p.1 #1 · D600 with 300mm af-s f4 or 70-200mm f4 or 80-400mm
I am currently looking for a lens to use on my D600 for wildlife and birding. I am currently using a 70-300mm VR (a hold over from my DX days). The three I am considering are the 300mm af-s f4, 70-200mm f4 and the 80-400mm. I currently have a tc-14eII. What I am looking for is high performance. Does the 80-400mm really give that to me on a 24mp camera? It is not compatible with the teleconverter. Does the 70-200 perform well with a 2x teleconverter? I have used the 300 with a converter and have been happy with the outcome. Now that I am ready to buy, which one do I go for? Thank you in advance for your input.
p.1 #3 · D600 with 300mm af-s f4 or 70-200mm f4 or 80-400mm
The 70-200 is too short for wildlife on FX particularly for birding even with a 14EII, despite it being a great lens as far as I heard. I had the 80-400 (I suppose you're referring to the older version since you mentioned that it doesn't take 1.4 TCs) and it was a decent super zoom although a bit soft on the long end and has a slow AF, the VR is the crappiest out there. The 300 f/4 AF-S was my favorite tele and I couldn't recommend it enough. Works like a charm with a TC 14EII. Very sharp wide open, very fast AF, great build and the price is just right. There's nothing even close in that price range IMHO...
p.1 #4 · D600 with 300mm af-s f4 or 70-200mm f4 or 80-400mm
Nobody knows how the new 80-400 will perform but these will ship next week so there should be feedback coming soon on that lens. I just shot with the 70-200 f4 & 2X this last weekend on my D600 and while the IQ and AF isn't terrible it's not a good solution IMHO if one needs 400mm all the time. The 70-200 f2.8 VR2 & 2X performed better on the 800/800E for me. I've owned the 300 before and it's a great lens but no VR limits it's usefulness if you're handholding a lot.
p.1 #5 · D600 with 300mm af-s f4 or 70-200mm f4 or 80-400mm
You would be ahead to sell the D600 and buy a D7100 if your thing is wildlife. Put the net difference towards getting a great tripod/head for a first class lens. I don't know about the new TC-20eIII, but I did test my 80-400mm VR against the 70-200mm f2.8 VR with TC-20eII. Using a solid tripod and cable release, the 80-400mm was noticeably sharper. In fact, the TC-2e wasn't even acceptable. I ended up with the TC-17e but rarely use it because the 80-400mm is still just a little bit better. It's looking like your best option for wildlife now is a D7100 & new 80-400mm VR. I'm on the list for the camera, and intend to get that lens by the end of the year myself.
p.1 #6 · D600 with 300mm af-s f4 or 70-200mm f4 or 80-400mm
Between the two I recommend the 300mm f4 with the newest 1.4 TC. Primes are always a good choice - better image quality and focus speed. This would be my recommendation for anyone that wants to start wildlife.You can also switch to dx mode if you want that extra reach. But then you have to be extra careful since it is easy to clip your subject and remember that you are only shooting 10mega-pixels. I have also found the you can crop your image and still keep good detail. I use the 300 2.8 VRII with the TC20eIII and say it was worth every penny. I have to say it was a hard decision to make. Unless I have set up a perch, I shoot freehand. No matter what lens you use you have to know your subject and get close to it. You want it close so that you can get that beautiful background. Every shot is going to look soft if you shoot too far from your subject.
p.1 #7 · D600 with 300mm af-s f4 or 70-200mm f4 or 80-400mm
All good advice above. It all depends on your budget. I agree that the 70-200 is too short on FX. For the cost of the 80-400 (the new version) you could (almost) pick up a D7100 plus the 70-200 f4. If money is not an issue, I'd wait on the reviews of the new 80-400 version, as well as the D7100.
I have the D600 with the 300 f4 af-s. It is a great combination and a world apart from your 70-300 (which I also started with). I've used it with the 1.4 TC and while very good, I usually prefer to just crop and limit my enlargements. Here's an example (cropped somewhat) of the D600 with the 300:
p.1 #8 · D600 with 300mm af-s f4 or 70-200mm f4 or 80-400mm
Daniel, ya can't do much better for the bucks than the AF-S 300 f4 (refurbs runnin' $899)
Sometimes I'll forego the TC (1.7's my fave) and post a 100% crop SOOC to emphasize my point...
Shot handhled with the D800, but you get the idea.
BTW, welcome to FM
p.1 #10 · D600 with 300mm af-s f4 or 70-200mm f4 or 80-400mm
I revive this thread because I'm in a similar situation. I come from canon so I'm not yet entirely familiar with nikon's lineup.
Soooo.... The new 80-400 seems amazing. However, it's in a price league that I don't fancy too much. Same the sigma 120-300.
The 300 prime is quite nice, but it's an old lens due for a refresh. I don't feel like it's a good purchase at this point in time. However, I am afraid Nikon will not release a new version so soon after the 80-400.
I have been considering buying a 70-200 f/4 and the 1.7x TC. Does anyone know how this combo works?
p.1 #11 · D600 with 300mm af-s f4 or 70-200mm f4 or 80-400mm
Albi86 wrote:
I revive this thread because I'm in a similar situation. I come from canon so I'm not yet entirely familiar with nikon's lineup.
Soooo.... The new 80-400 seems amazing. However, it's in a price league that I don't fancy too much. Same the sigma 120-300.
The 300 prime is quite nice, but it's an old lens due for a refresh. I don't feel like it's a good purchase at this point in time. However, I am afraid Nikon will not release a new version so soon after the 80-400.
I have been considering buying a 70-200 f/4 and the 1.7x TC. Does anyone know how this combo works? ...Show more →
It works but the IQ and especially the AF is not in the same league as the 80-400. Heck my 70-200 f4 is a tad less sharp then the 80-400 at 200mm (and that's with the 70-200 stopped down to the same aperture) 3 different tests have shown me that. Bad 70-200? I dunno, I compared the f4 to the f2.8 VR2 when I first got it and thought they were pretty close. Just my personal experience, take it with a grain of salt.
There's a comparison shot floating around between the 300 + 1.4 and the 80-400. In that case they showed the same level of detail and the 80-400 was superior in color/contrast and corner performance.
I've got to say having all that zoom range is just awesome. I shot some kite surfing at Scott creek yesterday and being able to zoom out and get the kite and the rider in the frame and then zoom in tight on the kite/rider was pretty cool.
p.1 #12 · D600 with 300mm af-s f4 or 70-200mm f4 or 80-400mm
Albi86 - you don't say what you are going to use the lens for. If it's for birding then from the images I've seen here the 80-400 seems very good, but not as good as the Sigma 120-300/2.8 OS which can be had for around US$2,200 (at least that is what I paid for it in Shanghai) as the new 120-300 is due out later this year and retailers are depleting stock.
The Sigma also takes the TC14II (once you file off the offending lever - simple job) to give you a stellar 168- 420mm though the 120-300 alone is superb. Of course it also works very well with Sigma's own, excellent, TCs (1.4 and 2.0).
Research it a bit - POTN have an amazing thread on that lens. Though do note that as an f2.8 lens it weighs twice as much as the 80-400 I believe !
p.1 #15 · D600 with 300mm af-s f4 or 70-200mm f4 or 80-400mm
rd4tile wrote:
There's a comparison shot floating around between the 300 + 1.4 and the 80-400. In that case they showed the same level of detail and the 80-400 was superior in color/contrast and corner performance.
