400MM for nikon

petert

petert

Suspended / Banned
Messages
679
Name
pete
Edit My Images
Yes
What's the best inexpensive if there is one? Would love the more expensive glass but couldn't justify It
 
I could say, define expensive/inexpensive.
I assume that you are ruling out a manual focus lens so would ignore the older quality glass lenses?
Depending on what you consider expensive/inexpensive, many have found the newer Nikon 80-400 AF-S lens to be a good buy.
Sigma also do a 400mm f5.6 that seems to receive some good reviews, as does its 500mm lens
 
Four figures out the equation 4-500 nearer the mark, I've been told the sigma 400 5.6 has a noisy and slow af and the hsm wasn't made for nikon? It's for wildlife mainly
 
Last edited:
Depending which camera you have there is a Nikon 300mm f4 in the classified if its one that would take a 1.4 you could have 420mm 5.6 at a reasonable cost.
 
That might be the best option other than going canon
 
What about the 500 zooms? Are any any good?
 
If you can stretch further I can highly recommend the Tamron 150-600mm. Has £100 cash back at the mo, but actually currently works out cheaper at Amazon.de at the moment, only £671. Bargain. Also, any Tamron lens bought in the EU will quality for the 5 year extended UK warranty.
 
It doesn't look too big either is it handholdable
 
Depends how strong you are ;) Yes it is, although when you're holding any camera with this kind of FL you need to make sure your hands are steady. That being said the VC on the Tamron is very good. I also find carrying it around on a sling strap is pretty comfortable too, although I make sure it's locked at the shortest length whilst walking around.
 
I might just stick with the 70-300 for now, I only take the local wildlife when I can.Time is the biggest issue for these things
 
The sigma 120-400 and the 50-500mm lenses are supposed to be good. The 50-500mm is also sharper then the 150-500 they also do, if you read some user reviews. Ffordes have a 50-500mm in stock now for just over your budget.

http://ffordes.com/product/15061216103931
 
Last edited:
Had the 150-500, wasn't that impressed 120-400 doesn't get many positive reviews but the 50-500 seems the best of the bunch
 
The 50-500 are a grand lens when bought new hence their highish second hand prices. If you can get one cheap they are worth going for, otherwise, may as well buy a the Tamron or Sigma 150-600.
 
I would avoid any s/h screw drive Sigmas as they have been notorious in the past for stripping their ring gear. HSM versions should be ok. I would say that the 300mm F4 in the ads section is a good buy but you'd want to put a Nikon teleconverter on it for 420mm F5.6, which will add another £200+ to the price.
 
eccles said:
I would avoid any s/h screw drive Sigmas as they have been notorious in the past for stripping their ring gear. HSM versions should be ok. I would say that the 300mm F4 in the ads section is a good buy but you'd want to put a Nikon teleconverter on it for 420mm F5.6, which will add another £200+ to the price.
Click to expand...
Was thinking about the 300 f4 not that particular one, I've found a couple cheaper and in better condition but would it be significantly better than the tamron 70-300 vc? My copy at least is very sharp even at 300
 
Difficult to assess a lens's sharpness unless you've got a yardstick against which to judge it. But IMO it would be a pretty good bet that the 300mm F4 + Nikon 1.4-III TC will outperform the Tamron zoom. You would lose the VR/VC though.
 
I should think it would be a little better and faster, I suppose the answer would be to have both would the kenko tc be ok? It's a fair bit cheaper
 
Is it faster focusing would anyone know?
 
A member on another forum i use has both,unless he is in a poor light situation like shooting Owls so needs VR/OS he prefers the cropped nikon 420mm as opposed to the Tamron 150-600.@600mm
 
petert said:
Was thinking about the 300 f4 not that particular one, I've found a couple cheaper and in better condition but would it be significantly better than the tamron 70-300 vc? My copy at least is very sharp even at 300
Click to expand...

I have used the Nikon AFS 300mm f4 and the Tamron you have, the Nikon is a lot better even with a TC, the AF was lightning quick on my D7100 without TC.

I had the Kenko 1.4 TC on mine and it would struggle to AF in low light, very poor. I would go for the Nikon version if buying again, although there are people who use the Kenko and have no problems.

The older AFD as in classifieds is slower to focus and doesn't take TC very well IIRC compared to the AFS version. Old thread when I was looking at the AFD version > https://www.talkphotography.co.uk/threads/nikon-300mm-f-4e-pf-ed-vr.571808/page-2#post-6657091
 
Last edited:
Thanks for that I just read somewhere else it was quite slow to focus, no point and if it doesn't take tcs even less point might have to look at the later version
 
I was about say what ive got will be enough and then from my garden I saw a bird of prey, too far for a pic so itook the camera for a walk. Saw nothing anywhere so as I was about to go back home one flew about 30 feet above my head and I found their nesting site,first time ever so chuffed to bits. Now I'm so pleased I got any shot but they do seem a bit soft so I think an immediate upgrade is needed.
Is this an Osprey?


 
Last edited:
The tamron hunted quite a bit and didn't seem as sharp in this situation
 
Yeah Buzzard, I had one over my house also today, very low, about 15 foot over roofline and I dont have a camera. There were some Red Kites in the sky later, but would have been to far too photograph. I'm waiting for my new D750.
 
Was a bit disappointed with the results so I think the the 300 f4 is going to be a must especially now I've found something worth shooting
 
Last edited:
I'm a Nikon shooter. Wanted a reasonably priced 400. Bought a Canon 7D and 400 f5.6. Pretty happy so far.

Still got my Nikons..full frame, that's why I crossed over. Crop body made sense to me. Only use it for Wildlife/Birds. I reckon reach is really important.
 
Used to have canon never owned but have used the 400 5.6 and loved it, it's in my mind to switch again just the hassle of doing it:-( for wildlife canon have the better options imo nikon for everything else so.someone tell me just to add the nikon 300mm f4 please lol
 
Last edited:
I had the nikon 300mm f4 AFS non vr version a few years ago and it was a great lens, very sharp and took the 1.4 TC very well. I was always impressed with the quality for the cost, it's a fairly lightweight lens if compared to the bigger f2.8/f4 lenses.

It's something I'm currently thinking of switching back to as my 200-400 is bigger, heavier and probably needs more use than I give it. My current thinking is either a 300mm f4, nikon 80-400 (new version) or a sigma 120-300 f2.8 but I'm going to have to make a decision in a few months ready for autumn.
 
:agree: The AFS version was a fantastic lens on the D7100. They can be had new from HDEW for £699 and for me, it's a lot of lens for the money. Due to arm/shoulder problems the lens was too heavy for me to hand hold so sold on.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top