Buy this lens. It will get you into new photographic milestones in wildlife and you will be grateful.
352348
I have used this lens for over two weeks now. Bought it the moment stock was in.  I am comparing it with the Nikon 70-200 VR2 and 80-400GVRED (latest).

I am also posting some photos directly here.  It has one of the best returns on investment in quality, built and ergonomics.  Better in my opinion than 80-400mm G and cheaper by 100%.  Not as solidly build as 70200 but in terms of IQ, almost there.

Summary:

You can judge the image quality by the pictures you see.  Focussing is fast, accurate and zooming is firm. All else 5 stars.

Conclusion: Highly Recommended.  Buy Now.
1678931
This is a spectacular telephoto lens that can deliver the very best for professional sports and wildlife photographers while being incredibly easy to transport and shoot with. The optics, size and weight savings Nikon made to this lens are a really impressive feat.

For reference this weighs less than a 24-70mm f/2.8 and is smaller. It's extremely well balanced on an FX body and it will fit with the lens hood into most shoulder bags. You can get razor sharp results handheld on high-resolution bodies like the D810 and it pairs wonderfully with Nikon's 1.4 and 1.7x teleconverters. The 300 PF with an accompanying teleconverter is an extremely lightweight and versatile combination.

Optically the 300 PF is among Nikon's best; this matches the performance of the 300 f/2.8 VRII. No visible CA or fringing at f/4 whatsoever. Extremely sharp wide open, and flawless stopped down once. Focus speed and accuracy are very good, I would say in between the 70-200 f/2.8 VRII and 70-200 f/4 VR. The Vibration reduction issues have been fixed from the initial versions and you can get handheld shots at 1/10s at 300mm. I can't find any faults with the optics and image quality, it will deliver the best images you can get out of it.

Build quality is great, although Nikon used tough impact resistant plastic instead of metal for weight savings. The lens is weather resistant and will be fine in light rain, but I would recommend using a bag or rain cover for longer amounts of rain/drizzle. For extreme environments the 2.8 variants would be better suited, but for most outdoor work this lens is made to be a workhorse. The small size and low weight also make this ideal as a travel telephoto lens; I loved being able to take this onto planes and save luggage space.

Pros:
- Weight, size, portability are completely unmatched at this focal length.
- Fantastic optics, AF performance and VR ability: perfect for professional sports/wildlife work
- Combined with a teleconverter this is an entirely new way to shoot with a super telelphoto.

Cons:
- Expensive compared to old f/4 (although half the cost of the 2.8VRII)
- Only partial weather sealing
- Not compatible with some older bodies

Compared to Nikkor 300mm f/4D: If you are on a budget the 300 f/4D is optically great, although you will need a good monopod. I've only used this version briefly, but I found the focus to be considerably more accurate on the PF (although similar speed). For me the difference in weight, optics, focus and having VR are absolutely worth the money, but if you don't need the very best for sports/wildlife the old 300 f/4D is still a fantastic lens.

Compared to Nikkor 300mm f/2.8 VRII: Unless you need full weather sealing and/or have an older Nikon DSLR with poor ISO performance, I would recommend this over the current 300mm f/2.8 for most people. The optics are on par if not better, the focus is 90% as fast and just as accurate as the 2.8 and it can be handheld without a monopod and deliver the same performance. Yes it's a stop slower, but with modern DSLRs pushing noise performance better and better, most of the time f/4 is absolutely good enough. For extreme low-light sports the 2.8 will have an advantage, but it's not as sharp at f/2.8 as the PF is at f/4 and it has noticeable CA and fringing.

Compared to Nikkor 200-500 f/5.6 VR: For versatility and cost, the 200-500 is hard to beat. I feel like the 200-500 is aimed at stationary wildlife/birding photography while the 300 PF is better suited for sports and travel due to it's portability. Both lenses are wonderful optically, but the 300 has significantly faster and better autofocus performance (I tested both lenses with a Nikon D500). The 300 PF is also a full stop faster, massively lighter, more compact and doesn't require a monopod or tripod.
2411632
I love to take photos of wildlife and this has been an nice addition to my collection it's a great entry level zoom lens!
771886
I couldn't be happier with this lens. Yes, it's a bit heavy, but it's not unwieldy. Image stabilization and autofocus work beautifully. I've been shooting squirrels and songbirds in my backyard since it arrived last week. I'll never be a good enough photographer to justify a more expensive lens, and I can't tell the difference anyway. Hate that I didn't have it on my recent African safari, but it's darn sure going with me to Alaska!
1674729
Absolutely beautiful lens, straight forward, no quirks, just photography. Big, heavy, smooth and gorgeous.

Produces stunning images on both my D7000 and F100. The Bokeh at 2.8 is beyond creamy.

Sharp as a tack all throughout.

If you're shooting strobes, you don't need VR anywho, so save yourself from spending an extra 1000 bucks on a 70-200 VR I/II and pick this up.

