Home · Register · Join Upload & Sell

Moderated by: Fred Miranda
Username  

  New fredmiranda.com Mobile Site
  New Feature: SMS Notification alert
  New Feature: Buy & Sell Watchlist
  

FM Forums | Nikon Forum | Join Upload & Sell

1
       2       end
  

Archive 2017 · Looking for new telephoto lens.

  
 
PabloSRT8
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #1 · p.1 #1 · Looking for new telephoto lens.


Hello again!

I have a D500 I use for BIF with a 200-400mm vr1.
For closer wildlife I have a D800 with 300mm 2.8 Af-s version 1.
I recently purchased a used TC17eii to use with the D500 combo, but the pictures look so bad I stopped using it right away.
So I've been looking at two lenses for longer reach:
600mm f4 af-s 1
500mm f4 af-s 1
The af-i are much cheaper but I read they very slow?
What about a 400mm 2.8 af-i with my tc-17eii?
If I was to get this longer lens I would sell my two long lenses to afford it.
The Sigma 300-800 5.6 looks good, but is probably too slow for BIF? af-and iq wise?
Thanks!
ps, i have my 24-70 and 70-200 2.8s so im not loosing anything by selling the other two on short range.



May 01, 2017 at 10:42 AM
Chris Court
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #2 · p.1 #2 · Looking for new telephoto lens.


I'm certainly no long lens guru, but the new Sigma 500mm f4 Sport looks like a cracker! Semi-affordable, too.

C



May 01, 2017 at 12:07 PM
MalbikEndar
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #3 · p.1 #3 · Looking for new telephoto lens.


> The Sigma 300-800 5.6 looks good,

I've only seen this in pictures. Looks like a rocket launcher so might not be a good idea these days.

Thom Hogan had a nice discussion of super-teles, TCs, and practical issues. Maybe it's still there.

I ended up with a 500 mm/f4, in part so I could take it on small planes. Have to say I use a 300 mm PF + 1.4 TC much more.




May 01, 2017 at 01:43 PM
tntcorp
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #4 · p.1 #4 · Looking for new telephoto lens.


from my experience, the 400/2.8 starting from the af-s version 1 can take the 2x tc w/ slight blink to af speed or image degradation.

similarly, the 500/4 and 600/4 af-s can take the 1.7x tc.

the new 200-500/5.6 mates well with the 1.4x tc version 3 w/ slight image degradation. never shot with the d500 to comment on the af performance as the lens becomes an f/8 with the tc.
on the older d3s, af acquisition is slow for bif with the lens/tc combo.

imho, the best bang for the buck, arms, and back is the 150-600 C. users feedbacks reported of faster af speed on the S version, but then it is as approx. the same weight as your 300/2.8 afs with higher cost.




May 01, 2017 at 02:04 PM
Christian H
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #5 · p.1 #5 · Looking for new telephoto lens.


You can get a used f/4 500 VR G for less than 5K. That is, in my humble opinion, the way to go for budget superteles these days.

Christian



May 01, 2017 at 05:41 PM
Steve Walker
Offline

Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #6 · p.1 #6 · Looking for new telephoto lens.


You want to shoot birds, especially birds in flight.

Many find the 500 f4 to be the right, hand-holdable solution for that application.

I primarily shoot mammals with the occasional bird when I can. For me, the 600 f4 VR was the right solution.

I find that I usually shoot with a 1.4 teleconverter on the 600. If I shot 500 and was shooting small critters like birds, I would probably be using the 1.7 teleconverter much of the time.

I made the decision to get the 600 and am very glad that I did. If I shot birds, I would still get the 600, because I am not able to hand hold a 500 f4, so would be using a tripod anyway.

If you get the 600 f4 or the 400 f2.8, be sure to get a good tripod and gimbal head. I use a Gitzo 5 series with a wimberley 2 head. I am very happy with it, but would probably be equally happy with a comparable tripod from RRS or Feisol.

If you get the 500 you can probably hand hold it. I tripod and gimbal might not be necessary for the 500, but a monopod might come in useful at times.

Good luck. It is certainly exciting to shoot with a long lens. Remember that it might take awhile to get used to shooting such a beast. Long lens technique really makes a difference with these lenses.

Steve



May 01, 2017 at 09:06 PM
Photozack81
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #7 · p.1 #7 · Looking for new telephoto lens.


