Nikon 120-300mm f2.8 REVIEW: The GREATEST Nikon Lens Ever Made, BUT...

[@froknowsphoto]

would you buy this lens or an entire kit of lenses?

[@harendotesabydos4619]

I would by this lens for my D850. But it is to expensive for me. So i stick to my 70-200 2.8 and my 200-500 5.6 for that range i need. But if i get a chance to sniff it, i will do.

[@AMGOSUK]

No -- I just sold off all my f-mount gear (40 items) and now only shoot Z-mount (pair of Z9) and the best Z-mount glass (including 400/2.8TC, 800/6.3PF and many more). For sports I would carry a Pair f Z9 with a Z70-200/2.8S and Z100-400/4.5-5.6S. I might also carry the 400 and a wider lens 24-70//2.8S and probably a fisheye as well. Only the 400 "needs" a monopod. I carry 2 ZTC14s so the 70-200 becomes a 90-280/4.0.

[@richcillessen972]

No, I would not bu this lens. Was tired of waiting for Nikon so I bought the Sigma version with the new FtoZ adapter and paired it with my Z 9. Great combo for football

[@RokDAWG1]

I'll definitely pass on that one. I'm waiting for Sony, Sigma or Tamron to bust out with a new killer mid to high focal length lens at a reasonable price.

[@chrishilton6378]

At that price point I'd take a hard pass. The Z 70-200mm with a TC1.4 gets you close to the sane reach with little to no IQ drop off for 1 stop. And at less than 1/3 the price. If you can tolerate the f4 you're set. Also if you can tolerate DX mode with the 1.5 crop you get more flexibility. I used to avoid DX mode in favor of cropping in post but it's slowly growing on me.

[@Joseph-iu6ip]

He continuously gets his best shots using the Nikon Z9 and yet throws shade every chance he gets.

[@hautehussey]

Nikon, if you’re listening, make an FTZ specifically for this lens that has a built in TC! That would be the ideal combination for a lot of sports.

[@marc5279]

thats a good one

[@AndySnap]

A lot of Nikon pros are still using D5/D6 ( I work alongside them) and will do so for another couple of years until the cameras are worn out. Pros don't buy kit on a whim like amateurs. So an F-mount 120-300 makes sense as it covers two Nikon user bases until such time that more Z bodies are being used, then Nikon can easily refresh the design for Z mount. But what a great lens for sports, a dream lens for me too.

[@michaelfullanaphoto7884]

I use it with the Z9 via ftz and love the results. I have owned the 400 2.8 FL E and all of the Nikon Superteles and this one is by far my favorite. The focus is blazing fast and the images are tack sharp at 2.8

[@barryscully1820]

I can't wait for someone to come out with a 120-300 again for mirrorless cameras. I used the Sigma with and without the Canon teleconverters and the one I had was amazingly sharp. The weight and slightly slower focusing speed was the downside at the time. This was a fantastic lens for shooting Owls since I was almost always in very low light and often needed the zoom. If the Nikon version you had is sharper than the Sigma was then that would likely be as sharp and the 300 prime...pretty amazing.

[@bspiers75]

"As they continue to come in my face". Jared is a legend, lmao. 😂

[@mikaels-p6765]

Honestly… the 120-300 with a d6 for soccer and hockey is a dream… super sharp and faster af than our 400 2.8

[@LopsidedAdventures]

I'd still buy that for the Z system and use it via the FTZ adaptor. That range is awesome, and at a constant 2.8 aperture, makes it a top notch lens even for the mirrorless Z system.

[@davidroseman3287]

add a tc and you’ve got a 240-600 f4

[@rivergate950]

@@davidroseman3287 that would be 5.6 not f4

[@RonEMarks]

I gotta say, after shooting mirrorless for the past 10 years, ending with canon R5, I finally decided to go back to DSLR. I haven’t been this happy with digital in years. I tried to like mirrorless and burned plenty of cash buying and selling cameras/lenses over the years. I simply prefer the OVF and the battery life of the DSLR. Not to overlook how it’s always ready to shoot. Whereas mirrorless is always waking up the EVF when I need it or staying on and burning more battery. I simply prefer the DSLR experience much more. So for me, I am very happy that there are some great newer options for lens rentals when I shoot events. I would never buy this lens but I plan to rent it often. Thanks for the review!

