Tokina 300mm F/4 AT-X upgrade.

If you would like to post, you'll need to register. Note that if you have a BCG store account, you'll need a new, separate account here (we keep the two sites separate for security purposes).

T

Turberticus

Well-known member
Member's gallery
I've been using a pretty old screwdrive focus Tokina 300mm F/4 with my D7500 for a little over a year now. It has served me well, but I'm looking for something that's sharper, has less CA, and focuses quicker. The screwdrive focus mechanism slows to a crawl with a Kenko 1.4 TC attached which makes it difficult to track BIF. There is also some slack in the screwdrive focus mechanism which sometimes results in missed focus even with a stationary subject. When I can get a shot in focus I get pretty good results, but I think it's time I upgraded to something more reliable.

My budget is just under $1K. I've been waffling between the 200-500 and 300mm F/4 D AF-S + TC14II. Below are some pros/cons from the top of my head.

The 200-500 has the benefit of VR and 500MM reach, and I've read it's pretty sharp. Unfortunately I've read that there can be some variation in sharpness between copies.

The 300 F/4 D AF-S + 1.4 TC should give me comparably sharp results at 420mm F/5.6 to the 200-500, but in a slightly more compact and lighter package. I'm a little concerned about the documented squeaky AF-S motor issues, plus I'll be missing out on VR and 80mm extra reach.

Between these two lenses, which do you think would be best for BIF, as well as normal perched bird photography?

Thanks in advance!
 
Member's gallery
Turberticus said:
Between these two lenses, which do you think would be best for BIF, as well as normal perched bird photography?
Click to expand...
Between those two lenses I'd pick the 200-500mm f/5.6 lens hands down unless size and weight are major issues. I've owned both and IMO the copy to copy variation issue on the 200-500mm is a bit overblown on the internet or perhaps was an early issue as I've owned one and shot with a couple of others owned by friends and they've all been very sharp lenses. But of course buy from a reputable dealer with a good return policy so you can run the lens through its paces.

If the question had been 300mm PF f/4 vs 200-500mm f/5.6 then it would have been a toss up as I really love my 300mm PF lens for its small size and razor sharp optics but I'd definitely take the 200-500mm over the older 300mm f/4 AF-S lens. Don't get me wrong, the 300mm f/4 AF-S lens is a fine lens and very sharp but for birds flying or perched I'd take the 200-500mm any day over the older 300mm f/4.

I would say for folks on a tight budget trying to get into longer lenses the older 300mm f/4 AF-S lens is a great way to go but if it's in the budget the 200-500mm lens will open up more possibilities especially for smaller subjects.
 
Member's gallery
Thanks for taking the time to write this! Unfortunately my budget took a bit of a hit and ended up being less than I anticipated, so I think I will settle for the 300 F/4 D AF-S + TC14II. I've just gotten frustrated with the slow performance of the Tokina 300 F/4 which has cost me a few shots with its painfully slow autofocus. It's also a bit soft at F/4 which is only magnified at F/5.6 with the TC. I have to stop it down to F/5.6 without the TC or F/8 with the TC to get acceptable results. I rented the 300 PF + TC14III a few months ago and immediately noticed much better AF performance, not to mention being blown away by how sharp it was. The 300 PF seems to be pretty close to the 300 F/4 D AF-S as far as sharpness goes, so I'm hopeful this will be the right move for me.
 
Member's gallery
I had the AF-S 300mm F4D for 6 years, you won't be disappointed. AF takes a hit with the TC, but it isn't unusable. You just have to keep the shutter speed up to make up for the lack of VR. I'd say focus speed is on par or faster than the 200-500 VR.
 
Member's gallery
Been there done that Tokina thing ...and the heavy Nik 200-500 .go for a grey Tamron 100-400 and tap in console .. I have two one on a D7200 and one on a D850 Brilliant and light in the hand and wallet.
 
Member's gallery
I have both the 200-500 and the 300 AF-S w/ 1.4 TC. I use the 200-500 all the time, while the 300/TC sits in my office most of the time. The reasons are VR and zoom. Honestly, the 300 w/TC is a bit sharper, and certainly lighter. I'm quite happy shooting with either set up on my D500. So, I probably haven't helped your decision a great deal except that I'm pretty sure you'd be happy either way.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top