• Welcome to BirdForum, the internet's largest birding community with thousands of members from all over the world. The forums are dedicated to wild birds, birding, binoculars and equipment and all that goes with it.

    Please register for an account to take part in the discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.
ZEISS DTI thermal imaging cameras. For more discoveries at night, and during the day.

D300 and 300mm f4 upgrade opinions needed (1 Viewer)

BillN

BillN

Well-known member
I have been using a Nikon D300 with Nikon 300mm f4 for sometime now. I also have a Nikon TC x1.4.
80% of my shots are hand held, when walking around with my bins.
20% are tripod
I tend to only use the TC x 1.4 on a tripod set up

I have a good tripod and head ….. although I could upgrade the head to maybe a Manfrotto 393, which looks exceptional value.
I have tried the Nikon V1 with FT-1 for a couple of weeks now, for me, IQ not great, use on tripod fine but as a carry around I’m not too happy…… so I have discounted this for serious use.

I think the D300/ 300mm f4 combo is very good, the lens is marvellous, but I feel I would like to move up and maybe I need more pixels on the (cropped) image and a better low light performance, (or VR).
I really enjoy bird photography and think I need to spend some money and upgrade.
My choices seem to be, Nikon 300mm f2.8 VR . £2.5k used, £4k ish new
D7000 or D600, (to use in DX mode).
(I planned to buy a D7000 but feel I need to look at the D600)

What do you guys think and or recommend. I want to stick to Nikon as I have been a Nikon user for years and the best hand held performance is what I am after at this time. Is the 300mm f2.8VR a lens that can be hand held for a few hours? - pity that there is not a new 300mm f4 with VR!
 
Last edited:
Hi Bill.

As a relatively newbie to Nikon (after Pentax and Olympus) I have both the D800 and D600 with the Sigma 500/4.5 HSM (bought used for just over $3k and an extremely sharp lens) and last week the Sigma 120-300/2.8 OS HSM ($2.2k new) after reading 130+ pages of the 194 page thread on this lens on POTN, along with the Nikon x1.4 II and Sigma 2.00 TCs.

POTN is basically a Canon users forum but there are a few Nikon users on there too. The shots from the 120-300 and 2.0 TC are simply amazing and a large part of the reason I bought the 120-300 (despite it's checkered reliability history). Basic tests show it really is as sharp as it looks on the web. I'll be trying it out for real on Saturday (instead of the 500mm) but I recommend you take a look at reviews etc. on this lens. Most agree that it is better than the latest Canon 300/2.8 with a x2 TC whilst matching it with a x1.4 and just losing out bare.

The 120-300/2.8 weighs around the same (2.9kgs) as the Sigma 500mm (3kgs) and also the same as the new Nikon 300/2.8 VRII (2.9kgs). I wouldn't consider any of them hand holdable for a day's walk around birding, I use the 500mm on a monopod which goes on my shoulder and the 120-300 will be the same (with a Black Rapid attached for redundancy).

D600. If you use it in DX mode then of course it is the equivalent of the D7000 though maybe with larger photosites it will be cleaner at high ISOs and it has a fantastic DR. It also has a more advanced AF system (not as good as the D800 but still, although similar, an improvement over the D7000) and of course even if used in DX mode then you'll still have the other advantages the D600 offers over the D7000.

The D800 however is a superb camera if you do a lot of cropping - that resolution gives you headroom to crop and crop and crop and acts like a longer lens. There are lots of samples of 100% crops that are a lot more than just printable.

I wouldn't worry too much about a VR version of the 1.5 kgs 300/4 - if you are shooting at high SS then the VR isn't of much (any ?) real benefit until the light fades. Though you know this lens a lot better than most of us. The OS-less Sigma 500/4.5 I use gives me far more keepers on a D800 than the superb DA*300 ever gave me on the SR body of the Pentax K5.
 
Last edited:
Thanks Frogfish

interesting alternatives

I know that I said that I want to stick to Nikon, but I have just been reading an article by a guy who started with Nikon then moved to Canon as he felt that their lens range was better value
 
Mmmm, I think you have several issues to address, to my mind anyway.

I think your D300 is good enough, more pixels do help, and the only current crop camera that will do that is the D7000, but then you going to go from 51 to 39 autofocus points. I wont go D600, that only gives you around 10Mpix on the cropped visual, and its not enough!!! If you go full frame you need minimum D800, but my money would rather go to longer reach glass, ie 500 or 600mm. The 300mmf2.8 with 2 x TC is getting good reviews and that will also be an option.

