• 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.

Nikon 300mm f4+1.7TC vs Sigma 150-500 (1 Viewer)

Like to see the examples, my 300/4 is incredibly sharp and I use it quite a lot for butterfly / damselfly photography, as well as a walkabout lens with a 1.4 attached. Looking at these forums I do sometimes question quality control from manufactures, recently another member had indicated that he had too fine tune his body with a 300/4 to maximise the sharpness.
 
How does the new Sigma do at distance over water.? I have the old 170-500 and I found over about 30 metres it was a letdown. I used the Sigma for garden/park photography and the Nikon 300/4 + 1.4x or 1.7x at the wetlands/mudflats.
Neil.


v30rider said:
I have the D90 and have both the sigma 150-500 as well as the nikkor afs 300mm/f4 with nikkor tc-14eII. I was suprised to find that at 300mm, the sigma is quite comparable in sharpness to the nikkor prime (even wide open -f6 on the sigma pretty much equal to f5.6 on Nikkor....better than f4 on Nikkor). That really blew me away. Also found that at 420mm, the nikkor with 1.4tc is much sharper than the sigma 150-500 when using larger aperatures. For example, nikkor + tc at f6.3 is much better than the sigma at 400mm at f6.3, and at f8, but at f11 the gap closes considerably with the nikkor + tc just slightly sharper.
As far as focusing speed, the nikkor without the tc is a bit faster than the sigma. The nikkor with tc is a bit slower than the sigma.

So Nikkor afs 300mm + 1.4tc pros vs sigma 150-500:
- better image at 420mm at larger aperatures (so considerably faster)
- excellent "macro" capability
- faster AF at 300mm (ie, without the tc)
- not as heavy
- more convenient lens hood

Cons vs sigma 150-500:
- nikkor 300mm + tc is more expensive
- nikkor 300mm + tc is a bit slower focusing
- Nikkor prime not considerably sharper at 300mm (you'd expect it to be)
- not as versatile as the sigma zoom
- no image stabilization
- loosing 80mm reach
Click to expand...
 
Duke Leto said:
Like to see the examples, my 300/4 is incredibly sharp and I use it quite a lot for butterfly / damselfly photography, as well as a walkabout lens with a 1.4 attached. Looking at these forums I do sometimes question quality control from manufactures, recently another member had indicated that he had too fine tune his body with a 300/4 to maximise the sharpness.
Click to expand...

I had actually just gotten this afs 300 lens (only had it a few days) and wasn't that impressed with it. After I read your post, I did a lot of shots and looked closely at the focusing. At long focal lengths, it looked fine but at minimum focusing distance (which I hadn't really done much of up to that point), the focusing is noticably off.....I didn't really notice a problem at longer focal lengths but perhaps its just enough to take a bit of the the crispness off the photos, not sure.
In any case, its gone back for exchange. I'll get the replacement in a few days and will let you know if the long end has improved or not. Thanks for your input.....(by the way, I'm using a d90 and don't have the option to fine tune the lens).
 
Last edited:
Hi,
Sorry to dig up an old post.
Im interested to know whats the best TC is for the 300mm F4?
I see you recommend the Nikon 1.4, what about the Kenko or the Sigma 1.4s? They just as good?
Also how would the x2 TC be on the lens?
 
TS446 said:
Hi,
Sorry to dig up an old post.
Im interested to know whats the best TC is for the 300mm F4?
I see you recommend the Nikon 1.4, what about the Kenko or the Sigma 1.4s? They just as good?
Also how would the x2 TC be on the lens?
Click to expand...

The Nikon 1.4x is the best out there, especially for Nikon lenses. The 2x won't AF reliably at f8, unless you have the new D4 or D800.
Neil
 
Thanks again Niel,

Ill keep an eye out and see what i can find.
Seen a Sigma for sale on here, cant seem to find any Nikon TCs second hand.
 
TS446 said:
Thanks again Niel,

Ill keep an eye out and see what i can find.
Seen a Sigma for sale on here, cant seem to find any Nikon TCs second hand.
Click to expand...

You're not likely too. Vary rarely sold as they are essential pieces of kit for long lens use. I have 6 , including a 1.6x , which I wouldn't part with.
Neil
 
I use a Nikon 300 F4 with 1.4 conv and agree entirely with Helios your keeper rate will go up dramatically.
 
