I don't know the 300/4.5, but I have had some issues with the FA*400/5.6 at long exposure times. Especially when rotated to portrait position. It performs better with the MZ-S than with Z-1, presumably because the MZ-S shutter is better damped.
Bjørn's work on Nikon lenses is very interesting, and most likely have transfer value to most brands. Jostein ----- Original Message ----- From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, February 03, 2004 5:11 PM Subject: tripod collar or not > > Alan Chan asked about the peculiar results he was seeing with the tripod > collar on his 300/4.5 (i.e. less sharp results for long exposures than > using the camera-body tropod mount). > > Apparently, it IS possible for a poorly designed tripod collar to be worse > than no tripod collar. Bjorn Rorslett, a Nikon guru, has been griping > about recent Nikon telephoto lens tripod collar designs for a couple > of years, saying that they are too flexible and poorly placed and > actually multiply vibration. From what I remember of the F/FA 300/4.5 > it has just the same sort of tripod collar design as the 300/4.0 AFS > Nikkor that Bjorn really exploded over. It's worth noting that Nikon > has since changed some materials in that tripod collar and changed designs > entirely for some newer lenses. > > The URL is http://www.naturfotograf.com/tripod_collar_rev00.html > > DJE >