Good luck in your search.

Regards
 
Last edited:
I can definitely recommend the 300mmf2.8 for use with a D300. It's really excellent on its own. Also, when you add a TC-20E III 2x teleconverter, it provides a very manageable 600mm F5.6 that still gives very good results.

I personally do not see the D600 as a suitable upgrade to the D300 - lower-spec focussing system and body, fewer pixels in DX mode and the need to use a cropped DX zone in the view finder. So I'm sticking with the D300 until there's the next top-line DX upgrade - hopefully sometime this year..
 
Last edited:
I have all the Nikon bodies referenced in this discussion - plus the 300 f/4. I have to agree with Roger - I'd sit tight a little longer as none of the current products is truly compelling if you need more reach and are already using a teleconverter.

The D800 is truly spectacular - but only if you have enough reach in your lenses. Since you are already stretching for reach with a DX body and a teleconverter, it just won't be long enough. The advantage of the D800 is that image quality is truly excellent. And using longer lenses on an FX body means you'll have soft out of focus backgrounds.

The D600 is similar to the D800 - just a little lower price point. There is a significant drop off in the AF system - it's better than the D300 but not as good as the D800 or D4.

I just can't get sharp enough images on the D7000 at the long end. Up close it's fine, but long lenses at a distance are a bit of a problem. And it reveals issues with optics. It's an upgrade to your D300, but a small upgrade and not really compelling.

The 300 f/4 is a good lens. You'll need to consider something like the Nikon 200-400, Sigma 50-500, or something similar to add reach and maintain image quality. I wouldn't trade the 300 f/4 for a zoom that only reaches 300mm. And the 300 f/2.8 is not really a birding lens.

It's quite likely Nikon will deliver an upgrade to the D300, an upgrade to the 80-400, and a VR version of the 300 f/4. We've been expecting these items for years and probably won't get all three. But it sure seems likely we'll get at least one of these and you'll want it.

So bottom line - if you really need to spend money, invest in a workshop or trip and wait for the right gear later in the year.
 
ericbowles said:
I just can't get sharp enough images on the D7000 at the long end. Up close it's fine, but long lenses at a distance are a bit of a problem. And it reveals issues with optics.
Click to expand...

Autofocus fine tune!!. I had same problem, and eventually ended up at -19.. Now its just spectacular.

Regards
 
Isn't the far better high ISO performance of the D600 going to help significantly over that of the D300 when it comes to hand held shots of small birds resulting image images that have been cropped significantly.

i.e. I will be able to shoot at far higher ISO speeds with the D600 versus the D300 and get the same or a better IQ ......... I will be able to shoot at higher shutter
 
I think if you intend on shooting supertelephoto lenses handheld a 24mp camera is not what you want, especially if you expect to crop significantly.
 
Very difficult, my standard answer would be buying the D800 would solve most of the problems, but that’s not the best solution.

I can’t see what’s wrong with your present equipment; change is good only if it suits your needs.

The D800 is the best camera you’ll buy, but it’s not for hand holding with larger lenses, the biggest lens I hold is my 200mm and I bin a high percentage of these.

I don’t have the F4 300mm so I can’t tell you of the combination but I suspect the results will be similar to my 200mm. I don’t see the need of a converter with the D800, it’s just another problem that can go wrong.

The D600 is a slimmed down version of the D800 and by all accounts very good, but you still have the same issues as the D800.

If you do go for one of these, then you’ll have to seriously look at you computer option, they are huge files and unless you are ruthless in assessment of your images, your storage problems increase.

You can never second-guess Nikon, but they will probably release a DX next time, maybe patience is the answer this time.
 
pe'rigin said:
Very difficult, my standard answer would be buying the D800 would solve most of the problems, but that’s not the best solution.

I can’t see what’s wrong with your present equipment; change is good only if it suits your needs.

The D800 is the best camera you’ll buy, but it’s not for hand holding with larger lenses, the biggest lens I hold is my 200mm and I bin a high percentage of these.

I don’t have the F4 300mm so I can’t tell you of the combination but I suspect the results will be similar to my 200mm. I don’t see the need of a converter with the D800, it’s just another problem that can go wrong.

The D600 is a slimmed down version of the D800 and by all accounts very good, but you still have the same issues as the D800.

