Smallest, Lightest, decent 300mm?

uhoh7 · Joined: 24 Nov 2010 Posts: 1300 Location: Idaho, USA

I'm looking for the smallest lightest decent 300ish prime I can find.

all the f/4s seem to run near 1000 grams (could go slower)

suggestions?

TY sirs

ManualFocus-G · Expire: 2014-11-24

It's not particularly small, but I've found the Soligor / Hanimex etc. Tokina made 300/5.5 preset to be very decent and light. It has very little CA which is important in an old prime in my opinion. Can usually be picked up for very little.

Pancolart · Expire: 2013-11-18

Sure. Enna 5.6/300mm.

Lloydy · Expire: 2022-01-01

I have a Soligor f5.5 and a Tair f4.5, the Soligor is smaller and lighter, marginally, and a very good lens. The Tair is heavy, not a lens I put in a backpack very often! But it's a remarkable lens.
Both of these lenses however have one great advantage, they are cheap. Laughing

BRunner · Joined: 29 Jul 2009 Posts: 705 Location: Czech Republic

Revuenon or Tokina 5.6/300. Very sharp from wide-open (sharper than Tair @f5.6) and very light. Unfortunately, no APO, so CAs. But no worse than Tamron SP 5.6/300 54B. Which, of course, is very small and light too, but significantly pricier.

Attila · Expire: 2025-11-18

Tamron SP 300mm f5.6
SMC Takumar 300mm f4
Nikon 300mm f4.5 with ED even better

To which camera body ?
To mirror less Canon FD and Konica , Minolta MD can be also a great choice.

walter g · Joined: 20 Feb 2010 Posts: 2463 Location: NC, USA

If it will work on your camera body the Minolta MD 300 4.5 is only 705 grams.

uhoh7 · Joined: 24 Nov 2010 Posts: 1300 Location: Idaho, USA

visualopsins · Expire: 2025-04-11

uhoh7 · Joined: 24 Nov 2010 Posts: 1300 Location: Idaho, USA

revers · Posted: Fri Jun 10, 2011 11:02 pm Post subject:

You might like the Canon FD 300/5.6 version 3 (55mm filter), 685 gm.

Example shots:

1.

2.

3.

4.

uhoh7 · Joined: 24 Nov 2010 Posts: 1300 Location: Idaho, USA

another good suggestion---nFD version is 635 grams

fairly cheap.

another possiblity is the hexanon 300/6.3 which is 560 grams, but not easy to find Sad

still....the MD is looking like the best total package price/weight/speed/sharpness

hemisferico · Posted: Sat Jun 11, 2011 1:16 am Post subject:

The Olympus OM series 300mm F4.5 is not bad and relatively compact, I seem to recall B&H still had some new not long ago.

I've tried a lot of different 300s on both m4/3 cameras and Canon EOS cameras, if you can handle the weight the two best in terms of IQ (and CA correction) that won't break the bank are the Canon 300mm F4 L Fdn and the Leica Telyt 250mm F4 v2. YMMV.

aoleg · Joined: 22 Feb 2008 Posts: 1387 Location: Berlin, DE

Nikkor ED IF 300/4.5 is probably the lightest and most usable 300mm lens in practical terms. It's well-corrected for CA and features internal focusing (very light, convenient and short MFD). My next best compact 300mm would be Olympus Zuiko 300/4.5 (make sure to get one of the later versions, "MC" or just "Zuiko" without a preceding letter).

In comparison, SMC Takumar 300/4 was soft and full of CA, Sonnar 300/4 is outright huge (but very good IQ), non-ED Nikkor 300/4.5 is bigger, heavier and softer than the ED version (and longer MFD). No-name 300/5.6 lenses are mostly crap with few exceptions (Tokina is one of the better ones for example), but you'll never know. Yashica ML 300/5.6 was a disappointment sharpness wise, also it has very high contrast levels and is quite a bit lighter than similar lenses int his FL.

SXR_Mark · Joined: 12 Jun 2010 Posts: 506 Location: England

The Zuiko OM 300mm f4.5 is very sharp even wide open, but is not particularly light at ~1200g (with collar).

I use mine a lot with my Oly E3 for motor sports because it is the best 300mm I have tried. I use a monopod so the weight is not an issue. It does however suffer from colour fringing on high contrast edges in strong sunlight, for example bright reflections from metallic trim and around white identification numbers. At f11 this problem is effectively gone even in the strongest light (just a bit of purple tint to metallic reflections). In duller light, f8 is also trouble free. I don't tend to use it a faster apertures due to the limited depth of field as well as the risk of fringing.

