300mm lens query (for Nikon D3100)

JAC40

JAC40

Messages
59
Edit My Images
Yes
Hi. If I could get some lens advice it would be appreciated. I was going to get a Sigma 70-300mm f/4-5.6 APO DG Macro lens.....on advice of a friend, but with no VR all I got was blurry photos. As my main interest is taking wildlife photos (hence the 300mm), I was thinking of getting a Nikon AF-S DX NIKKOR 55-300mm f/4.5-5.6G ED VR Lens from Amazon (approx £185 and my max budget). Do you think this would be a good lens for wildlife photography? I'm a beginner with a dslr so I'm not looking at anything spectacular, just decent shots will be ok.
 
JAC40 said:
Hi. If I could get some lens advice it would be appreciated. I was going to get a Sigma 70-300mm f/4-5.6 APO DG Macro lens.....on advice of a friend, but with no VR all I got was blurry photos. As my main interest is taking wildlife photos (hence the 300mm), I was thinking of getting a Nikon AF-S DX NIKKOR 55-300mm f/4.5-5.6G ED VR Lens from Amazon (approx £185 and my max budget). Do you think this would be a good lens for wildlife photography? I'm a beginner with a dslr so I'm not looking at anything spectacular, just decent shots will be ok.
Click to expand...
It's the best you'll get for the money you want to spend.

Although the focus can be slow, it's a pretty good, if not very good lens.
 
Sigma does not have brilliant reviews.

The Nikon is better, and as said above, a wee bit slow to focus.

Not everyone is able to spend several hundred pounds on a lens, I know I can't :)
 
Agree with above. I used the Nikkor 55-300 and with practice it is a capable lens which can garner some nice images. However as was said it is not the quickest at focussing and has a tendency to hunt for focus at times but for the money its the best in that range you will get for Nikon.
The 55-200 VR is better and faster but you lose 100mm in range. your call.
 
JAC40 said:
I was going to get a Sigma 70-300mm f/4-5.6 APO DG Macro lens.....on advice of a friend, but with no VR all I got was blurry photos.
Click to expand...

I can I ask why you think VR is going to stop you getting blurry wildlife photos? Do you have any examples? I have VR on both of my telephoto lens and never really use it. Ok most of the time I'm on a tripod but even hand held I rarely use VR for wildlife. 1/focal length is a great rule for hand holding a lens as it is important to stop camera shake but blur can be introduced by the animals movement. Whether you have a too slow shutter speed that can't freeze its movement or whether it has moved out of the plane of focus since the cameras auto focus operated, both of these can cause blur and can't be solved by VR.

High shutter speeds, continuous AF and raising the ISO helps more to capture sharp images. VR only allows you to use slower shutter speeds than you can normally use when hand holding a camera. It can't freeze the movement of an animal, slower shutter speeds can result in more blur from subject movement. Using VR on a very slow or static animal would be ok as a slow shutter speed may freeze subject movement.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top