Take a deep breath, and squeeze.
1446870
This lens just arrived today.  So this is going to be a short review.  I have a Nikon D5100 and D50.  I put the lens on the D5100 (it works great on both) - and took some shots.  Amazingly sharp, superb reduction depth of field, and I am just delighted.

I'm planning to keep my 18-200 on one camera, and this lens on the other.  I think I'll be using this lens more.  Go figure!

I can't wait to take some portrait pictures too.  With this sharpness and clarity, they are going to be outstanding.
1085526
I am an amateur bird photographer in the San Diego area. I puchased a Nikon D60 with the Nikkor 55-200mm VR. After a short while it was obvious that the 200mm wasn't going to cut it for bird photography.

I recently purchased the Sigma 150-500 and I am thrilled at it's performance so far.

Tripod mounted, the lens is fantastic of course. Panning with a ball head, following birds in flight over the lake, produce some great images. The OS has two modes, the first of which is great for tripod panning, reducing horizontal blur.

With the incorporation of OS (Optical Stabilization) this lens is more than capable hand-held. Switched to the second mode, the OS will reduce vertical image blur. I have been able to track flying hawks at 500mm, with amazing clarity. I am very impressed with the hand-held images I am able to get.

The auto-focus is not the fastest on this lens, but has been acceptable for in-flight bird shots that require quick changes in focus.

When it comes to nature photography, the zoom is a must. While following birds, I often go from 200mm all the way out to 500mm and back again, chasing them around the sky. A dedicated telephoto, without zoom, will of course provide better image quality, but at the price of limited focal length versatility. This lens provides a great balance for photographing wildlife.

Overall I have been impressed by the quality of this affordable super-telephoto lens. Compared to the more expensive options, this lens is also very light, making it perfect for a nature photographer on the move.

Enjoy
658304
Optically, this is an amazing piece.  I also have the 24mm 1.4G and 85 1.4G which are all equally as impressive, but I find this 35mm focal length to be much more useful as an "everyday" lens.  35mm on a full frame body can pass as wide angle for landscapes and architecture as well as a portrait lens.  And because of its close focus ability, it serves as a semi-macro lens as well with about .2X magnification and close focusing to about 1 foot.  Background defocus is also more pronounced than the 24mm due to the focal length, and bokeh is almost as beautiful as the 85 1.4G.  I've used it on a D700 and now on a D800 and when I pixel peep the 36 megapixel file, I'm even more amazed at how sharp this lens is.  It's tack sharp wide open at f/1.4, which was not something I expected, so much so that any increase in sharpness when stopped down was only really noticeable near the edges upon close inspection.  Perhaps Nikon designed the optical formula to be this way?  If so, I applaud them because if you're going to spend $1600 on a big and heavy fast prime lens, you'd want to shoot it wide open, otherwise there's no point in carrying the extra bulk.

I'm such a sucker for prime lenses that I've amassed a large of collection of Leica M primes, Zeiss, Voigtlander, Nikon, and Canon primes from new to older classics.  This 35mm has to be up there among my top 5.  The only sharper 35mm I've used is the latest version of the Leica M Summilux, but dare I say even that might not be as sharp wide as Nikon's at f/1.4.  And this 35mm is certainly in the same class as the sharpness king in my collection: the Zeiss 100mm Makro-Planar ZF.2.  But it's not about sharpness that makes this lens great.  It's about usability.  This is the lens that I'd likely keep if I could only have one, or bring with me if I could only carry one, simply because it can used for almost any type of shot.  While it doesn't focus as fast as any of Nikon's pro zooms, it's fast enough for most purposes and that includes focus tracking fast moving subjects like kids or pets.  On the D800, continuous AF works well and is often spot-on.

So what are the cons?  There are very few but I'll list them: 1) AF motor is somewhat noisy (sounds cheap and even noisier than my copies of the 24mm and 85mm 1.4G) when the the lens is hunting for focus, 2) it's somewhat large and overly heavy for a regular prime (though nicely balanced and doesn't seem as large when mounted on a D800 or D4), and 3) the filter size is 67mm (why oh why did Nikon do this?  The 24mm 1.4G is almost identical in barrel size, form, and overall dimensions and that lens uses the 77mm filter thread that most of the modern Nikon pro lenses use, so why 67mm for the 35?  Does not compute).  Despite these things, I'm still giving this lens 5 stars because they are far from deal-breakers and doesn't change the fact that I really love this lens.