I am still trying to build up the right muscles to be able to hand hold my 400 2.8. I can do it for short swings but I don't have nearly enough endurance to make a run of a several hours long shoot handheld. I rely on either a gimbal/tripod or a monopod.

I've considered a 500/4 to cut back the weight some, but I am just over the top pleased with the 400 2.8VR's image quality that I can't even begin to entertain another long lens.

It takes a TC like it isn't even there (aside from the light loss) and SOOC images are so sharp they look fake.

I love it.



May 02, 2017 at 05:23 AM
morrismike
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #8 · p.1 #8 · Looking for new telephoto lens.


PabloSRT8 wrote:
Hello again!

I have a D500 I use for BIF with a 200-400mm vr1.
For closer wildlife I have a D800 with 300mm 2.8 Af-s version 1.
I recently purchased a used TC17eii to use with the D500 combo, but the pictures look so bad I stopped using it right away.
So I've been looking at two lenses for longer reach:
600mm f4 af-s 1
500mm f4 af-s 1
The af-i are much cheaper but I read they very slow?
What about a 400mm 2.8 af-i with my tc-17eii?
If I was to get this longer lens I would sell my two long lenses to afford it.
The Sigma 300-800
...Show more

There are a couple options I'd take in your position (actually already have taken one of these choices)
1. Sell the 200-400 and 70-200 and get a 200-500/180 f2.8/500 f4 (all used)/50-100 sigma. I've never used the 200-500 but some say it's better than the 80-400G.
2. (my option) sell the 200-400, 70-200 and get a 80-400G, 180 f2.8, nikon1 v3 with ft1, and a 600 f4. The 80-400G is my favorite and does well with a 1.4x tc III. The 180 f2.8 is pretty freaking awesome for almost needing a long lens stuff. The 600 f4 is great but requires upper body strength and a lot of practice to not hurt yourself. I was going to get the new lightweight 500 f4 but pretty expensive.



May 02, 2017 at 08:37 PM
PabloSRT8
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #9 · p.1 #9 · Looking for new telephoto lens.


morrismike wrote:
There are a couple options I'd take in your position (actually already have taken one of these choices)
1. Sell the 200-400 and 70-200 and get a 200-500/180 f2.8/500 f4 (all used)/50-100 sigma. I've never used the 200-500 but some say it's better than the 80-400G.
2. (my option) sell the 200-400, 70-200 and get a 80-400G, 180 f2.8, nikon1 v3 with ft1, and a 600 f4. The 80-400G is my favorite and does well with a 1.4x tc III. The 180 f2.8 is pretty freaking awesome for almost needing a long lens stuff. The 600 f4 is great but requires upper
...Show more

Hi, I actually sold my 200-500 5.6 after I purchased the 200-400 f4
On my D800 and D500, the 200-400 f4 wins hands down on AF speed, AF acquisition, and image quality.
The 70-200 is my go to lens for portraits of my kids, I don't have a big area where I could use 300mm in the house.
I had a V1 and the iq was so bad that I sold it.
I have a 200 f4 micro, but its slow at AF.
I saw a 500mm f4 af-s for $2300 and a Sigma 800mm 5.6 for $4k which is over my budget but I read that it has very slow at AF anyways.
Forgot to say my limit is $3500 and that's stretching it.
Thanks.



May 03, 2017 at 06:01 AM
PabloSRT8
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #10 · p.1 #10 · Looking for new telephoto lens.


Thank you everyone for all the replies.
I forgot to mention my budget, and it is way south of all the excellent lenses that were mentioned here.
$3500 and that's stretching it.

How is the AF on a 400mm 2.8 AF-I vs an AF-S version 1?
I've seen a few 500mm f4 for around $2300, but maybe 400mm to 500mm not a big difference?
All 600mm AF-S version 1 are over $3500.
Sigma 300-800 read is very slow at AF, I wonder if 800mm 5.6 Sigma prime is faster.
Thanks!



May 03, 2017 at 06:06 AM
Christian H
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #11 · p.1 #11 · Looking for new telephoto lens.


If you're planning to do any serious handheld shooting (BIF) I don't see a way around VR. Do yourself a favor and save up some cash until you can afford a 500 G.

If instant gratification is the order of the day, I'd say go with a 500 AF-S II. It's the lightest of the series and, as far as I know, Nikon will service that generation. Very few people can handhold non-VR 400 or 600 mm glass with any consistency.

AF-I glass is a gamble. Replacement parts are no longer available: if it breaks you have a somewhat expensive paperweight.



