Nikon 300mm f/4 AF vs. Nikon 300 f/4 AF-S

Does anyone have any real world experience using the above 2 lenses?

I have the Nikon 300mm f/4 AF and am considering upgrading to the AF-S
model. I use it primarily for action sports and wildlife (birds mostly)
using my D2Xs.

Any feedback would be most appreciated.

TIA---

 

I've owned both, and both are great lenses! The AF-S might have an
advantage to you because it's focusing is quieter, using Nikon's Silent
(ultrasonic motor in the lens). Other than that, I don't see a compelling
reason to change.

There is a great comparison by Thom Hogan here:

http://www.bythom.com/300AFSlens.htm

Bill Crocker

 

Oops! That should have read "Silentwave", not Silent. My spell checker
clobbered it, and I was too tired to catch it.

Bill Crocker

 

Bi Bill,

Yes, the SilentWave motor is EXACTLY the reason I'm considering upgrading.
Is the Silent Wave version that much faster? What body do you use yours on?

TIA---

 

No direct experience. Reviews an be found here
http://www.naturfotograf.com/lens_tele.html
Really didn't like the tripod collar design on the AF-S.

 

I have both of them.
imho the AF-S serie is more fun to use as it is lighter and focus faster too
[ on D1X / D2H ]
but i don't know its me or just my feeling , but I think the AF serie is a
bit sharper.

Why don't you have a look at the AF-S 400 /2.8 ? for action and birding
snaps it is a better option
[on a monopod too btw ]

 

Normally AF-S will focus faster than an AF, but in the case of the 300mm
f/4's, I didn't see a big difference.

Bill Crocker

 

I was using a D200.

Bill Crocker