[@_systemd]

I went from dslr to mirrorless and while i enjoy the extra features getting me more/easier shots and I can't even complain about battery life or dislike of EVF, I feel like I went from being a photographer ("", hobbyist of course) to an "electronic gadget user" of sort. Speaking purely from feel perspective, I would prefer to go back to some 10yo DSLR.

[@kendall6030]

Won't be picking one of those up, but that's a heck of a lens. Thank you for the review!

[@csc-photo]

Fantastic images and what a monster of a lens. I wouldn't be surprised if Nikon produced a native Z version of this one, after all the time & work that went into the F version (assuming it can be re-worked for the Z mount easily enough?)

[@lifewithoutborders1348]

Z has bigger mount, plus the motor element they are using to move glasses in Z mount is different from F Mount. May be less research time than F but still good amount of time and money it will take

[@MTBD80]

I get why it's F-mount so that it will work on ALL the cameras. The only real downside is that you can't use it with the amazing Z TCs so hopefully there will be a Z version just for that.

[@XavierMinguellaPhotography]

You said that the Sigma 120-300mm f:2.8 HSM OS Sports it is some soft at full aperture but you could test a second hand (or even a new one of a store stock) with a Canon EOS R3, I've seen pretty good results with that lens, the first OS version it was not as good as the Sports version, I've read some tests with DSLRs but never in a R3, what do you think about?

[@peteryonemori]

I own it and its fabulous with my Z9 as well as the D6, replaced the 70-200 and 300mm2.8

[@Lino1259]

Will there be a 120-300mm 2.8 Z lens?

[@garynelson4485]

I still love my Sigma 120-300/2.8 OS lens with the Sigma MC11 adaptor on my A9 and A1. Mine is plenty sharp. I just wish Sigma would make it in E mount - Z mount and RF mount would be good also.

[@fildiablos]

Wondering if this would be comparable in quality to the Z70-200 2.8 w/2.0TC? It would give you 140-400 but of course loosing 2 stops of light. Definitely a lighter combo also.

[@summitbid]

I shot this lens on a Nikon z9 and it blows the z70-200 out of the water in image quality with or without the TC. It actually made me feel like the my shots with the 70-200 were not that sharp after I used it (which is, of course, not true, the z70-200 is very sharp). The Nikon 120-300 is the sharpest lens, zoom or prime, I have ever used.

[@rolandomunari588]

I have been using the Sigma (even with a 2x TC) both with a D4s and a D850 for a bit of everything: found it both snappy and sharp! I never tried the Nikon, but I find it hard to justify its price, considering it might be just marginally better than the Sigma.

[@billnault1379]

12:01 Phrasing!

[@sandb1867]

Good review. Watching this for the first time (2022-04-21), just after Canon announced the RF 100-300/2.8 for the same price. Canon has upped the game and produced a lens that could genuinely replace a 70-200/2.8 and a 300/2.8. Hope you get to review it.

[@rosscameron4219]

Great review but did you have music playing in the background the whole time?

[@texmex9721]

I had the Sigma Sport 120-300 f2.8 for a long time and loved that lens. The range was about perfect for baseball sitting near 1st or third base.

[@zacate96]

I would love(if possible) to have an updated review for the ''newer'' sigma 120 - 300 2.8 for us weird cannon shooters :D I do concert photographer and for a long time I wave consider getting it, but there are not so many reviews and its an expensive one big lens jaja

[@RECOCHARD]

I still use Reflex for mega zoom or long focal length primes. I do not like using evf/hybrid sytem for this purpose.

