Wildlife safari zoom lens solution for D200

[Thurisaz]

Need help on what solution to get for my D200.

I'm travelling to Africa next year, for a 10-14 day private custom made photo safari (wildlife). I'm not a rich man, actually quite poor, working for a well know environmental organization, and I have been saving for a couple of years now. Point is, no luxury solutions please, no matter what reasons.

I will be carrying with me my new D200 and a Nikkor 18-200 lens (damn waiting line :( ) as primary equipment. I will also be taking with me an ancient Nikon FE2 film camera as a backup (w Tokina 50-250).

I want a digital zoom range of at least 400mm. My primary choice atm is, after many hours of or reading reviews and forums, the Tokina 80-400, which has mixed reviews, mostly at forums, on it not being sharp at ALL at f5.6 to F8 or at 300-400mm. Others are saying it is quite sharp at these settings and has very good sharpness at all other ranges.

The issue with this lens has been it's AF being very slow. The lens has gradually been getting better in both image quality and in AF. The latest one that got released just a couple of days ago has a completely new AF system and is now supposed to be very good.

-So, a solution giving me something in the range of 50-500 zoom, digital and under US$ 1000, preferable way under that sum.
-Pros and cons for the Tokina 80-400 ($650), Sigma 80-400($1000), Sigma 50-500 ($1000), or any other alternatives like a TC ring on a 300mm zoom or something (heard many saying this is never as good as having one larger singel zoom lens !! ? !).
I've also read that the Nikkor 80-400 ($1300) is not worth twice as much as the Tokina 80-400 and is not even better than Sigmas 80-400.

Of the two Sigmas, it seems as only the 80-400 has image stabilizing technology, resulting in the same prize as the 50-500 one.

-Is it really dumb to buy a big zoom lens without stabilizing technology for wildlife photography? Can't a bean bag compensate for this loss somewhat or is it an impossible task to take a 400mm shot, at sunset or sunrise, at a big cat chasing it's prey? without setting the ISO to above 400 preferably?


Thanks for any and all help on this!

[coldrain]

Not sure why a D50 will not do, it will bring the price down a lot.
But on the lens side, of course a bean bag and/or tripod will help a lot. You do not need IS, just some photo technique to deal with tele shots. IS isn't around that long... but teleshots with support have been for decades...

The cheapest solution, and better than the Tokina 80-400, is the Sigma 135-400.

The 80-400 from Sigma is quite good for its price.

Tamron has a new xxx-500 lens that is not bad either.

You can also consider a Sigma 70-200 f2.8 HSM DG with a 2x teleconvertor, for instance from Soligor (www.soligor.de) or Sigma (or Kenko or Tamron).

It is quite safe to say that the 70-200 Sigma + 2x Soligor teleconvertor (not the pro version!) will do very well, beating most mentioned solutions in the long end in sharpness and contrast.

[Thurisaz]

Thx coldrain.

First to my reason for th D200, which is already bought and I'm also extremely happy with it, so far. Reason is primarly that I've been waiting a couple of years now for a good dSLR, less expensive than the 5D and D2x, but with at least 10Mpix. I was hoping for 12Mpix but 10Mpix will do and amount of total megapixels is not everything. I want to make larger prints and crops of photos to print. But another main feature is it's magnesium alloy body which is both dust and moist sealed, which I dont think even the 5D is. Very important for me in dusty Africa or in my future moist rainforest trips. Another thing is all the advanced features of the D200 and the big LCD display, even though D50 has big display too.
D50 sure is a great camera and no camera beats it, in my opinion, in it's price range.

Thx for your input on lenses. I've checked out the Tamron 200-500 and compared it to the Sigma 50-500. After seeing many sites with pictures taken by both it does seem as the Sigma gives better results though very heavy and a bit harder to handle. Tamron's is plastic and Sigmas is metal. I like sturdy lenses even if they do weigh more.
The best and totally new solution which I will be giving major thoughts to is the Sigma 70-200 2.8 + 2x, sounds very interresting and the lens has got very good reviews.

[Gopher]

Is there a Nikon mount equiv. for Canon 100-400 IS? That lens was made for such an application.

[britkev]

Is there a Nikon mount equiv. for Canon 100-400 IS? That lens was made for such an application.

Nearest Nikkor equivalent would be the 80-400 VR which apparently suffers from rather slow focussing, and even after rebate is about $300 over the OP's budget

[rawpaw18]

The best and totally new solution which I will be giving major thoughts to is the Sigma 70-200 2.8 + 2x, sounds very interresting and the lens has got very good reviews.

The Nikon mount for the new Sigma 70-200 2.8 is being released in July. Cost seems to be in the $900usd range.

[dclapp]

would'nt the nikon 80-200 with the tele converter be a better setup then the sigma 70-200 for about the same price?

[jcon]

I may get some arguements here but when I was researching the 2, I had read at a few places that the Sigma compared very well with the Nikon equivalent. A shop owner here says he prefers the Sigma over the Nikon, so take that for what its worth. I personaly have never used the Nikon. Everywhere I look the Sigma gets strong reviews. So in this case, I think it may be a personal preference.

[erichlund]

Need help on what solution to get for my D200.

I'm travelling to Africa next year, for a 10-14 day private custom made photo safari (wildlife). I'm not a rich man, actually quite poor, working for a well know environmental organization, and I have been saving for a couple of years now. Point is, no luxury solutions please, no matter what reasons.

I will be carrying with me my new D200 and a Nikkor 18-200 lens (damn waiting line :( ) as primary equipment. I will also be taking with me an ancient Nikon FE2 film camera as a backup (w Tokina 50-250).

Lots of Lens Lust Cut here. One thing to not forget is that you can use AI/AI-S lenses on that D200, and you have a good enough viewfinder to use them. You might look about for a really good deal on some really big glass. Unfortunately, I think the secret is out, because the prices aren't what they were. Barring that, you can usually find the Nikkor 80-200 for pretty cheap (~$700) and a doubler will get you into the range you want. Just remember, the doubler takes two stops.

Don't sweat that business about which is marginally better. If you like the Tokina, get it. If you like the Sigmas, get one. But, for many years, the Nikkor 80-200s were the glass of choice for many pros. They aren't suddenly bad lenses. I personally think the thing that brings this into conflict is that the 70-200VR is such a good lens that people tend to put the 80-200 too far down. Of course, the top end lenses from the third party manufacturers are getting much better.

-Is it really dumb to buy a big zoom lens without stabilizing technology for wildlife photography? Can't a bean bag compensate for this loss somewhat or is it an impossible task to take a 400mm shot, at sunset or sunrise, at a big cat chasing it's prey? without setting the ISO to above 400 preferably?
Stabilization is only for your movement, not the subject. Stabilization does ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to stabilize the subject. Your best option is a tripod or equivalent mount (Some safari vehicles now have camera mounts, but I don't know how widespread this is). A bean bag on a roll bar is an excellent solution, as long as the vehicle is stationary and the engine is off.

Thanks for any and all help on this!

Good luck and have a great trip!