Downsizing Kit - Best 300mm Zoom Options (Nikon)

rpsmith79

rpsmith79

Messages
1,796
Name
Rich
Edit My Images
Yes
So, long story short, my shooting habits and lifestyle have changed somewhat over the last year, and i no longer have the time/inclination to get up at the crack of dawn to go shooting wildlife like i have done for the past few years, i still enjoy going out for walks etc with my other half, but have no inclination now to lug around my Nikon D7100 and 200-500mm f5.6

Over the weekend, while cheering on my other half doing a 10k run around the local lake, i went out with my trusty Tamron 70-300 VC, and actually really enjoyed using it again, ok i missed some shots due to not having the reach, but i could happily walk a decent distance with it and not be cursing at the weight on my back/shoulders

Just a quick list of what kit i have so far:

Nikon D7100
Nikon 200-500mm f5.6
Tamron 70-300mm VC
Sigma 17-50mm f2.8
Tokina 12-24mm f4

So i have been thinking of getting rid of the 200-500, 70-300 and 12-24 (don't really use it much) and getting a better 300 zoom, possibly even a super zoom (18-300mm) so that when i am out and about with the other half i can take just one lens and still get the odd landscape/portrait shot too, and for when travelling too

So far i have got the following short list


Nikon AF-S 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6 VR - 80mm Dia x 143mm Long, 0.75kg

£430 new (Amazon)



Nikon 28-300mm f/3.5-5.6 VR - 83mm Dia x 115mm Long, 0.8kg

£750 new (Amazon) FX Lens, a bit on the expensive side



Nikon 18-300mm f3.5-5.6 VR - 83mm Dia x 120mm Long, 0.8kg

£425 new (HDEW) DX Lens



Sigma 100-400mm F5-6.3 DG OS HSM | C - 87mm Dia x 182mm Long, 1.1kg

£800 new, slower at the long end



Sigma 18-300mm F3.5-6.3 DC MACRO OS HSM | C - 79mm Dia x 102mm Long, 0.6kg

£500 new, slower at the long end


Budget wise, i am looking at around £500 as i would ideally like to make a bit of cash out of this idea and put that towards a motorbike

So, i am wondering if any of you good folk on here have any experience of any of these lenses and would care to share your experiences with them please, or any other possible suggestions
 
Aside from the new Sigma 100-400 which I've yet to see an awful lot about I don't believe any of those lenses on your list are going to be any better than the Tamron 70-300 USD (assume its the newer USD anyway!) you already have, it might be a cheap lens but its well known as a stellar performer and stands up very well against more expensive glass.

Obviously if your looking to go for a superzoom then the 70-300 focal length obviously won't cut it but personally I'd keep the Sigma 17-50 f2.8 and Tamron 70-300 combo.
 
chrism_scotland said:
Aside from the new Sigma 100-400 which I've yet to see an awful lot about I don't believe any of those lenses on your list are going to be any better than the Tamron 70-300 USD (assume its the newer USD anyway!) you already have, it might be a cheap lens but its well known as a stellar performer and stands up very well against more expensive glass.

Obviously if your looking to go for a superzoom then the 70-300 focal length obviously won't cut it but personally I'd keep the Sigma 17-50 f2.8 and Tamron 70-300 combo.
Click to expand...

Yes, this is the big quandary at the moment, do i just mothball the 200-500mm for a while and see if i can "do without it" for a few months and just stick to the 17-50 & 70-300mm combo

But if a Nikon 18-300mm is as good as the Tamron (need some opinions on this really) then it could be a contender for walks/travel/holidays

I do like the look of the Sigma 100-400mm, but it does seem a bit slow at the long end (f6.3) and a bit more than i was wanting to pay, but with it being new there aren't many reviews of it about
 
I see one very good wildlife photographer I follow on Flickr is using a Canon Powershot SX60 HS ... 65X zoom gives you something over 1000mm equivalent I believe!

Image link
 
The 18-300 is meant to be ok, but as with all super zooms you have to take on board its flaws.

Looking at Flickr there are some cracking shots taken with the 18-300!

If you were to go that route, you could add a 35mm or 50mm just to get that bit of quality when you want it. Both are cheap and very light so will just slip in to a bag unnoticed!
 
Last edited:
I took a 28-300 & D610 to Vietnam and it was fantastic as a general purpose lens, paired with a 50mm it was the prefect travel kit. I was perfectly happy with the sharpness at 300mm but the focus breathing, especially at 300mm, means it is of limited use for up close birding.

However, on a DX body 28mm probably wouldn't be wide enough for a general use one lens solution.
 
Nawty said:
I took a 28-300 & D610 to Vietnam and it was fantastic as a general purpose lens, paired with a 50mm it was the prefect travel kit. I was perfectly happy with the sharpness at 300mm but the focus breathing, especially at 300mm, means it is of limited use for up close birding.

However, on a DX body 28mm probably wouldn't be wide enough for a general use one lens solution.
Click to expand...

I was eyeing up the 28-300mm as i guess at that price it was going to be a step up from the 70-300 and 18-300, but it is quite a bit more than i was wanting to pay (around £750) as i was really looking at freeing up some cash

JJ! said:
The 18-300 is meant to be ok, but as with all super zooms you have to take on board its flaws.