If you do go for one of these, then you’ll have to seriously look at you computer option, they are huge files and unless you are ruthless in assessment of your images, your storage problems increase.

You can never second-guess Nikon, but they will probably release a DX next time, maybe patience is the answer this time.
Click to expand...

Thanks

My reasoning is:

The D600 is reported to have far less noise at high ISOs than the D300, with the consequence that the D600 has a far better high ISO performance
I have no problems hand holding the D300 and 300mm f4 in reasonable light, (i.e at an acceptable shutter speed for a prime non VR lens)
With the D600 my light options uses will be far more flexible allowing me to hand hold the lens at reasonable shutters speeds in lower light.
The cropped image of the D600 should be better than the cropped image of the D300? ....... even in DX mode on the D600
I have no computer problems with circa 20 meg images but would baulk at the size of the D800 images.

For £1,500 I reckon that the D600 is the best value for money upgrade I could achieve at the present time ....... apart from the DX D7000, which is selling at a bargain price. I believe, from what I have read, that both will put more pixels onto my cropped images that the D300, plus both have better high ISO performance.

As I said I want to stick to a hand held rig as tripod work is really tedious and to be realistic I am never going to or want to achieve "pro results". This would rule out moving to 400mm or 500mm none VR, even if I set aside the (much) higher cost consideration.

I find my V1 only useful, (comfortable), with my 70 300mm f5.6 VR Nikkor - handling is acceptable and IQ is OK .....(versus using it with my 300mm f4 and the 70 200mm f2.8 VR)
 
Last edited:
ericbowles said:
The 300 f/4 is a good lens. You'll need to consider something like the Nikon 200-400, Sigma 50-500, or something similar to add reach and maintain image quality. I wouldn't trade the 300 f/4 for a zoom that only reaches 300mm. And the 300 f/2.8 is not really a birding lens.
Click to expand...

I agree with Eric that the 200-400 lens is excellent (wish I could afford one!), but not about the 300 f/2.8 not being a birding lens. It's brilliant. OK you need to switch teleconverters to get full flexibility but, having a TC-14E II 1.4x converter like you as well as the new TC-20E III 2x, I have the choice of 300mm f/2.8, 420mm f/4 and 600mm f5.6, according to distance and amount of light. It's light enough to hand hold (though I do use a monopod or tripod for best results) and suffers very little loss in quality from the converters. IMHO it's the most portable and affordable way of getting to 600mm in the Nikon line, and fine to carry around on hikes along with bins and scope - unlike my previous pre-VR 500mm f4.0 which never got far from the car! Finally, if you do eventually give up on DX and switch to FX, it's more than sharp enough for the D800..
 
RogP said:
I agree with Eric that the 200-400 lens is excellent (wish I could afford one!), but not about the 300 f/2.8 not being a birding lens. It's brilliant. OK you need to switch teleconverters to get full flexibility but, having a TC-14E II 1.4x converter like you as well as the new TC-20E III 2x, I have the choice of 300mm f/2.8, 420mm f/4 and 600mm f5.6, according to distance and amount of light. It's light enough to hand hold (though I do use a monopod or tripod for best results) and suffers very little loss in quality from the converters. IMHO it's the most portable and affordable way of getting to 600mm in the Nikon line, and fine to carry around on hikes along with bins and scope - unlike my previous pre-VR 500mm f4.0 which never got far from the car! Finally, if you do eventually give up on DX and switch to FX, it's more than sharp enough for the D800..
Click to expand...

Thanks Roger

most of my bird shots are taken in and around our garden and woodland, (we live in rural France), or on my morning and evening walks, I think that we are quite lucky bird wise out here in SW France as we are also close to a "migration route". I take my bins and have tried a tripod and monopod but both spoil the experience for me, (and I certainly get complaints from my wife). We tend to go on holiday now and again and the same goes, I do not want a tripod or monopod to spoil a good walk or detract me from the use of my bins.
Sometimes I set a tripod rig up in the garden etc., usually early morning in spring and summer and sit out there with a cup of tea and the odd croissant and then my images really improve, (must be the croissant!).
I really like the 300mm f4 ..... it is a star of a lens for the money ..... but sometimes in winter and when trying to get a shot of a bird, (to ID later), in dark undergrowth, there is just not enough light, (we all know the feeling - seen something special and could not get a good shot because the shutter speed was not high enough - 95% of the time I use Aperture priority mode, .... so I need to do something ........ also with my D300 I hardly even seem to venture above ISO 400, sometimes I hit ISO 800, but not very often.... as I do not feel confident with the image produced.

