In article <1996Sep3.151825@alder.cc.kcl.ac.uk>, udee785@alder.cc.kcl.ac.uk says...
[all deleted: what we both say about the Nikkor 100-300mm f5.6 performance]

I agree with what Fei Xia added about the 100-300mm, and I did sell
mine in favor of the 80-200mm f2.8 AF + TC14C, which at similar true apertures, actually performed better, good as the 100-300mm is
(though it didn't solve the missing tripod socket problem - maybe
it is time to try a Kirk bracket...).
Hope This Helps

Fei Xia:
Indeed, I have been using one for the past ten
years or so and sometimes feel the designers
had strange priorities and considerations.
What's the use of the granted excellent
optical performance if one encounters trouble
all the time trying to steady it? It's very
long (fortunately the length does not further
extend when zooming -- similar to the 50-135)
and quite heavy (some 200mm long and over 900g
in weight) plus the centre of gravity shifts
when zooming/focusing. These are bad news in
the absence of a tripod fixture on the lens. I
have slight bends around my most used camera
body's tripod mount to show how much I used it
with the body fixed on tripod.

Other shortcomings include visible light fall
off at 5.6 and all FL (disappearing by 8 but 8
is even slower!) and incompatibility with all
TCs I've tried it with (and I've tried quite a
few). Obviously the TC issue is not serious as
who would want to use such a slow lens on TC
anyway.

A redeeming feature is that it works
beautifully with the 6T to get you over life
size at 300. Very much good enough quality
for bugs and flowers at a very good distance
(1:1 at about 30cm from subject). Then again
one has the tripod problem here in an acute
way. They should have sold the lens with a
special Nikon bean bag (a good design would be
a Ti coloured bag full of Ti beans inside).

It's surprisingly easy to focus fast probably
owing to good contrast but avoid using screens
with the centre split circle rangefinder.

Regards, Fei