Yes I can, I was rapidly losing daylight, and was curious what the two f/stops looked like for my own satisfaction. So I will take more time this weekend and do both with a near far subject, at the various f/stops, all at the same 100 ISO. In the preliminary look I see a reasonable Bokeh not at all like the 500mm mirror lens which I did own for a short period of time. I have found that on the old 300mm f/11 is quite sharp, it seems that diffraction at that f/stop is not a problem with that lens even on the d800. But my preference is f/5.6 or f/8 on that lens. I think it has to do with it being a long lens and a true 300mm.
My tripod technique is exactly that, Steen, mirror up and a built in delay of at least two seconds. Plus yesterday I was trying my new tripod, an Induro, that only weighs with the head 4 lbs. As opposed to my Majestic that weighs 13 lbs. So tomorrow a long and fruitful test.
The new lens is not quite 200mm in length. I wish it had a built in hood like my 200mm and 300mm have, rather than the cheap new lens hoods that Nikon is so fond of. I did do a hand held comparison at 6400 ISO and the new lens was superior in low light, no surprise there. But outside handheld at 800 ISO the old lens was equal at a distance. I am always amazed at how sharp the old lens is.
So I will post this weekend.
My tripod technique is exactly that, Steen, mirror up and a built in delay of at least two seconds. Plus yesterday I was trying my new tripod, an Induro, that only weighs with the head 4 lbs. As opposed to my Majestic that weighs 13 lbs. So tomorrow a long and fruitful test.
The new lens is not quite 200mm in length. I wish it had a built in hood like my 200mm and 300mm have, rather than the cheap new lens hoods that Nikon is so fond of. I did do a hand held comparison at 6400 ISO and the new lens was superior in low light, no surprise there. But outside handheld at 800 ISO the old lens was equal at a distance. I am always amazed at how sharp the old lens is.
So I will post this weekend.