May 03, 2017 at 07:10 AM
OwlsEyes
Online
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #12 · p.1 #12 · Looking for new telephoto lens.


I have similar gear as you.. some more modern and some less. My wife and I both shoot (though I do a bit more than her). Collectively, we have a 300mm f/2.8 AFSII, 200-400mm VR1, 200-500mm VR, 70-200mm VRii, TC14eii, 3 D500's, D810 and D610. If we can't get the shot with what we've got, then it's on us.

In your kit, the weak link is the TC17ii and the D800. It is not that the D800 is a bad camera, it is just not very well damped. The end result is that super-tele work can be ultra challenging especially if you are shooting a long lens at 1/400 second or lower. I had a D800e and it ended up being a mirror-up body only. After using a friend's D810 I realized that Nikon really improved the shutter / mirror box on that camera and the problems I had previously experienced dissipated. While I am not knocking your drive for longer glass, it is a huge investment considering what you already have and the age of the gear you are exploring.

As an alternative, you might consider selling your D800 + 1.7x and replace these with a D810. I have shot my 300mm f/2.8 w/ a 2x on my D810 and have had really good output between Iso 100 and 800. This camera allows for liberal crops. Alternatively, my 200-400mm lens w/ a 1.4x on the D500 is stellar at f/8 when shooting within 30 meters, anything else and the atmosphere becomes my enemy.

As for the 200-500VR, my wife uses this from a tripod and I use it handheld from a canoe or kayak. It is not as fast to AF, but in good to moderate light it is a great value in a long lens. The VR on this lens is the best of anything I own.

cheers,
bruce



May 03, 2017 at 08:59 AM
morrismike
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #13 · p.1 #13 · Looking for new telephoto lens.


PabloSRT8 wrote:
Thank you everyone for all the replies.
I forgot to mention my budget, and it is way south of all the excellent lenses that were mentioned here.
$3500 and that's stretching it.

How is the AF on a 400mm 2.8 AF-I vs an AF-S version 1?
I've seen a few 500mm f4 for around $2300, but maybe 400mm to 500mm not a big difference?
All 600mm AF-S version 1 are over $3500.
Sigma 300-800 read is very slow at AF, I wonder if 800mm 5.6 Sigma prime is faster.
Thanks!


You have a 200-400 to trade in towards a 500 or 600 f4.



May 03, 2017 at 10:27 PM
PabloSRT8
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #14 · p.1 #14 · Looking for new telephoto lens.


To recap, I need more reach than my 200-400 f4, this came to light when I was on the edge of a small river taking pictures of Bald Eagles on the other side; my body was leaning forward about to fall in.
Yesterday for the first time I tried my 300mm af-s version 1 (which I'm surprised how quick the AF is)
With my TC-17ii.
To my eyes, it was very sharp combo. I would even say it was better than my old 200-500 5.6 when I stepped down past 5.6 on the 2.8 (now 4.8 because of 1.7 tele)
I had more reach than my 200-400 and just as sharp but no vr.
I'm now wondering if a 400mm 2.8 with tc would be just as good as a 600mm f4.
Only one way to find out, but that's an expensive answer!



May 04, 2017 at 06:07 AM
Photozack81
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #15 · p.1 #15 · Looking for new telephoto lens.


I'd say you'd have a hard time telling the difference between my 400 2.8 + 1.4x and someone else's 600 f4. Especially if you stop it down to 5.6.

I can't speak to a 1.7x, never used one, but I do have a 2x and it works well with that too. The 800 f/5.6 native lens probably outperforms this combo, but not by much.

You can pick up a 400 f/2.8VR (the older version) for around 5k used if you shop around. The older, older ones without VR can be had even cheaper.



May 04, 2017 at 11:52 AM
la puffin
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #16 · p.1 #16 · Looking for new telephoto lens.


PabloSRT8 wrote:
Hi, I actually sold my 200-500 5.6 after I purchased the 200-400 f4
On my D800 and D500, the 200-400 f4 wins hands down on AF speed, AF acquisition, and image quality..


I'm considering a 200-400/4 instead of the 200-500. I didn't like the latter at 500mm, the AF was too slow and build quality was commensurate with it's price.

Did you ever try comparing the 200-400 with a 1.4x TC vs the 200-500 bare? If so, was the AF quicker and IQ better on the 200-400/1.4x?



