BrianJarvis wrote:
I beg to differ, if you take a look at the Blue Angels shot, most of them are not cropped, and those that are were only minimally cropped. Most shots averaged about 250mm, a 300 prime would not have worked in this instance.
I did look at them and I feel that 16 out of the 28 on pg 1 would have been better at 300. The aircraft would have filled more of the frame and it would have given a little more detail. If your happy with them cool. Check out the MATA thread for more airshow/plane pics.
As for birds here are two taken at 8m with a 850 (500+1.7) Both are heavy crops.
I agree with the 300 f/4 because of cost.
But, would prefer the AF-S 70-200 VRII and latest TC-2x Nikkors.
Better yet would be an overdue (by about 10 years) AF-S 80-400 VR
BrianJarvis wrote:
In addition to a new body I posted a poll on, I'm now looking at a longer reach zoom lens. 300+mm min reach. Fast focus is a plus for birds in flight and action shots. Looking at D7000 or D300s replacement if one comes avail in the next few months
Well, you can discount the 80-400 then.
If you're looking at primarily birds, you want 400mm minimum unless you're only going to be shooting back yard birds and you have a great hide setup already to where you can get close.
Another vote for the 300 / 4 with 1.4x tc (and even then you'll be wanting more length).
You might also seriously consider the Sigma 50-500 OS. It's a bit expensive but reviews pretty good. I owned the 50-500 non-OS and was happy with it, but it's a beast of a lens.
You're facing a problem I had when I shot Nikon - Unfortunately they don't have a lot of attractive 400mm options as compared to Canon.
I've found with most birding I've done (which is pretty casual), there almost isn't a such thing as "too close", so the longer the better.
(Even my 600mm f/5.6 Minolta bolted onto my Nex 5N - rarely is it too close).
cputeq wrote:
You might also seriously consider the Sigma 50-500 OS. It's a bit expensive but reviews pretty good. I owned the 50-500 non-OS and was happy with it, but it's a beast of a lens.
+1
Have the 50-500 non OS it is a good deal used at around $650. Stop it down to F8 in good light and it is an ok bird/plane lens.
Great shots LLondon, don't get me wrong, I know the 300/4 would be a great set up for birding, the thing is as you may have seen from my website, they are a small part part of what I shoot. Most of what I shoot is landscapes. I also shoot wildlife (non birds) when I can find them. there have been may times when I wish I has a 400 or higher, especially for the Bald Eagles that fly around here but that is just not in the budget. I need something that is flexible, that can stay be tossed in the car on a regular basis for multi purpose shooting. That is one of the reasons I've been debating the Bigma's (120-400 or 150-500, giving me up to about 600mm or 750mm respectively on my DX), not great for hand holding because of the weight, but doable if your not out all day. Until Nikon replaces the 80-400, it's really the only other Nikon option I have.
cputeq wrote:
I've found with most birding I've done (which is pretty casual), there almost isn't a such thing as "too close", so the longer the better.
+1
I shoot birds with a 500mm f/4.5 Sigma on my D7000 - 750mm equivalent. Still regularly fit a 1.4x TC on it to get closer!
BrianJarvis wrote:
Great shots LLondon, don't get me wrong, I know the 300/4 would be a great set up for birding, the thing is as you may have seen from my website, they are a small part part of what I shoot. Most of what I shoot is landscapes. I also shoot wildlife (non birds) when I can find them. there have been may times when I wish I has a 400 or higher, especially for the Bald Eagles that fly around here but that is just not in the budget. I need something that is flexible, that can stay be tossed in the car on a regular basis for multi purpose shooting. That is one of the reasons I've been debating the Bigma's (120-400 or 150-500, giving me up to about 600mm or 750mm respectively on my DX), not great for hand holding because of the weight, but doable if your not out all day. Until Nikon replaces the 80-400, it's really the only other Nikon option I have....Show more →
Thanks.
The 50-500 is very hand holdable. Have used mine on a D200 and D3. It has been put away since I got the 500/4. You will need good light as it is slow. Not a bad tossed in the back floorboard set up. Get a mono pod to help on the longer shots.
Sorry if it feels like we are trying to force a solution onto you . Just trying to save you money in the long run.
A landscape lens will not be a good bird lens 99% of the time. A good bird lens can be a good landscape lens. Think a 2 lens kit. Something like a 17-55 for wide angle and a 300/4 for birds,planes and long distance landscapes. Look for used. I would not feel bad about spending a day at an airshow or a long walk in the wood with that on a good dx body.