Get one for your FX Nikon body today, you will love it.  But if you shoot with a DX body, save your money and get the excellent 35mm f/1.8 DX version instead.  The 1.4G version is expensive, big, and heavy and its optical advantages are only really exploited by a full frame sensor.
3006055
This lens become my main lens, i use it all the time for my winter trip to Colorado. The lens is very wide, great to capture the scenery, buildings from short distance. The manual setting is super easy. Just need to set the proper ISO at your camera and go for it. Great pics for every occasion. Now i mostly bring 2 lenses and this fish eye for sure one of them. Great lens and i do recommend to my friends.
759143
This is honestly an incredible lens for the price. My girlfriend got me this as an anniversary gift, and I am blown away by it. Highly, highly recommend.
722396
I love this lens. It has opened up so many new possibilities. I use it all the time.  I love not having to zoom and focus when I'm shooting it gives me more time to just get good shots.
847136
For serious amateurs and some Pro's this camera fit with a "click"..., If you love natural photograph or take a walk on the wild side...What are you waiting for...? Buy it, you gonna love it.
And, when you have it, come to Costa Rica and begin you adventure, could be all that you imagined...!
609705
Game changer! I LOVE this lens! It's actually become my daily shooter for still and portrait.
Since I have a Rebel and it's not a full frame camera, there's an adjustment phase when you
first start shooting to fully understand the crop factor, etc. Once you get comfortable...the quality
and composition of shots below 3.0 makes you fall in love with this lens...This 85 and a nifty fifty are
a must for any avid novice looking to get more out of your shots.
143899
Short Answer: Click Buy. Now.

Long Answer: This lens has been nothing short of perfect. I bought it used and it had been used for 6 years before I had it but yet I love it more than any other lens I've ever used. If you follow rumors much you might be concerned by folks who think that perhaps there's some chance that maybe Canon might possibly update it and maybe will add IS and maybe it will be a better lens and maybe it will come in the year 201X. Notice how many "maybe"'s and "might"s there were in that sentence. This is a great lens, period. If Canon releases a MkII version of this lens it will probably be over $2k and even if it's better it will not take anything away from this being an amazing lens and phenomenal value. So why do I like it?

1. Bokeh - The lens, as you have likely read, has an amazing way of isolating your subject when shooting wide open. The best part about it is that your subject will still be sharp when shot wide open (at f/2). I find that the sweet spot for me is f/2.8. Subject is super sharp and background is beautifully blurred (you don't even notice it except if it's hopefully got some nice colors in it).

2. Sharpness - As measured above, this lens is amazingly sharp. I've used it for landscape purposes, portraits, action shots of my dog. Really it can be used for anything (except maybe group shots, you'd probably have to go pretty far back to get them which isn't ideal)

3. Build Quality - It's built well with a large focus ring for manual override after autofocusing does it stuff. Autofocus is nice and quick, which helps when taking photos of my dog (might depend a bit on your camera body)

4. Colors and contrast are excellent straight out of the camera. I do very little post-processing. The hood works well but the lens also handles flare very well (I rarely get any unless I'm looking for it). No chromatic aberration or distortion that bothers me.

Those are the three main things I love about this lens. It is great value and of course will hold its value well. Buy it now and don't think about it any further.

The only time I might hesitate to recommend this to someone is if you have an APS-C camera. It is quite long for that kind of camera since it would be 216mm equivalent. Without IS it means that you might have the jack up the ISO a bit when lighting conditions aren't ideal (cloudy days, evening, low indoor light). If your camera body doesn't handle high ISO so well that might be a drawback because you might find it difficult to get keepers.

For those APS-C folks who might be on the fence about this I would say get the 85mm f1.8 or 100mm f2 lenses for around $350. If you find that you're shooting just fine with those and you would be ok with a little bit more reach then you will love this and should definitely get it.

A lot of people compare this lens to the 70-200mm f/2.8 IS II. I don't really understand the comparison too much considering that that lens is 2x the weight, greater than 2x the price and does not go to f/2. If weight and cost aren't an issue then it is a very potent zoom but I think a great kit would have both of these lenses instead of either or. If you find that you really need the 200mm end you could also buy this 135L and the 200L (f/2.8) for less than the price of the 70-200. Not to detract from the amazingness that is the 70-200 but I think that they are different tools and you will love both of them.
41708
[...]
This is an image I took with this lens. Big bang for the buck. I think you should get this if your debating on a new "cheap" lens!
2483225
Not only a must have lens for new enthusiasts of photography, but for experienced ones too. This super wide angle lens delivers what it is expected and more. I am very happy I decided to buy it and I highly recommended.
572856
After owning a Nikon 18-200mm lens for several years, and having it travel with me the whole time, it was admittedly hard to sell...it's a great lens with lots of capability.

However, it can't hold a candle to the 17-55mm f2.8. Maybe a cheap Bic lighter in a crosswind, but that's it.

This 17-55mm lens more than makes up for its lack of focal length with incredible color reproduction, razor-sharpness, and lovely bokeh at f2.8. While lenses with greater focal lengths can cover more of a zoom range, they won't be doing it well. Having such a wide maximum aperture throughout the zoom range, this lens performs all functions - landscape, candid, portraiture, etc. - with remarkable ease. The autofocus is stunningly fast and efficient. The lens is a bit heavy, granted, but it's balanced; if you can't handle it, get to a gym. You'll thank me. There's no VR, but you don't need it with such a fast aperture. Yes, the zoom ring is a bit tough, but after a week, you won't even notice. These are all incredibly small gripes, and personally, I don't find anything wrong.

Perhaps the most alluring feature about this lens is that it just inspires confidence. Knowing you have the fast aperture, the best glass, and the best build quality simply convinces you to get out there and shoot better pictures. Buy it, love it. Full stop.