that AF-I version in mind if/when I get another Nikon body!
Also, for my flare tests I make sure to have it pointing at the sun as little as possible. I’ve seen the disaster photos of how a 600mm lens can literally melt the inside of a camera. Also, since the NEX-7 uses an electronic viewfinder, there’s no worries about hurting the eyes when pointing the camera at the sun. I’d NEVER do that with a DSLR, at least not with the optical finder.
Hello Matthew/ All – Nice article !! I am a beginner in bird photography, I right now use D3000 + 1.4 TC + 300mm F4 and things are fine with it.
I have an option to buy Nikkor 300mm f 2.8 Manual focus Non-VR which is in good condition though not tested with my camera body D3000.
My Questions are –
1. Is it worth to buy considering I already have 300mm f/4 ? [ don’t mind manual focus/non-vr if it gives me crisp images than my 300mm f/4 ]
2. How is the focus ? is it fast enough to take birds in flight ?
3. Will my 1.4 TC work on it ? does anyone has sample bird photos especially flight shots ?
Kindly reply.
Thanks
Rahul Deshpande
Thank you Rahul, glad you liked the review. You’ve got a pretty good setup right now with your 420mm (630mm equiv.) lens, especially if it is autofocusing on your d3000.
It’s great to hear you are interested in the lens that I use. However, I have some reservations in recommending it based on your camera. The lens will not meter with your d3000 in any way, so you’ll be stuck in full-manual mode. Combined with the tiny viewfinder and only a focus confirmation dot, manually focusing would be a pain even on stationary objects, let alone flitting, flying birds. So, with that in mind,
1. The 300mm f/2.8 AI-s ED at f/4 would probably be just about equal to your AF 300mm f/4.
2. It focuses well, but on the NEX-7, I have many focus-assist aids that make manually focusing on quick moving subjects (athletes, mostly) easy. I tried using the lens again on a d300 (which has a bigger viewfinder than your d3000) when my NEX-7 was in the shop, and I struggled for a good while.
3. The TC should work on it, but again, you aren’t getting any metering.
Hope that all helps. If anything, I would put the money towards an upgraded body like a d3200/d5100/d7100.
Thanks Matthew ! yes I am going to upgrade the body mostly D7100. Just a question – how the lens (300mm 2.8) would behave with D7100 ?
Best Regards
Rahul Deshpande
Well the d7100’s viewfinder is .61x magnification with 100% coverage, while the NEX-7’s viewfinder has 1.09x magnification with the same 100% frame coverage. The NEX-7’s viewfinder is substantially bigger, and as mentioned, the focus assist options on the NEX-7 make focusing a breeze. The d7100, I believe, does have the dot/two-arrow focus confirmation, but even that’s a pain to use on moving subjects.
I have had one of these behemoths for many years and this lens, along with my 180mm f/2,8 ED AIS are my go-to lenses for outside portraiture. I have no problem hand holding this lens down to 1/250 sec, with my arms braced into my body. In my opinion, this lens was made when Nikon was in its hay day of optical and mechanical excellence
That extra weight really does help in keeping everything steady. Handheld, the 300mm is much too unwieldy on the NEX-7. I’ve used it on a d300 with vertical grip on multiple occasions, and the combo is very useful even handheld.
Couldn’t agree more about Nikon’s past in excellence. I came across a 200mm f/2 AI-s ED I’ll write about soon that seems to blow even the 180mm f/2.8 (which I have and love) way out of the water. Stay tuned. 🙂
A year or two ago, I got to try one on my NEX 5N. One of my clients’ dad was a retired professional photographer, and as he got old and started losing it a little bit, his kids got his lenses. My client showed the lens to me, telling me he couldn’t get it to work on his Nikon D5100, so I used it with my 5N. I was very impressed. At the time, I didn’t have much interest in telephoto lenses, but I still wanted to borrow it from my client, but his brother didn’t want it to leave the house because it belonged to their dad. Now, I want one really badly. I think I’ll save for it. Man, photography is expensive!