I think the next time I'm in the UK, in a few weeks time, I'll look at the D600, D7000, (what puts me off is the handling/button/menu use, compared with the D300), and decide which to get. I'll also look at the 300mm f2.8VR, if I can find a dealer in the stock with one in stock, ........ then if I reckon the 300mm f2.8VR is the way to go I'll look for a good used model.

Thanks all for your comments
 
Last edited:
If you want a seem less upgrade consider a D700 it will outperform the D300 but handles and feels the same
 
Bill,
If you are not happy with the D300, try/look at the Canon 7D and the 100-400 IS, or the very popular 400/5.6, if you can't get on with that or the D300, take up wine making.
 
I like the D800 on the 300/4 AFS + 1.4x as my favorite "walk - around " combo. You can shoot up to iso 3200 comfortably and you're getting "effectively" a 2x magnification over the D300 ie. a 600/4 AF +1.4x . A monopod would help for stability though as the D800 is not so forgiving of camera shake but you would be getting one the best cameras out there.
You will be blown away by the images you will get with a 35/50 mm lens on it.
Neil.
 
BillN said:
I really like the 300mm f4 ..... it is a star of a lens for the money ..... /QUOTE]

Sound reasoning by everyone, still not an easy choice.

I like Steve's idea of the D700, but can you get hold of a new one?

Neil walks around with the combo, and his results are excellent. And I would second his thoughts on the D800, it will knock your socks off.

I know where Eric is coming from with the 400mm zoom, one heck of a lens combo.

The D600 does seem to tick a lot of boxes, you'll never get a perfect camera, sometimes it pays to wait, but life's too short for that and it's so enjoyable just taking images out in the sunshine....go for it!

Nikon not Canon!
Click to expand...
 
At my wits ends, after reading as much stuff on the internet as one can take, this is my conclusion

what I would like over my D300 is better low light and ISO performance ....... then I can then get more shots at acceptable shutter speeds and the high ISO shots will be better quality than the D300.

I much prefer the handling of the D300, (and therefore the D800), over the D7000, (and therefore the D600), and certainly over the V1 which has similar handling traits to the D7000, which for me are hardly acceptable.

So it looks as if there is not a body out there for me apart from the D800 in crippled DX mode as I would expect the replacement for the D7000 will handle like the D600 and D7000.

So I started by feeling that the D7000 was the way to go, then I felt that the D600 would be a better choice, now I'm into the D800 to use in DX mode - bloody Nikon, are they doing this on purpose .......... all I want is a DX replacement for the D300 with better high ISO and low light performance ...... but it looks like this body will never be made.
 
I just sold my D300 and in packing it up I realised how great it felt in the hand compared with the D7000 which I use at the moment - robust, chunky, and quality build - sad to see it go.

There is now talk of the D7000 replacement appearing within the next few months.... you could wait for that although I suspect it will be a relatively small body again.
 
BillN said:
what I would like over my D300 is better low light and ISO performance ....... then I can then get more shots at acceptable shutter speeds and the high ISO shots will be better quality than the D300.

I much prefer the handling of the D300, (and therefore the D800), over the D7000, (and therefore the D600), ..
Click to expand...

The D3s or D700 would be your best bet for handheld use then. Again, it's not a good idea to shoot a D7000, D600, or D800 handheld at supertele focal lengths if you really want CONSISTENT IQ. Sure you may pull out a few keepers, but as the saying goes "even a broken clock is right twice a day."
 
Warning! This thread is more than 11 years ago old.
It's likely that no further discussion is required, in which case we recommend starting a new thread. If however you feel your response is required you can still do so.

Similar threads

shrek48
D7200 + sigma + TC ?
Replies
3
Views
744
gerald762
gerald762
W
Considering a Partial Camera Upgrade - D500 w/ 200-500mm lens
2
Replies
34
Views
4K
BriLee
B
C
Upgrade 128 RC head or no?
Replies
5
Views
532
Chris C
C
Andy Hall
Sony FE 300mm f2.8 OSS G Master Lens
Replies
10
Views
2K
dakuan
dakuan
Steve Heath
OM-1 with Olympus M.Zuiko 150 x 400mm TC Pro
Replies
12
Views
3K
DCC1976
D

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Back
Top