[@FOTO2VIDEO77]

Have kept my Nikkor 400mm f/2.8 E, 105mm f/1.4 E and have had '0' concerns using the FTZ II shooting baseball, track and field, softball, tennis and portraits with both of my Z9's. The Z9's autofocus is the sometimes unpredictable factor, not the 120-300mm. Also kept a D850 while selling the rest of my Nikon F farm to upgrade to the Z9's. Already have the 14-24z, 24-70z, 70-200z and the 50 f/1.8z... You make an excellent, logical argument against buying a "late" technology Nikkor F 120-300mm f/2.8... But... I shoot all men's and women's athletic events for a DII university and though it's going to take a year (if I'm lucky) for me to pay myself back, I sacrificed to purchase this "old" tech lens. So far this Fall it has been worth every penny for volleyball, soccer and football and I can't wait to drag it to hoops games too. It's so versatile and adaptable the only problem I have is learning how to use it effectively along with my Z9's. I never purchase equipment without considering the resale value and technology longevity, but all things being what they are, I was at peace pulling the trigger to buy this lens though I truly wish Nikon would've designed it in the Z-mount instead of the F and as someone else suggested, an added 1.4 teleconverter would've been icing on the cake. Yes, it's heavy and kinda awkward at times, but my 70-200 has been hanging out in the bag since I got the 120-300 due to the minimum focal length (70mm vs 120mm) being a tad longer and tighter. With the ability to switch between FX and DX on the fly with the Z9, the 120-300 gains more value and versatility when you can't be where you'd always like to be at the best time to be there. Yeah, I'm a croppin' sports shooter in camera and on the go! So, yes, I have the exact kit I need and need nothing else, and that's a great place to live in. I love this lens for what I do and this purchase/investment was a no brainer, even with the caveats you so clearly point to, and I see using the 120-300mm for a long time to come unless Nikon trots out a groundbreaking equivalent sometime soon. After all, this old F-mount 120-300mm works wonderfully on my D850 too! Bonus! Thank you, Jared. Greatly appreciate you!

[@williamjoseph6144]

Hey Jared !! Would love if you go do a full video on the process of exporting the image settings and how you print pics from the pro 1000... ... 😁

[@mromanelli]

i have the last sigma version 120-300 2.8 paired with a Z6II.... awesome!

[@Jimmy_Cavallo]

💥 I would have preferred the 200-400 f4 for this shoot.

[@jarlathmcnee3833]

I was wondering if the sigma 120-300 would work better with the new canon r7 or r6 since it has been 11 years since you reviewed it. Has auto focus gotten better? If you had the time it would be a fun comparison review.

[@alexChabakphotography]

I'm still waiting for my Nikon 10mm to 1000mm f/1.2 ED MC TC VR S Noct Silky Swift VCM ultra everything lens!!!

[@deingewissen_official]

Same

[@pierrevilley6675]

Dont forget the PF element and the nano coating, so it doesn't weight more than 400grams

[@michaelsurratt9593]

I have wanted that lens for years. I am hoping they make a native mirrorless version.

[@baljindersinghsidhu3959]

I'm using Tamron 18-400mm and happy using it on my Nikon D7500..

[@bradtrounson]

Long live DSLR. Still shooting with my D500 which still looks amazing and am planning a D850 which is still being sold by Nikon!

[@itsa_me_amikey]

Iv had my D850 for 2 years now and absolutely love it. I will have it for many many years to come....hard to beat it!

[@animestarlord9021]

I still have my old d850 and sometimes comes in handy but use my z9 over 99% of the time.

[@ctfxcplane]

Im still using my Canon 1 Dx and will continue to use DSLRˋs for a long time!

[@michaelcahill4534]

I still use my D7500s and will continue to until I save up enough to go mirrorless!

[@Ingo-xi8cj]

Jared, did you read the many good opinions about the Sigma 120-300, how satisfied the users are. Many write it's a plenty sharp lens and I have the same experience. A friend of mine happens to own the Nikon 120-300. Have not compared them thoroughly, but the Nikon is a tad sharper and seems to have better color and is better in Backlight situations. And the quality seems to be great. The Zoom Ring is much more smooth for example. But all in all the Sigma is just a fine lens.

