Not hitting the spot.....

N

NikonNewbie

Messages
13
Name
Matt
Edit My Images
Yes
Hi,

Ive been using a D3300 for couple of months now and whilst the 18-55mm kit lens does a brilliant job at close up macro type shots and everyday snaps, its not doing what i want as i really love nature and birds in particular, including airshows and landscapes....so i am not getting the reach or frame fillers that i want.....

Can someone suggest a decent lens that will be balanced (camera only weighs 480g), but give me the reach and the clarity i want to capture birds and aircraft. Ive read that the Nikon 70-300mm on here is a great lens, will it match well to my camera body? Budget a maximum of around £350-400 but im happy to look at used lenses in good condition if i can save a packet!

I took a trip to RSPB Ham Wall today and cant get any decent photos of birds except the swans! Got some nice ones of the landscape though.

Hope that makes sense?

TIA Matt
 
It's the perfect step up lens. Very decent performance for the money.
 
Nikon 70-300VR is a very good lens, also worth checking out the Tamron 70-300 VC
 
Thanks for the replies...i will do some reading on both of those and see if the saving is worth having the Tamron over the Nikkon and i would prefer to pay more for a decent product but not throw money at it if its not going to be worth it!
 
NikonNewbie said:
Budget a maximum of around £350-400
Click to expand...

If you want to shoot wildlife/birds, for that sort of money, I'd go for a secondhand 150-500 Sigma.

I used one for 12 months and was very happy with the results. I've recently up graded to a Sigma 150-600 c, if you can stretch to £750 I'd highly recommend one of those for the money, plus it'll take a teleconverter (y)

I started on a 70-300 vr but soon found I wanted a bit more focal length, the birds just never seemed close enough ;)
 
Phil-D said:
If you want to shoot wildlife/birds, for that sort of money, I'd go for a secondhand 150-500 Sigma.

I used one for 12 months and was very happy with the results. I've recently up graded to a Sigma 150-600 c, if you can stretch to £750 I'd highly recommend one of those for the money, plus it'll take a teleconverter (y)

I started on a 70-300 vr but soon found I wanted a bit more focal length, the birds just never seemed close enough ;)
Click to expand...
a
Thanks....i can imagine it never being enough....imagine me earlier with 55mm trying to capture an Egret 200m away!!

Will my camera body be able to make the best of these lenses? i dont want to spend on a top lens if the body wont be able to keep up or will it be ok?
 
NikonNewbie said:
a
Thanks....i can imagine it never being enough....imagine me earlier with 55mm trying to capture an Egret 200m away!!

Will my camera body be able to make the best of these lenses? i dont want to spend on a top lens if the body wont be able to keep up or will it be ok?
Click to expand...

I used my 150-500 on a D7000, not had a D3300 but a quick google I found this http://snapsort.com/compare/Nikon-D3300-vs-Nikon_D7000

It puts the D7000 just infront of the D3300, but only just, so I would say it would be absolutely fine.

Honestly, birding/wildlife photography is an absolute money pit, the lenses I've recommended above are bottom end budget but that's not to say you don't get value for money (y)

Take a look at my Flickr, it will give you an idea how the lenses have performed for me, all exif is intact so you'll know what I took what with over the last 16 months :)
 
One thing\s for sure, for birding you can never have enough reach ;) 70-300mm won't be bad on a crop body camera like yours giving 450mm equivalent. The 150-500mm or 150-600mm will be better, but they are heavy beasties. The Nikon 70-300mm VR is very good, can be had used for around £350-400. The Tamron 70-300mm VC is excellent for the money though, only slightly behind the Nikon.

It's all about getting close though, none of these lenses is going to fill the frame if the bird is 200m away;)
 
Last edited:
Thanks for the input will have a gander on Flickr.

I guess i dont want to spend money on the 70-300 if i will be left wanting more after a couple of months so i think i will continue to save and use my kit lens for now, and opt for the longer lens in a few months :)
 
NikonNewbie said:
Thanks for the input will have a gander on Flickr.

I guess i dont want to spend money on the 70-300 if i will be left wanting more after a couple of months so i think i will continue to save and use my kit lens for now, and opt for the longer lens in a few months :)
Click to expand...
To give you some kind of idea, this is a straight out of camera (hence why it's a bit flat) uncropped image at 550mm from 8ft away. Granted they're not the biggest birds, but you still can't fill the frame from 8ft.
DSC_8126_zpsuakjhylu.jpg
 
Last edited:
NikonNewbie said:
I guess i dont want to spend money on the 70-300 if i will be left wanting more after a couple of months
Click to expand...

And trust me, you will! :D

A secondhand 150-500 can be bought for around £300/£350 and will easily sell if you decided at a later date to go for the 600 :)
 
the body will be a nasty limiting factor for AF tracking/speed/accuracy.
 
NikonNewbie said:
So maybe stick to a smaller lens until I can upgrade the body?

I've no idea what those graphs show either...!!
Click to expand...

I would definitely opt for a better body, D7200 is apparently very good! It depends really on your budget dude

As for zoom lenses, again it will depend on your budget. Decent entry level offerings are the Nikon 70-300VR & Tamron 70-300VC. Can't go wrong with either of them really
 
I had the D3300 bought for me a couple of months ago, but don't want it to limit the potential of wildlife photography and of the lens.

Would you suggest getting the 70-300 as a lot less ££ and would work well with my body, then In a year or so when I'm more proficient I can treat myself to a new body and a 500/600 lens :)
 
NikonNewbie said:
I had the D3300 bought for me a couple of months ago, but don't want it to limit the potential of wildlife photography and of the lens.

Would you suggest getting the 70-300 as a lot less ££ and would work well with my body, then In a year or so when I'm more proficient I can treat myself to a new body and a 500/600 lens :)
Click to expand...

How much did you want to spend? There is some absolute bargains to be had on the 150-600 Tamron second hand
 
I have a D3300 and use a Nikon 70-300 VR and the combination works well. I recently took some Herons in flight shots with pleasing results.
 
F/1.4 said:
How much did you want to spend? There is some absolute bargains to be had on the 150-600 Tamron second hand
Click to expand...

I've just got into photography so I would hate to spend £2-3k on a body and lens and fall out of love with it!

I'm going to get a used 70-300, get to grips with the camera and lens and become much more experienced and then I can upgrade next year :)
 
odd jim said:
Am I the only one who hasn't got a scooby what that means? :)
Click to expand...
They are graphs of the actual resolutions the D3300 will record using each lens (by aperture/FL). Dark green is ≥ 10MP, and dark red is ≤ 3MP... at least as closely as I can judge the colors.
The 70-300 will give ~5MP at 300 f/11, the 50-500 will give ~ 5MP at 500mm f/7-11, and the 150-500 will give ~ 5MP at 500mm f/11.

DXO's "Perceptual" MP is the actual measured lens resolution (LP/mm), just converted to MP for that specific sensor. 5MP actual is plenty for most uses (as long as you're not cropping)...
 
Last edited:
I would be very tempted to suggest the Nikon 55-300 VR. You loose on af speed slight but quality does remain the same - the money saved could eventually be put towards a bigger lens. Keeping a 55-300 or thereabouts is always a good idea an what, as you don't always want to be carrying a super zoom for wildlife images. Depends on the subject I suppose.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top