These super telephotos can be difficult to find uses for in general photography, but when the need arises for them, nothing comes close! Good luck finding a cheap copy, keep an eye out for lenses that are cosmetically bad but good optically. They sell for significantly less.
Hi Matt… thoroughly enjoy your analysis! I bought mine together with the TC301 and use this on my D600 body. Crisp sharp and no complaint whatsoever. Even with the TC301, it still produces very sharp images. Recently I bought another old legend, the 50-300 ED AIS zoom. It is also a remarkable lens. Wonder if you have had any experience with this lens to share. Many thanks in advance.
Andrew N.
Hello Andrew! Sorry I did not respond to this sooner, the comment got caught up among all the spam comments I have to wade through. Surprised to see the lens doing well with the TC301 for you. When I tried it with that teleconverter in the store the sharpness just wasn’t there for me. Could easily have been a bad teleconverter someone was trying to get a commission off of, but I’ll never know. I have seen that odd 50-300mm AI-s before, but never ventured into a curiosity purchase due to the relatively slow speed. However, if that ED glass does its job right, f/4.5 is plenty fast for most things, especially with a zoom rang like that.
There are times when photographing events that that focal range could be useful, as on APS-C that’s roughly equivalent to the 80-400mm’s some regularly use. I hope you are enjoying it! If you wanted me to write a review on it, though, I would have to borrow yours for a bit. 🙂 It isn’t exactly a cheap lens that I can gamble on being worth keeping/reselling when snooping around eBay.
Hi,
Some AI-S version is comming to my doors 🙂 Also for D7100.
Its bang for the money, even if It looks like toilet tool 🙂
Thanks, nice review, its quite hard to find such a info nowdays…
Do you have any idea what are the differences of all AI-s MF versions?
I have found that there were more variants…
Thanks again
To my knowledge, there are two main variants of the AI-s 300mm 2.8 ED. The first one has a 122mm filter thread, while the second has a built-in and permanent 122mm protective filter (no thread). Supposedly the optical design is the same, but if you can find the later version with the front protective filter in good shape, go for that one.
Hi Matthew,
I’m one of those people that still shoot film with my trusty F4 and mostly ais lenses.
I have recently acquired this beautiful lens, and as I will go the digital route pretty soon, it made me wonder whether I should go for a Sony A7ii which wil have EVF manual focusing with all the bells & whistles + image stabilization with all my ais lenses, or go for a d810 which can provide better image quality, have auto metering and be more balanced with most of my lenses.
Hey there Nat! Good on you for shooting film, I never have been able to give it a shot yet. 🙂
Regarding your digital upgrade question, you cannot go wrong with either camera, I have been reading great things about both. However, I cannot vouch enough for EVF manual focusing (peaking/magnification) + the image stabilization you’ll get with all your other AI-s lenses with the A7ii. The d810 may get you better resolution if you lock the mirror up on a tripod, but for all intents and purposes, you will have a much higher success rate in GETTING the shot with the A7ii after you acclimate to the controls (I came from a d300). Also, no split-prism viewfinder option on the d810 to my knowledge, so kiss precise focus at wide apertures goodbye.
Some big rumors in the pipeline, however, for a possible A7rii or even an A9 that may use a revamped version of that 50mp sensor in the new 5Ds from Canon. If you can wait until the summer to buy a new camera, sit tight (check out sonyalpharumors.com often too). Otherwise, spring for the first deal you can get on an A7ii and let me know how it works for you!
Hi Matthew,
As weird as it may sound, in the end I bought a barely used Nikon DF at a ridiculously competitive price.
What pushed me with this purchase was the level of manual focus accuracy I achieved with its optical viewfinder when I tested Nikon DF combined with a DK-17m magnifier. I have tested D800 and D610 viewfinders before as well as a D700 and D3s and they are much worse than DF. If only we had a split prism it would be perfect but even with the default screen it’s working somehow.
Afterall, I was looking for a very good platform to use my manual Nikkors. Also checking some reviews, I noticed that A7II’s IS was very different from Olympus cameras (less efficient) and was hard to achieve great sharpness with even with native lenses (probably due to full frame sensor size, and the size of the mount limiting how much in body IS can move.).