I had a cheap 1.7x Promaster that AF'd with a D200 and a 70-300G. Currently I am having good luck with a Tamron AF 1.4 with a Sigma 300/4 macro. The Tamron AF 2x does not reliably work but manual focus does give usable images in direct sunlight. Undoubtedly, Nikkor TC's are far superior.
 
Last edited:
i m on da same league..after going through replies,it seems that afs300 f4 with 1.4x combo will b better than sigma150-500 even its equipped with OS :) one q i wud like to ask even sombdy considers its idiotic :p does this nikkor combo allow sufficient crop to compare with 150-500 at 500 end?keeping the sharpness usuable which one gives better reach?bydaway i hv seen many fantastic sharp photos shot with 150-500+d7000..moreover also seen good images clicked with 300f4+1.4x+d300s...does the body play some game with ultimate sharpness?
 
jack da ripper said:
i m on da same league..after going through replies,it seems that afs300 f4 with 1.4x combo will b better than sigma150-500 even its equipped with OS :) one q i wud like to ask even sombdy considers its idiotic :p does this nikkor combo allow sufficient crop to compare with 150-500 at 500 end?keeping the sharpness usuable which one gives better reach?bydaway i hv seen many fantastic sharp photos shot with 150-500+d7000..moreover also seen good images clicked with 300f4+1.4x+d300s...does the body play some game with ultimate sharpness?
Click to expand...

Distance and humidity would play a bigger role in sharpness and of course stability.
The difference between 430 mm (Nikon) and 500 mm ( Sigma) is not enough to worry about but the difference between f5.6 ( nikon) and f6.3 (Sigma) is. Autofocus on moving subjects at f6.3 would be unreliable, especially at distance, with most camera bodies. The new Nikon D800 will AF at f8 but the D7000 won't.
Neil.
 
The D7000 will actually focus at f/8 but it requires good light. Nikon is conservative and the reported limits are for reliable AF.

One clarification - the reported focus is usually for a lens wide open regardless of what aperture is selected. Most cameras will provide a wide open view through the viewfinder and you use the DOF preview button to see how it really looks. So a 2x converter on an f/4 lens is f/8 wide open - which is borderline on the D7000. Even if you chose f/11 for your aperture setting, the combination is f/8 wide open and should focus with good light and a good subject. My experience is when it comes to AF the center sensor is better than the surrounding sensors - and much better than the outer sensors. Darrel Young has documented that for the D800 and I expect it is the same for the D7000.

The Nikon 300 f/4 provides better image quality than the Sigma 150-500 even with teleconverters. The bare lens is clearly better, and nearly as good with the 1.4 teleconverter. With the 1.7 lens you have an effective 510mm - borderline on the Nikon but at the point where the Sigma zoom is losing quality as well so the Nikon is still as good or better (in my opinion :) ).
 
ericbowles said:
The D7000 will actually focus at f/8 but it requires good light. Nikon is conservative and the reported limits are for reliable AF.

One clarification - the reported focus is usually for a lens wide open regardless of what aperture is selected. Most cameras will provide a wide open view through the viewfinder and you use the DOF preview button to see how it really looks. So a 2x converter on an f/4 lens is f/8 wide open - which is borderline on the D7000. Even if you chose f/11 for your aperture setting, the combination is f/8 wide open and should focus with good light and a good subject. My experience is when it comes to AF the center sensor is better than the surrounding sensors - and much better than the outer sensors. Darrel Young has documented that for the D800 and I expect it is the same for the D7000.

The Nikon 300 f/4 provides better image quality than the Sigma 150-500 even with teleconverters. The bare lens is clearly better, and nearly as good with the 1.4 teleconverter. With the 1.7 lens you have an effective 510mm - borderline on the Nikon but at the point where the Sigma zoom is losing quality as well so the Nikon is still as good or better (in my opinion :) ).
Click to expand...

Eric,
I'd be interested in seeing your flight shots with the D7000 and 300/4 + 2x. Do you have a link to a gallery?
Neil
 
Warning! This thread is more than 12 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
747
gerald762
gerald762
E
Upgrading from Sigma 150-600 C to Nikkor 500mm PF
Replies
4
Views
2K
rezMole
rezMole
Musoman
Electrical contact problem ?
Replies
2
Views
798
Musoman
Musoman
T
Camera choice for birding around 3000 Euros with lens?
Replies
3
Views
1K
Tsvetan
T
Len Poxon
Nikon 500 F5.6 PF
Replies
6
Views
3K
The BulbMogul
The BulbMogul

Users who are viewing this thread

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