Looking at Flickr there are some cracking shots taken with the 18-300!

If you were to go that route, you could add a 35mm or 50mm just to get that bit of quality when you want it. Both are cheap and very light so will just slip in to a bag unnoticed!
Click to expand...

Good call on the 18-300mm and a couple of primes though, i hadn't thought of that, i was thinking i would just keep the 17-50mm for when i know i won't be shooting at distance, and then use the 18-300 as a walkabout lens, but a prime or 2 would even fit into a jacket pocket if needed

Hmmmm, decisions, decisions.................... i think i might wait around a bit yet and see what sort of reviews the Sigma 100-400mm gets, as that could simply replace the 200-500 and be about half the size/weight, which might make me more inclined to carry it with me again
 
rpsmith79 said:
I was eyeing up the 28-300mm as i guess at that price it was going to be a step up from the 70-300 and 18-300, but it is quite a bit more than i was wanting to pay (around £750) as i was really looking at freeing up some cash



Good call on the 18-300mm and a couple of primes though, i hadn't thought of that, i was thinking i would just keep the 17-50mm for when i know i won't be shooting at distance, and then use the 18-300 as a walkabout lens, but a prime or 2 would even fit into a jacket pocket if needed

Hmmmm, decisions, decisions.................... i think i might wait around a bit yet and see what sort of reviews the Sigma 100-400mm gets, as that could simply replace the 200-500 and be about half the size/weight, which might make me more inclined to carry it with me again
Click to expand...

I use 50mm as walk about on FX and it's so light and easy to carry. On DX you have the 35mm and it's even smaller, easily fits in a pocket!
 
rpsmith79 said:
I was eyeing up the 28-300mm as i guess at that price it was going to be a step up from the 70-300 and 18-300, but it is quite a bit more than i was wanting to pay (around £750) as i was really looking at freeing up some cash
Click to expand...

Optically I would say the 28-300 is similar to the 70-300VR I had and your Tamron is said to be at least as good as the Nikon so if you are happy with that then I guess you'll be happy with the superzoom.

However, the reason the 28-300 is expensive is because it is FX and therefore requires more glass, I would expect (/guess) that optically it is similar to the DX 18-300.
 
Nawty said:
Optically I would say the 28-300 is similar to the 70-300VR I had and your Tamron is said to be at least as good as the Nikon so if you are happy with that then I guess you'll be happy with the superzoom.

However, the reason the 28-300 is expensive is because it is FX and therefore requires more glass, I would expect (/guess) that optically it is similar to the DX 18-300.
Click to expand...

Yes, but i'm struggling to find a direct side by side comparison between the 2, as like you say, they are really designed for 2 different camera systems

But, i have always assumed (rightly or wrongly) that an FX lens would outperform a DX lens when used on a DX body
 
rpsmith79 said:
But, i have always assumed (rightly or wrongly) that an FX lens would outperform a DX lens when used on a DX body
Click to expand...

Well...

Actually FX lenses don't have to 'work' as hard as DX lenses as there is less magnification going through the lens so DX lenses have to be sharper than FX lenses to achieve the same perceived sharpness in the final image (another way of looking at it is that as the FX sensor is bigger you don't need to shrink the scene as much to record and therefore don't need to resolve as much detail).

That said, often (but not always) FX lenses are built to a higher standard than DX lenses so they perform well anyway and with a FX lens on a DX body often has better corner sharpness as the crop sensor is using a more central part of the image circle (and sharp edges are a bit more difficult).
 
rpsmith79 said:
Nikon 18-300mm f3.5-5.6 VR - 83mm Dia x 120mm Long, 0.8kg

£425 new (HDEW) DX Lens

So, i am wondering if any of you good folk on here have any experience of any of these lenses and would care to share your experiences with them please, or any other possible suggestions
Click to expand...

That isn't the Nikkor 18-300 that HDEW are offering. The one they are selling at £425 is the slower F6.3 which from the reviews is not as sharp as the F5.6 version. I have the 18-300 F5.6 version which is an excellent lens but they are £525 or more used and £800 new.

MOD EDIT... Naughty, if you want one, put an advert in the classifieds under wanted, don't invite people to trade via PM or you'll get yourself and them banned.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Andrew Smith said:
That isn't the Nikkor 18-300 that HDEW are offering. The one they are selling at £425 is the slower F6.3 which from the reviews is not as sharp as the F5.6 version. I have the 18-300 F5.6 version which is an excellent lens but they are £525 or more used and £800 new.

MOD EDIT... Naughty, if you want one, put an advert in the classifieds under wanted, don't invite people to trade via PM or you'll get yourself and them banned.
Click to expand...


Ahh, i wasn't even aware there are 2 versions of this lens, and yes i did get that price from HDEW for the f6.3 version, thanks for pointing that out or i could have been very disappointed if i had bought it
 
Last edited:
Well, i took the plunge and bough a 2nd hand 18-300mm f5.6 for £550 from WEX, it has only just arrived, but i must say i'm quite impressed already with only just playing with it in the office, going to have a wonder on my lunch break and give a better test
 
the 18-300 is a cracking all round lens i have it attached to my d7200 in my
works van for the wildlife i come across when I'm driving around
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top