[@GreenTekHaus]

I have the Z 70-200 f2.8 S lens, along with the Z 2X TC, and coupled with that lens, it works really well! Sure, it gets bumped up to 5.6 for the full 140-400 range, but it delivers such wonderful images on my Z6! I can get nice bokeh with that set up, in a lot of situations. Granted, the 2.8 of the 70-200 is better, but I just wanted to say that it's not a solution that doesn't work. It's a whole lot cheaper, too! The Z doubler runs just over $500, and as such, is a real bargain in order to create a similar lens/reach solution. Unfortunately, the one big con is that it can only work on 3-4 Z lenses, currently. The Z 70-200 f2.8 is one of those. I don't know what the others are, as I know it's not any of the other Z lenses that I have, currently. ...And no, I can't seem to justify that price for an F-mount lens. Now, if my job was strictly sports, and I had a Z9 from the company, and they offered to get the $10k lens for me, then I would use it. On my own, most likely not. My current set up is pretty sweet! Yes, even with the focusing capabilities of the Z cameras. I've learned to use the various "Continuous Focus" with Eye Focus, and the other solution is with the Focus Box with the shutter half pressed down so that it tracks and keeps the tracked object in continuous focus, -pretty well, to where I get consistent 95%+ keepers. The low light capability of my Z6 is still pretty good, compared to other offerings, and for my uses: Real Estate, Architectural, my sons sports (baseball and XC) along with Landscape and some Wildlife photography, it's a great set up! So much so, that I'm waiting for the next generation of Z cameras before looking to upgrade. Sure, I'd like a Z9, but my current solution is more than adequate. Another solution is the Sigma 150-600 Sports lens. I use it with my Z6 and my older D7100 (APS-C, 1.5X Crop factor) for wildlife and they work well together, too! I guess I am mentioning this here, because JP keeps bashing Nikon eye focus, but with the current focus system capabilities, it does work really, really well. The last firmware update also improved the "stickiness" of the eye focus capabilities of the system. I'm blown away how much Nikon still keeps improving my camera that I bought 3 years ago, now! I wish DJI and other drone (and other camera) companies would do the same, actually! Great vid, though, JP!

[@JGZphotography]

Well, I can understand soft image might be blamed on the Sigma 120-300 mm 2.8 as many users failed to understand the need microfocus their DSLR cameras to counteract front/back focusing. Microfocus is not in the dictionary for mirrorless. The Sigma 120-300 mm 2.8 Sport is tack sharp on my R3s, using with the EF/RF adaptor. I really think Nikon has made the 120-300 mm 2.8 for their loyal users, who balk at any third party adaptation. Oh well!

[@froknowsphoto]

Sounds way to complicated.

[@richardmurray1858]

sadly it doesn't look like canon users will even have the opportunity to 'balk' at third party lens use going forward with the RF mount. Oh well!

[@JGZphotography]

@@froknowsphoto Nah, shouldn't be TOO complicated for you, knowing the technology of DSLR mirrored focus mechanism vs mirrorless focusing.

[@alstuart8801]

I'd buy it... As im still using DSLR Nikons.. D4s and D5

[@JaysCashVault]

May I ask if you could make a video or a short on how to use your presets in light room?

[@goldentigers6722]

Are you taking stills from a video shot through that lens or were you shooting stills?

[@dmphotography.prints]

Those are fantastic photos! Great review 👏🏽

[@ryans_fotos]

Just buy a 300mm 2.8 and a 70-200 boom cheaper then the 120-300. I just saved you 5 grand.

[@The_CGA]

I just like shooting 300 primes anyway

[@hautehussey]

And add another z9 for $5500 and you haven’t saved anything! :)

[@lsaideOK]

Fro already went over the advantage this lens and one camera has over having two cameras and two lenses. It's as if people just watch bits and pieces of a video

[@IliasKoureas]

Well yeah but imagine telling the soccer player to not take the shot till you swap lenses

[@accooper97]

Not a sports photographer but I imagine it may not be best to switch between a 70-200 and a 300 when bases are loaded and it’s the end of the inning. That’s why you have a telephoto zoom

[@chennytango9298]

Canon’s new RF 100-300 2.8 is much lighter and shorter and is native mount to mirrorless. It is a beast on R3. I would pick that combo any day over Nikon Z9 plus FTz 120-300. And I am a NIkon user primarily. Just a sad reality. They need to make this into z mount lens.

[@thomaskay8596]

I’m rockin the Z9 with the sigma sport 120-300 OS for the exact reason you mentioned. $3500 vs $9500 is just too much to be first party. The sigma does dance photography and dance competitions perfectly for my needs. Super clean and clear and I’ll pocket the $6k savings for other gear.

[@thirty6shots]

12:02 I'm a child 🤣

[@peaceyoman123]

is this just me or do the images at 300MM look to have some lens distortion? timestamp 7:17, the wall looks to be bending.