May 04, 2017 at 05:20 PM
PabloSRT8
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #17 · p.1 #17 · Looking for new telephoto lens.


la puffin wrote:
I'm considering a 200-400/4 instead of the 200-500. I didn't like the latter at 500mm, the AF was too slow and build quality was commensurate with it's price.

Did you ever try comparing the 200-400 with a 1.4x TC vs the 200-500 bare? If so, was the AF quicker and IQ better on the 200-400/1.4x?


The 200-400 f4 has less reach, but I get way more keepers now.
I might not reach 500, but I can crop more because images are sharper.
I have a TC-17eII and it doesn't work well with this lens.
Image quality takes a hit and AF is slow, but it is a 1.7...
After I got the 200-400 f4 I found a 300mm 2.8 af-s version 1 non vr really cheap.
That 300 af is actually snappier than the 200-400; and it actually works perfect with the tc-17eII
So now I have a 510mm f4.8 which at f5.6 seems sharper or same as the 200-400 without tc.
And is half the price! You might want to try that instead.



May 04, 2017 at 07:50 PM
la puffin
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #18 · p.1 #18 · Looking for new telephoto lens.


PabloSRT8 wrote:
The 200-400 f4 has less reach, but I get way more keepers now.
I might not reach 500, but I can crop more because images are sharper.


I need a zoom and 500mm + for surfing, that's why I ask about the 1.4x. I have no use for a f/5.6 lens but I could use the 200-400/4 bare, ,occasionally for baseball. So a 300/2.8 + 1.7x won't work for me, and I also have a 200/2 that works really well with the 1.4x III which is 280/2.8. Plus the 200-400 VR1 seems t be had for $2500 or less, which makes it more attractive for what you get.

Thanks a lot.



May 05, 2017 at 01:50 AM
OwlsEyes
Online
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #19 · p.1 #19 · Looking for new telephoto lens.


la puffin wrote:
I need a zoom and 500mm + for surfing, that's why I ask about the 1.4x. I have no use for a f/5.6 lens but I could use the 200-400/4 bare, ,occasionally for baseball. So a 300/2.8 + 1.7x won't work for me, and I also have a 200/2 that works really well with the 1.4x III which is 280/2.8. Plus the 200-400 VR1 seems t be had for $2500 or less, which makes it more attractive for what you get.

Thanks a lot.


As stated previously, I have the 300mm f/2.8 AFS-ii, 200-400mmVR-i and 200-500mmVR. I also have a TC14eII. The version two converters can be had cheap now that the 3's are out. Optically, they are very similar though the iii's seem to play better with the newer FL-e lenses (opinion is based on words of others and not experience with version iii converter). I sold my first 200-400VR after getting the 200-500 and immediately regretted it. At $2500, I can not think of a lens that can offer so much for "so little" in the big tele-world. If you are a sports photographer, it is a dream because the AF is responsive and the zoom is as smooth as can be. Furthermore, there is very little image degradation through the zoom range.

Now for the bad... the 200-400VR suffers from quite a bit of sample variation. You will want to get one with a returnable warranty so you can test it out. They are almost as sharp as the older (non-FLe-s) at 400mm when you are shooting within 30m (universally reported by experienced photographers), but seem to lose contrast and detail as things move very far away. My first version showed this pattern and was often a source of frustration for me. Wildlife landscapes suffered from an unexplained softness. My current lens seems to be much better when shooting distant objects. While I lose a bit of detail (expected due to haze, heat waves and the realities of increasing atmospheric interference), this fall off in detail is much reduced than before.

As for with the 1.4x... well, this will be a mixed bag. I use my 1.4x on my 300mm f/2.8 for a lighter & more mobile wildlife package when my wife uses the 200-500. The 1.4x plays well w/ the 300mm f2.8, but the bokeh seems uglier when there is a busy background. I have yet to use the 1.4x on the 200-400, but I know the AF will be more robust than with the 200-500. I will be out shooting all weekend and will give this a try for you and report back... I suspect that within close range it will be very good but distances will result in less acceptable detail.

sorry for the long response,
bruce



May 05, 2017 at 05:36 AM
la puffin
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #20 · p.1 #20 · Looking for new telephoto lens.


OwlsEyes wrote:
sorry for the long response,
bruce


No, not too long, I appreciate it. I hadn't heard a lot about sample variation, but haven't seen to many examples shot wide open.




May 05, 2017 at 09:39 AM
1
       2       end




FM Forums | Nikon Forum | Join Upload & Sell

1
       2       end
    
 

You are not logged in. Login or Register

Username       Or Reset password



This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.