In addition to this, I decided that the sensor’s behaviour at higher iso settings was something I desired especially when shooting at night.
If I need a flash I will mount one. The retro controls are ok coming from an F4 but they will slow you down sometimes. It’s been 2 days since my purchase but I tested the camera for more than 3 hours before I bought it.
I will share my experience with 300 f2.8 when I have some time to use it 🙂
That’s great to hear that the magnifier is working well for you, because all my past experience manually focusing these digital camera optical viewfinders is a mess. The split-prism on the old Nikon FA, why’d they get rid of it? Haha!
The Df and A7ii are two completely different but competent cameras at what they do, but for your needs it does seem like the Df etches ahead.
I look forward to your impressions on the 300mm f/2.8 when used on a Df, feel free to email me.
Hi Matthew,
I have used the DF extensively, and first of all, the 300mm f2.8 is sold. It performed brilliantly but it fell too short for birding, and too heavy in most use cases I have. If I had bought an A7 II I’m sure I would still have this lens due to image stabilization. The new 300mm f4 VR PF lens from Nikon is quite interesting (as its very light weight, small and has VR). It costs 1000$ more than what I want to pay however.
Other ais or series E Nikons perform brilliantly on the 16 megapixel DF sensor. These include 28mm f2 ais, 75-150 series E and 180mm f2.8 ED ais. With some stopping down, corner to corner sharpness and very low optical aberrations are available in all of them. 180mm ED still steals the show.
The benchmark lens that I use is a Sigma 35mm f1.4 art which is in a different class of its own. Even though old Nikons don’t perform on the same level, they do not disappoint either and are more than usable for any work.
As for manual focus, it’s fine with lenses f2 and slower. F1.4 lenses are very hard to focus accurately without third party screens.
Good to hear from you again Nat. Even on cropped-sensor cameras I have found the 300mm f/2.8 to fall short for birds and the like. I use a 400mm f/2.8 now on a NEX-7 when I need the reach and speed, but it is a heck of a lot heavier than the 300mm. Your only option for super telephoto without getting too heavy is to go with slower zoom lenses (or perhaps the 400mm f/4.5 AI-s?). The high-iso ability of the Df can offset the need for shallow apertures, but then you do lose some depth of field control.
It’s always a balance. 🙂
I’ve got one but I need a case for it. What case can I use?
Hey there Pat, you’ll need the CT-302 for this lens.
Hello,
Do you have any experience with the Nikon tc-14b mounted on the 300 f:/2.8 EDIF?
Hey there Casey, I do not, but a good friend of mine in NZ has used that teleconverter and says it does a decent job. Stay away from the 2x teleconverter, too much quality loss. You’ll need to stop down to f/4 (equiv. f/5.6) to get decent sharpness with the tc-14b.
Very nice! I got a 300mm f2.8 that I like. I have Wimberly that is helpful. Paul
I’ve seen a few working sports photogs using those with the big 400/500/600mm lenses. They look very tempting, especially if I did more exclusive telephoto work.
Hi Matthew…i want to buy a good 300mm with my nikon d810…im thinking between this nikon 300mm f2.8 and nikon 300mm f/4 af-s…wich is better at your opinion in terms of sharpness/contrast? Thank you
Hey there Nasos, the D810 is a high-resolution camera that demands a lot from the lenses in front of it. At the time of me writing the 300mm f/2.8 review I believed it to be plenty sharp. By all means, it is a good performer (especially for the price you can find these at), but at high resolution you’ll run into significantly more aberrations, notably purple fringing. Before I sold mine to upgrade to the 400mm f/2.8 AI-s ED, I found I had to stop down to at least f/4 to control the fringing enough to keep it from being a headache in post-processing. I have heard the 300mm f/4 is a fine lens, though. If I was in your shoes, I would consider the route I took to really capitalize on the extreme telephoto route without breaking the bank too much. That is, I have a 200mm f/2 AI-s and 400mm f/2.8 AI-s. The shorter 200mm at f/2 provides a very unique look wide open that few modern lenses can provide, and the longer 400mm f/2.8 is sharper and exhibits less fringing wide-open than my 300mm f/2.8 did at f/4. No small feat.