[@froknowsphoto]

the walls on an angle.

[@lorenworthington8739]

The sigma 120-300 f2.8 was/is such a money maker for indoor court sports. Perfect range to differentiate those shooting 12-24 & 200mm.

[@disco4178]

12:01. What were they doing to you, Jared???

[@jss27560]

I was looking for your reviews of whether the sony or canon 120-300 f/2.8 but I guess they also didn't make them.

[@allangault9500]

Those baseball photos are great. Awesome pics. The colours are the best.

[@IamNoOne-001]

My dream lens is the 180-400mm f4 tc1.4. I wish they start making these with z mount.

[@DidierMOULINPhotography]

Yesterday I was at a Handball match with my D6 + 200mm f/2 and I was often too close. For sure next time I'll take the 70-200 but the idea of this 120-300 also came to me... up until I saw the price !!! 12,000€ in France...

[@DidierMOULINPhotography]

A 70-200 f/2.8 E FL paired with a D500 is like a 105-300 /2.8 … for the price of a D500 in fact…

[@deanpratley125]

Great review BTW

[@chrislognshot]

also gave my brother 70-200mm to use with teleconverter and 1 other lens other goodies to use

[@90sretroroaster]

You should've tried it on a nikon d5 or some older crop like a d500... D7200 maybe even? That what have been really nice. Anyone with me?

[@j.kimmer1509]

OH HELL NO, GET WITH THE Z OLD MAN. that D body auto focus sucks in 2022. Get with the times. People like you keep Nikon stagnant and will kill it off. Just my opinion.

[@90sretroroaster]

Come on! It will be fun! Indeed as a first test it's fine that he did it on the z9. But how fun would this be? It's meant for F mount in the end :))

[@froknowsphoto]

I can't record the evf on those.

[@RussellTracyPhotography]

@@j.kimmer1509 My D5 and 400 f2.8 or 200-400 f4 work just fine for NCAA and pro sports in 2022. Am I looking to move to the mirrorless line? Sure, but I'm in no rush as there's plenty of life left in the D5 and the Z9 is still backordered forever. Quite frankly the number of DSLR cameras I still see on sidelines is still quite high since most media outlets dont rush out to buy the latest and greatest as soon as it comes out. They upgrade overtime as gear wears out as its incredibly expensive for outlets to upgrade.

[@j.kimmer1509]

@@RussellTracyPhotography Thank you Russell for your comment and insight. I have great respect for you guys out on the sidelines capturing "glory" and history. Have a blessed day and may God bless you and your family in His grace forever.

[@PJ-om2wq]

A very mint D700 just came up on MBP for £300 so I grabbed it. Am I mad? I already have a D750

[@RobDTom]

Great video. Is it just me, or does the bokeh not look that great for such an expensive lens?

[@livejames9374]

It’s the preset, skittles. In his before and after bokeh always looks much worse after preset is applied.

[@RobDTom]

@@livejames9374 Interesting. Which part of that preset would cause that?

[@livejames9374]

@@RobDTom clarity most likely. I also noticed luminance/hue adjustments can make bokeh look wonky.

[@adrianmorton9598]

I have the sigma 120-300 sport f2.8 paired with my Z6ii use this for most sports I shoot and for a good percentage paired with the sigma 1.4 TC. Heavy lens but I picked mine up new for £2200 5 years ago still a firm favourite as so versatile just damn heavy . It's even a great portrait lens just shocks the subject when you pull it out of the bag. Z9 next year look forward to seeing how they work together.

[@SteelRiderCarl]

If I was rocking some serious Nikon kit (D500/D850/Z9) and I was a working professional photographer, then I definitely would! This is the kind of glass, though, that I would have to either be buying to photograph an assignment that promised to be really lucrative or as a reward for such a project.

[@GuidoNRicci]

Fro, love you man

[@victorlim5077]

Brilliant photos. Great combo.

[@tpjverhoevenphotography]

Jared: "ALWAYS USE THE LENS HOOD, PEOPLE" proceedes to not use the lens hood ;) Great review. I'm actually thinking of this one for running sports. 100-400 S is letting me down a bit, and the 180-400mm f/4E is awesome, but it's f/4 which proves sometimes a bit on the high ISO side in bad weather (by which I mean, really bad weather).

