ilkka_nissila
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
|
ISO1600 wrote:
They don't necessarily need pro DX glass, they just need slower/more affordable tele options. They've got amazing superteles as it is, but many of them are more expensive than all the competitions' options. This is a hard pill to swallow for a lot of hobbyists.
In the D300 era, Nikon had a 80-400/4.5-5.6, 300/4, typical for wildlife photographers was also the 300/2.8, 200-400/4, 400/2.8, 500/4, and 600/4. At the time of the D500, there were a newer 80-400/4.5-5.6, 200-500/5.6, 300/4, 500/5.6, 180-400/4 TC, 300/2.8, 400/2.8, 500/4, 600/4, and 800/5.6.
For the rather new Z system, Nikon has so far 100-400/4.5-5.6, 180-600/5.6-6.3, 400/4.5, 400/2.8 TC, 600/6.3, 600/4 TC, and 800/6.3. If we correct the F-mount era lens prices for inflation, many of today's lenses are great value although the very top end lenses continue to be very expensive.
For photographing wildlife (and sports), Nikon has created a nice lineup. The 180-600 and 400/4.5 in particular are quite affordable for lenses of their type (depending on whether you are after faster aperture & portability or economy with a bit more reach, you can choose accordingly).
Sony and Canon have 400-800/6.3-8 ($3298) and 200-800/6.3-9 ($2099); Nikon doesn't offer a lens of this type yet but they do have 600/6.3 and 800/6.3 which are highly portable for the apertures and the cost of the 800/6.3 is significantly lower than Canon's 800/5.6. The Z mount PF lenses are not inexpensive in absolute terms but the 800 is competitively priced.
Nikon doesn't have small-aperture shorter teles at very low prices. However, Tamron 50-400mm F/4.5-6.3 Di III VC VXD ($1099), 70-300mm F/4.5-6.3 Di III RXD ($499) and 150-500mm F/5-6.7 Di III VC VXD ($1199) are available for the Z mount.
For mid-level needs the 180-600 & 400/4.5 seem to be really good value. The 400/4.5 is aesthetically and handling-wise really nice, and the 180-600 seems very popular among even serious wildlife photographers on FM.
Where it comes to lenses with maximum apertures of f/8, f/9, and f/11, I just don't see the conditions where they might be applied with good results broad enough to own such a lens. My slowest tele is a 100-400 mm f/4.5-5.6 and I often find myself at too high ISO settings (12800-25600) or too slow shutter speeds (1/50s to get to moderate ISO such as 2000) when using it. Much of sports is played indoors, and the richest wildlife activity is often on both sides of dawn and dusk. Do you want a lens that excludes all these possibilities?
|
