nikon 80-400mm VR vs. Nikon 300mm w/ 1.4 TC

[brian kirksey]

I am at the threshold of pursuing a purchase of either one of these setups.
I have been reading for what seems like a straight week on the two lenses. I am just as confused after all the R&D.. My goal is to have better luck "birding" when I walk through regional parks.:2

I will be using this system with my D300.
The closest lens I own is a 70-300 VR.

Nikon 80-400mm f/4.5-5.6D ED Autofocus VR Zoom Nikkor Lens

Its variable power. It's a VR, its able to be used hand held.
A negative is I hear its slow as molasses (to focus).
It's Heavy
I hear its not an easy lens to use



Nikon 300mm AF-S fixed with 1.4 TC
Fixed lenses are sharp?
It's lightweight?
its still fast enough for birds in flight?




Can anyone guide me in a direction.

[Desmond Chan]

Nikon 80-400mm f/4.5-5.6D ED Autofocus VR Zoom Nikkor Lens

Its variable power.

:2

It's a VR, its able to be used hand held.

So can many other lenses without VR. Photographers have been photographing hand-held with lenses without any sort of VR or IS for many, many years before any sort of image stablisation technology appeared.

A negative is I hear its slow as molasses (to focus).

Heard that, too.

It's Heavy

You'll get used to it. Or use a tripod, monopod.

Nikon 300mm AF-S fixed with 1.4 TC
Fixed lenses are sharp?

Of course.

It's lightweight?

That's relative.

its still fast enough for birds in flight?

How about it's good enough to shoot flying swallows?

Can anyone guide me in a direction.

You knew the answer already: 300f4 it is.

[brian kirksey]

Yes, I suppose your right. I guess I kind of knew, just needed moral support. Couple of pats on the back really make one feel good when they are thinking about spending lots of $$$.. But it is important I confirm my beliefs with other people who have done what it is I am thinking about doing.. Thanks for the confirmation..

[Dan Brown]

Hi Brian. I think the 300 + converter would probably be better overall but I have the 80-400 and have shot many, many BIF's with it, including swallows. I haven't used the 300 but hear it is faster focusing. The one thing about the 80-400 that I would miss though, is the ability to zoom back when needed (which isn't that often). If I was using the 300+1.4, I would never remove it, to keep sensor dust down to a minimum, so 420mm it is!!

Hope to bump into you in the NoCal field someday!

[allanrube]

IQ is better on 300, even with tcs.

[Richard Stern]

Hi,

300 4f/4 AF-S is heavier than 80-400, even without the TC. Using the focus limiter switch AF isn't that slow on a D300, but the 300 f/4 even with 1.4TC is still faster. IQ and sharpness of 300 at f/4 is about same as the 80-400 at f/8,a nd Bokeh is better. 300 focuses closer (good for flowers and bugs).

I use 300 f/4 +1.4TC and a good quality p&s (currently Panny ZS7) when traveling, but I have also kept my 80-400 just in case!

Richard

[AJ Witt]

I have owned both of these lenses. I first got the 80-400. I had it for about a year and after missing too many shots due to the slow focusing of the 80-400 I sold it and got the 300mm f4. While I didn't think the IQ of the 80-400 was bad, I thought the 300mm was sharper, definitely focused faster and just seemed like a much better lens all around.