[@Krongchai21725]

This is my dream lens, seeking for a good price 2nd hand from Japan next year.

[@robinc-k7162]

Great video, thx! Have you, or anyone else on here, tried the Z9 with the 500PF lens?

[@AlanHoey86]

Matt Granger has a video or two featuring the Z9/500PF

[@robinc-k7162]

@@AlanHoey86 many thanks!

[@hautehussey]

Yes, it works great. I’m not sure what Jared is talking about when he complains about the adapted glass. Makes zero sense.

[@robinc-k7162]

@@hautehussey thanks very much for your input!

[@lorisfarringtonphotography]

Just the thing I need to see when looking to add new lenses to my kit. Great vid as always Jared 👍

[@heritagecbu]

I don't know i just have a 70-200 mm for sigma nikon and i am satisfied of what i have. Anyways , thanks for the reviews that your doing although i might not be to active lately due to health issue i still try to see your channel when i see an interesting topic for me to widen knowledge . Again, thanks 🤗💙🌻🖖🍀

[@joshuaconti989]

the alternate is the 300mm f4 D without IS that weighs half of what a 70-200 2.8 does and built in retractable lens hood. just making this comment cus i use it to effect.

[@thephotoyak]

You would think around 2018 or 2019 the design team would just integrate an adapter and make it for mirroless.

[@michaelfuller8940]

If I had a Z camera I would definitely buy the 4 lenses. Far more practical. 12:01 "Then as they continue to come in my face.." LMAO

[@PhilThach]

Great review, Jared.

[@beverlybasden2648]

Thank you !

[@ankurbagai1056]

If Sigma or Tamron makes ones, probably similar to what pricing they have for 35-150mm or 50-400 or 60-500mm, probably yes. If Sony for first party makes one, no, too hella expensive.

[@Upnorth_overland]

I wish Nikon would bring back the black and gold look!

[@fernandoisturizphotography]

I’d love to, but as you said, I’ll rather go with the rest of the lenses for the same price. It’s an awesome glass tho

[@ibp2007]

Yes I would. Will.

[@ItsAdam47]

hello mr polin

[@JV61]

Skiddles is always the icing

[@craigfuchs5464]

I know it’s a 5.6 lens but how does the Nikon 200-500 compare?

[@pierrevilley6675]

From my experience with the 200-500 i can say it is an unbelievably sharp lens for a zoom, but it is dark, has relatively slow AF, and is not so good at very long distances. This 120-300 is 4 times faster both in aperture and autofocus.

[@patrickroe3260]

Jared, please, please, quit saying DSLRs are dead. It's not what the camera companies are doing, but what photographers are doing. I have no way to be sure, but I would bet that dslr cameras still see greater use than mirrorless cameras do. Dslr cameras may eventually die. It will be some time however. OR Maybe the camera companies will figure out that both kinds of cameras have their places.

[@andreasgiobel6355]

For me, This is what Jared Polin are suppose to work with, not phones. I don't care If you do real world "Old Hasselblad X-pan or Mamiya 645" as a comparison to Z6 II. Its smoothing in the content that needs to feel right for your audince, as this Does. Thx ! Well Done.

[@drrrw]

Interesting lens for film, I would rent it.

[@maldzy]

Why don’t they reskin these optics into a Z lens and build the adapter in to it? Is there that much difference in long lens design when making things for the new mount? I know there are big differences with the wide angles but I bet they wouldn’t really need to change much to make it a full on Z lens. My old fav lens was the 120-300 os from sigma, great for ice hockey

[@pierrevilley6675]

They sure can do as Canon with their rf 600 and 400, slap an adapter on the back of the dslr version and call it a day. But i don't really see the point of doing this instead of just letting people use the FTZ...

[@thesharpercoder]

Skittles! Skittles! Skittles! I cannot lie. I love Skittles, too. Amazing stuff.

[@tward88]

I agree completely that it looks like an amazing lens for an antiquated system. Now if they had that for the Z mount, and it was $6k, I would be working very hard to get that money together. But I am selling off my f-mount lenses as I get Z lens replacements. I will not buy any more F mount lenses.

