I have been looking at used 300mm f/2.8 primes. I know some of the basic differences between D and G lenses, but I am curious about functional usability or image quality differences that may not be described in the technical documents.
There's an AF-S 300mm f/2.8 D with a serial number in the 204xxx range and an AF-S 300mm f/2.8 G VR with a serial number in the 304xxx range. Both are advertised at good prices, but the difference between them is $1,000 USD. If I purchase one I'd be using it with either a D500, D750, or D810.
I'm not concerned about the lack of VR on the D model. Would I see a visible difference in image quality? If something went wrong with the D will Nikon still fix it? Any other advice you lens experts can offer that would sway me toward one or the other? If the D would give me near equivalent IQ and can still be serviced, I could sure use that extra $1k somewhere else.