Telephoto Lens Advice

A

Alison H

Messages
1
Edit My Images
Yes
I've had my Nikon D80 and Nikkor 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6 G ED-IF AF-S VR DX lens for about a year. I've been taking, or trying to take, wildlife photos and have found that a 200mm lens is just not long enough (I'm happy with it for all other stuff) so I am considering buying a longer lens, which is where the advice is needed. I have a couple of lenses in mind but was wondering what's more important a faster lens or a longer lens. As always funds are not unlimited so I'm going to have to compromise. I've been considering Nikkor AF-S 300mm F/4 IF ED or the Nikkor AF 80-400 F/4.5 - F/5.6 D ED VR.

I've read that the 300mm lens work well with a teleconverter, but obviously that will slow the lens, also that the 80-400mm lens is slow to focus and soft at the 200mm - 400mm end, which is where it will get most of its use.

Any advice, comments or suggestions on these or alternatives will be greatly received.

Many thanks

Alison
 
I have the 300 F4 and it is a great lens for the money.

It also works fine with a 1.4TC to give the length a boost.

Oh and Welcome to the forums.
 
I have the 300 F4 and a 1.7 TC, it works well,if a little slow at F6.7.On its own, its a cracker.........(y)

Who told you the 80-400 is soft at 200?
 
I would echo the sentiments that a TC is the way to go - also you don't have to lug a load of extra glass about, a TC is quite compact and light.

You will lose 1 stop for a 1.4x, 1.5 stops for a 1.7x and 2 stops for a 2x converter.

The other option is to set up a hide and get your subjects closer....that is what the pros do and spend weeks getting the shot. I have a friend, laurie Campbell, who is a well known wildlife photographer - he sat for 3 weeks in a hide to get his golden eagle shots......I couldn't afford to do it!
 
Here's an option out of left field ... sell your Nikon kit and buy a Canon.

I should stress that I have no time whatsoever for people who say one brand of camera is better than another. The top manufacturers all make very good equipment these days. But they're not all equally strong in every department. I think Nikon's flash system is superior and Nikons could well be better for portrait/studio work. But on the other hand Canon do seem to offer a lot more options in the telephoto department, which would be suitable for wildlife or birds. For example Nikon don't really have anything comparable to:
* 300mm f/4 L IS
* 400mm f/5.6 L
* 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 L IS

Just a thought.
 
Hey? You say Nikon have no 300mm, no 400mm, no 500mm and no 600mm lenses then - or anything in the 100-400 range.

So what are the 300 f4 and f2.8
400 f2.8
500 f4
600 f4
80-400 VR lenses if they are not in that range?

Not really with you ...there must be a point to what you have said, but I have missed it!
 
Lensflare said:
Hey? You say Nikon have no 300mm, no 400mm, no 500mm and no 600mm lenses then - or anything in the 100-400 range.

So what are the 300 f4 and f2.8
400 f2.8
500 f4
600 f4
80-400 VR lenses if they are not in that range?

Not really with you ...there must be a point to what you have said, but I have missed it!
Click to expand...

Yup didn't quite follow that myself:).

Also no-one said one brand is better, the OP has Nikon so we talked Nikon.
 
Lensflare said:
Hey? You say Nikon have no 300mm, no 400mm, no 500mm and no 600mm lenses then - or anything in the 100-400 range.

So what are the 300 f4 and f2.8
400 f2.8
500 f4
600 f4
80-400 VR lenses if they are not in that range?

Not really with you ...there must be a point to what you have said, but I have missed it!
Click to expand...
I didn't say that at all. What I did say was this:
StewartR said:
Nikon don't really have anything comparable to:
* 300mm f/4 L IS
* 400mm f/5.6 L
* 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 L IS
Click to expand...
And it's true.
* Nikon have a 300mm f/4, but it doesn't have IS/VR.
* Nikon don't have anything remotely like the 400mm f/5.6, which is arguably the best birding lens around.
* Nikon's 80-400 is really not in the same league as Canon's 100-400 - it's clunky, noisy, slow and awkward by comparison.

Yes, they both make excellent 300mm f/2.8s, 400mm f/2.8s, 500mm f/4s and 600mm f/4s. But they're all very very expensive. My point was simply that Nikon don't offer so many high quality options in the sub-£1000 telephoto market.
 
PsiFox said:
Also no-one said one brand is better, the OP has Nikon so we talked Nikon.
Click to expand...
I didn't say one brand is better. I don't think one brand is better. They both have their comparative strengths and weaknesses.

StewartR said:
I should stress that I have no time whatsoever for people who say one brand of camera is better than another. The top manufacturers all make very good equipment these days. But they're not all equally strong in every department. I think Nikon's flash system is superior and Nikons could well be better for portrait/studio work. But on the other hand Canon do seem to offer a lot more options in the telephoto department.
Click to expand...

Yes, the OP has a Nikon but apparently not a huge collection of lenses. My suggestion was that if your main interest is wildlife then Canon offers more options. I personally think that, if she is considering plonking down best part of £1,000 on a wildlife telephoto, then she ought to at least consider switching.

You can disagree if you want to. It doesn't matter.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top