[@danmar94]

This is why I left Nikon. Only now are they just starting to fully get behind mirrorless. Unfortunately the rest of the manufacturers are now leaving them for dust.

[@breemetravel1746]

#RawTalkEpisode17BestThingSinceBreasts Go Stephen! Who's Jared?

[@mhammer5]

I bought a Canon AE-1 in 1979. I bought a Canon 100-300mm lens for $360, around $1,500 in today's dollars. This Nikon lens is up there in price.

[@malekith13]

Well.. don't look the new canon 100-300 F2.8 then ^^

[@112mikomiko]

Hallo Jared, ich fotografiere überwiegend Fussball, früher mit der Nikon D5 jetzt mit der Z9 irgendwie fehlt mir etwas bei der Z9 und mit dem S 100 - 400mm bin ich gar nicht zu frieden. Habe letzten Samstag mein altes 300mm 2.8 drauf gehabt und ich finde es ist viel besser, kann das sein. Mit freundlichen Grüßen B. Miko

[@russgifford]

I would consider buying this lens, but won't anytime soon. I will probably rent one perhaps this season in basketball to see how much I like it.

[@gustavo66bueno]

skip to 12:00 you’ll thank me later

[@Mohitsahachowdhury]

Love your work

[@chrislognshot]

i like skittles preset. but on my photo came to graining

[@gameshoes]

Jared spitting fire at men's football (soccer) players.

[@tonyblake8841]

Spot on with the soccer comments. Worldwide miracles are performed daily with men going down in almost a death throw only to recover like nothing happened minutes later. As you say, the women just get on with it.

[@dannydonohue2577]

Cool dream lens... so damn expensive though! -Good to know that this lens doesn't have a "horizontical" (4:05) fixing point like Canon ;0 .

[@EliudGilSamaniego]

i bought the 300mm vrii lens wich is suposd to have an incredible sharpness to use with the Z9, all i got to say is im very disapointed. If you compare the pictures with any Z lens, the 300 vrii pictures look soft and blurry, i have examples with the new 400mm f4.5 and the 70-200, i think all the F is now dead to me because all the Z glass is SO MUCH BETTER OPTICALLY, if you care about image quality, just uy Z glass now and skip F unless you really need the lens and its the only alternative

[@ThomasHalways]

At least one whole year passed since I watched any Fro video at all. I watch this by coincidence only. He has nice side of him. Fro: it's not Soccer, it's Football.

[@bubuli]

14:00 being able to buy X lenses for the price of this 1 specialized lens is a dumb argument.

[@SolamenteVees]

I'm already using an adapted lens on my Z because Nikon hasn't released a super telephoto yet. (despite that ridiculous roadmap from last week)

[@richardmurray1858]

They have released two of the best mirrorless telephotos already released?? the 400mm 2.8 (with TC) and the 800mm 6.3? What are you talking about?

[@livejames9374]

@@richardmurray1858 no to mention 100-400 and 400 4.5. Dude is confused haha

[@TheGreatLoco]

Nikon wanted to finish the F-system era, having better lenses than what Canon has for their EF-mount, since Nikon lenses were developed later. Long after buying a camera, people still buy lenses. At least, I do. Besides, Nikon has better cameras too, with the exception perhaps of the 1DX Mark III vs D6. I mean, for example 70-200mm 2.8E FL vs 70-200mm 2.8L IS III. Or 105mm 1.4E ED vs 85mm 1.2L II. Or 28mm 1.4E vs what? And the 120-300mm 2.8E FL vs 300mm 2.8L IS II. And the list goes on, with for example 300 and 500PF lenses vs the Canon 400mm 4.0 DO II. Few are the usable practical lenses where Canon EF is better, maybe the 35mm 1.4L II and the 100-400mm 4.5-5.6L IS II. And the 135mm 2.0L and 85mm 1.4L IS , if not counting the 105mm 1.4E ED. Plus the 100mm 2.8L IS Macro that’s only little better than the older 100mm 2.8G VR Macro. I mean, Canon is great too IMO, but it seems Nikon wanted to close the DSLR chapter with more modern cameras and lenses.

[@badger67]

Buy the lens? I can't afford to upgrade my D3000 🤣