To each their own though, I hope you enjoy whatever lens(es) you end up with!
Hi…i bought this lens at last (nikon 300mm f2.8 ais) used for about 500$ for my nikon d810 but as i used it i noticed possible decentered problem of the lens…when i shoot landscapes with aperture between f2.8 to f5.6 with precise focus in the center the bottom right and left of the image appeared blurry…it is not very noticable from f8 and above…is this common with that lens or it is a problem?what do you think..thank you
Here some samples:
Nasos it’s great to hear from you, $500 is a pretty good price for the lens, I think that’s less than I paid for my beater copy. It’s a little too hard to tell if your sample images are suffering from decentering or just regular f/2.8-4 corner sharpness issues. I would guess it’s the latter since the lack of detail in the lower corners is symmetrical. Keep in mind that the d810 is a very high resolution camera that can bring out the best and worst a lens has to offer.
In this case I think you have too much camera for your lens, in a sense. When I shot my copy on aps-c (my old NEX-7), I didn’t get to see any corner sharpness issues because at the point in your samples where the aps-c corners would be, it’s still sharp.
Stopping down to f/8-11 may just be your best bet if you want to continue doing landscapes with the lens. Another viable option to help with sharpness is to shoot on a tripod and merge a few images together that essentially would enlarge the sharp center area. For instance in your first sample, maybe try shooting at each of the four corners, then merge it with the shot you have. If the merging algorithm is doing its job correctly, it will choose the sharpest parts in the final image.
Not ideal, but again we’re dealing with very old lenses here on a bargain! Apologies for the late response. Keep on shooting!
You do realize that the D810 can take care of fringing right in the camera right? And if you use PS CC it does an outstanding job of removing fringing as well.
Good suggestion Scott. Photoshop and Lightroom’s fringing removal I find to perform the gamut from perfect to kind of crummy. Really depends on the scene and the amount/kind of fringing. If it’s less than a few pixels I find the program can usually do a good job without any color artifacting. Bigger fringes tend to gray out edges too much in my experience. Haven’t used the function much in a year or so, so I hope it’s improved a bit!
Hey there Nasos, the D810 is a high-resolution camera that demands a lot from the lenses in front of it. At the time of me writing the 300mm f/2.8 review I believed it to be plenty sharp. By all means, it is a good performer (especially for the price you can find these at), but at high resolution you’ll run into significantly more aberrations, notably purple fringing. Before I sold mine to upgrade to the 400mm f/2.8 AI-s ED, I found I had to stop down to at least f/4 to control the fringing enough to keep it from being a headache in post-processing. I have heard the 300mm f/4 is a fine lens, though. If I was in your shoes, I would consider the route I took to really capitalize on the extreme telephoto route without breaking the bank too much. That is, I have a 200mm f/2 AI-s and 400mm f/2.8 AI-s. The shorter 200mm at f/2 provides a very unique look wide open that few modern lenses can provide, and the longer 400mm f/2.8 is sharper and exhibits less fringing wide-open than my 300mm f/2.8 did at f/4. No small feat.
To each their own though, I hope you enjoy whatever lens(es) you end up with!
Don’t feel bad, ALL of my Nikkors from 6mm fisheye to 600mm super telephoto are manual focus! You can have your AF lenses!. My D700, D7100 and D850 all have microprism/split image screens in them. I also have this lens and absolutely love it! It is super sharp, even wide open, flare is non-existent and focus is very crisp due to the high contrast and ED elements.
Lucky! I haven’t had a chance to use a split-prism viewfinder on a modern DSLR before I started using mirrorless cameras. Glad you got a good copy of the 300mm, because upon comparison to my 400mm f/2.8, I feel it has more sharpness/flare issues than it probably should.
How do you like your 600mm? Is it the f/5.6 AI-s ED?