The Tamron SP 300mm f5.6 is very light and compact and is also sharp, but suffers badly from colour fringing which is why I don't use it anymore. Contrast is also weak in bright conditions; it is unusable if you are facing the sun.

All other 300mm I have tried (Vivitar, Optomax, Promura) have been a waste of time and money.

I would stick to a "name" brand as cheap 300mm have always disappointed me. I would also like to try the Minolta you suggest; if you get one let us know how it performs. The Nikkor is another interesting suggestion, but Nikon lenses always sell for high prices in the UK. Revers' pictures with the FD 300mm look excellent. I couldn't use this on my E3, but for mirror-less it could be a good choice.

Whatever you get, let us know your thoughts as this is a subject that also interests me.

Mark

BRunner · Joined: 29 Jul 2009 Posts: 705 Location: Czech Republic

Above mentioned Revuenon/Tokina 5.6/300 wights only 660g. You can get it usually ~30€.

ManualFocus-G · Expire: 2014-11-24

The back up what others have said, the Nikkor ED-IF is pretty good but I wasn't impressed with the Zuiko. Fringing was bad! The Tamron SP 300/5.6 is stunning when stopped down to f8 (it fringes badly at f5.6, but gone at f Cool

.

Some images with the Tamron SP:

Vulture running by ManualFocus-G, on Flickr

Vulture taking off by ManualFocus-G, on Flickr

Vulture up close by ManualFocus-G, on Flickr

Siberian eagle owl portrait by ManualFocus-G, on Flickr

Alaskan bald eagle portrait by ManualFocus-G, on Flickr

Alaskan bald eagle landing by ManualFocus-G, on Flickr

Alaskan bald eagle in flight - coming right for us! by ManualFocus-G, on Flickr

SXR_Mark · Joined: 12 Jun 2010 Posts: 506 Location: England

@ MaunualFocus-G

Amazing shots Graham! Simply stunning. How on earth did you manage to get the focus spot on in the last shot??

Mark

ManualFocus-G · Expire: 2014-11-24

Cheers Mark Smile

The 5D has a big viewfinder, which makes it easier Wink

I really liked the Tamron, but I needed something which didn't fringe wide open, so I sold it Sad

Ended up buying a Canon 300/4L which is incredible Shocked

Soligor 300/5.5 stays in my cabinet as well.

mfkita · Joined: 29 Jul 2007 Posts: 222

The Nikon 300/4.5 Nikkor-H is the poor step-brother to the later ED, the more desired versions...you often see this 1kg 300 for under $100 on ebay...the top version is the "H" the bottom is the pre-ED AI version...I prefer the "H" because the focusing barrel is larger and closer to the aperture ring...this one was AI modified...

Here's a full frame shot with just some of the right side cropped to fit...

RioRico

I don't know if it's the smallest-lightest-cheapest etc, but my Chinon-made M42 Auto-Alpa MC 300/5.6 (610g, US$27) is pretty decent. It passed my PF test and doesn't show much CA as I recall, but I haven't shot it lately. (And I didn't bring it on this journey.) I'm more likely to carry my AF Pentax FA100-300/4.7-5.8 (380g, US$120). I'm even MORE likely to carry a T2 Sakar 500/8 (420g, US$13). Or, a bit shorter and faster, an M42 Enna Tele-Ennalyt 240/4.5 (300g, US$27). That Enna may be today's lens-of-the-day as I wander around the off-season ski ghetto I'm staying in this week.

cooltouch · Joined: 15 Jan 2009 Posts: 9096 Location: Houston, Texas

Any 300/4 or 300/4.5, I don't care who makes it, isn't gonna fit into your "smallest, lightest" requirement, so unless you have more wiggle room in that area than your requirement suggests, I'm thinking that any 300/4 -- or/4.5 -- will be too big.

I was gonna suggest the Tamron SP also, but I see a couple others already have. One thing to keep in mind about the Tamron is it includes a special spherical aberration compensation group so that its macro capabilities of 1:3.3 can be used without encountering this sort of optical problem. Any 300mm that can get down to a 1:3.3 ratio will have some other uses besides just long-distance stuff, IMO.

The Canon FD 300/5.6 is an excellent choice if it will fit your camera.

Here's something else to consider: a fast 200mm with a good quality 1.4x TC. Like the Canon 200mm f/2.8, for example. That would give you a 280mm f/4 and it would still be quite compact. Or if you're really into compact, the Canon New FD 200mm f/4 with a 1.4x will give you a very compact 280mm f/5.6.

hemisferico · Posted: Sun Jun 12, 2011 5:49 am Post subject:

cooltouch · Joined: 15 Jan 2009 Posts: 9096 Location: Houston, Texas

revers · Posted: Mon Jun 13, 2011 12:18 am Post subject: