Birding Setup

[JTF]

Does anyone use a D40 for birding. Looking for long lense suggestions.

[Rooz]

whats your budget ? what focal length are you after ? what sort of light is available ?theres a heap of lens' around, just to name a few...

sigma 50-150 f2.8
sigma 70-200 f2.8
nikon 80-200 f2.8 af-s
nikon 70-200 f2.8 VR
nikon 300mm f4 af-s

[XaiLo]

how long is long?

[Dread Pirate Roberts]

Look I don't own one but I've very envious of Rooz' 300mm bird shots on the pic of the day thread.

I'm finding 200mm just isn't quite close enough for birds. ie for birds I'm almost always at max zoom.

min of F5.6 at 200mm makes it very hard (but not impossible) to isolate the bird from the background.

The birds are often stationary enough, I just want a quicker lens to get a shallower DOF.

[K1W1]

The Sigma Bigma (http://www.sigmaphoto.com/lenses/lenses_all_details.asp?id=3348&navigator=3) is a common choice but you will need a decent tripod.

[jmorgan]

no one has said it yet but the nikkor 70-300vr is very nice, not as fast or as nice as the ones Rooz posted but not bad. I like mine.

[T06]

The Sigma Bigma (http://www.sigmaphoto.com/lenses/lenses_all_details.asp?id=3348&navigator=3) is a common choice but you will need a decent tripod.

I almost bought that lens but "CHRIST", i just couldn't do it with the aperture, now I'm a happy camper in the fsat lane.:p:p:p

[JTF]

how long is long?

500mm
Budget $1400

[tim11]

I almost bought that lens but "CHRIST", i just couldn't do it with the aperture,---
How about this APO 200-500mm F2.8/400-1000mm EX DG? :D
http://www.sigmaphoto.com/images/LensesImage/187_big.jpg

I have no experience with long lens but as with the Bigma Sigma APO 150-500mm F5-6.3 DG OS HSM starting at F5, wouldn't that make is a good light only lens? For moving subjects at least.

[wilson44512]

trust me when i say a 200mm lens is not long enough. i have the 55-200mm lens. and unless you can get close to the bird. you wont get a good close up shot. here are 2 i took in my back yard. the first one is at about 15 feet away and the 2nd is about 25 feet away. so if you got enough money get a good lens.

i was able to be this close because he comes here almost every day to feed.
http://i27.tinypic.com/1ggizd.jpg

http://i30.tinypic.com/25505ua.jpg

[XaiLo]

500mm
Budget $1400

300mm f/4 x 1.7TC = 510mm

300mm f/4 $1,124.95
TC-17E $449.99

Might have to adjust your budget :cool:

[BLWNHR]

How many stops do you lose with the 1.7? Would you be better with the Bigma?

[XaiLo]

1.5 stops... the bigma is f4-6.3 lastly, that would depend on how much one would be able to live with the image quality of the bigma.

[tim11]

1.5 stops... the bigma is f4-6.3 lastly, that would depend on how much one would be able to live with the image quality of the bigma.

The Bigma starts from F5.

[XaiLo]

The Bigma starts from F5.


I just copied this from Sigma's site are we talking the same lens?
APO 50-500mm F4-6.3 EX DG HSM

[tim11]

The Sigma Bigma (http://www.sigmaphoto.com/lenses/lenses_all_details.asp?id=3348&navigator=3) is a common choice but you will need a decent tripod.

I see XaiLo. On clicking Kiwi's Bigma link I saw APO 150-500mm F5-6.3 DG OS HSM and thought this particular one was called the Bigma. Now I realise there are many others too.

[Rooz]

the 300f4 + 1.7tc smokes the bigma. there is no comparison whatsoever. the only benefit of the bigma is of course its highly flexible focal range. the 80-400 nikkor is a much better option than the bigma aswell. but again, no comparison with the 300 prime.

[erichlund]

OK, first of all, the 150-500 is NOT the Bigma. That designation goes to the Sigma 50-500 f4-6.3 HSM. Always has. All you have to do is look at the barrels of the two lenses to know why it's the 50-500 that get's the designation. It's much thicker.

Secondly, of course the 300 f4 + 1.7TC smokes the Bigma: It's $1200 for the single focal length, before adding the cost of the TC, vs. $999 for the 10x zoom. For one thing, the Bigma is f6.3 at 500mm, and can only autofocus because it cheats and tells the camera it's an f5.6 lens.

There are people that take excellent photos with the Bigma. It's been a fan favorite of birders for a long time, due to the relatively low cost.

[Telecorder]

For moderately priced long range lens options, I've posted a list of review links for Nikon mounts at-->
http://www.dslrgeeks.com/forum/showthread.php?p=2726#post2726

Keep in mind that the D40 will only manual focus on those lenses that don't have an in-lens AF motor (AF-s; HSM et al)

In my case, the Bigma is one of the biggest bang for the buck but I'm located in the Mojave Desert blessed with more than adequate light. For Birding, I use Auto-ISO and Shutter Priority to overcome the f/6.3 issues with good success; even in the 'golden hour' just before sunset...

http://i33.photobucket.com/albums/d73/Telecorder/Pelican-Takeoff-4073_filteredMedium.jpg
http://i33.photobucket.com/albums/d73/Telecorder/Pelican-IF-3661_filteredMedium.jpg

[Dread Pirate Roberts]

Some good information thanks all.

Telecorder I like that second shot heaps. If I could get shots like that I'd be rightly proud too. I do wonder if it's a bit oversharpened for my eyes though. It fair leaps off the screen with the result it's got significant halos around the lower primaries.

[Rooz]

some spectacular shots on your smugmug page T/C. the eagle heads are breathtaking. those 2 above are not your best work by a long shot.

[Telecorder]

Some good information thanks all.
Telecorder I like that second shot heaps. If I could get shots like that I'd be rightly proud too. I do wonder if it's a bit oversharpened for my eyes though. It fair leaps off the screen with the result it's got significant halos around the lower primaries.

Thanks, DPR & Rooz...

I agree the 2nd Pelican is a bit over sharpened. My posting it was more to illustrate the ability of the Bigma in lower lighting circumstances just before sunset. I purposely post processed it with a bit heavier sharpening to achieve the 'artistic' effect of having the subject 'leap off' for a 20"x30" print that's on my wall. :)

While its not the best PP job - especially when viewed on a PC, the results, IMHO, achieves the desired effect in the print... I guess there's no accounting for taste - :D

By the by, this Eagle portrait is also in a 20"x30" print on my wall and, even if I say so myself, is fairly striking...

[T06]

dave i saw the size of the prints you mentioned & had a smile to myself. the thought was of a very big house as in lots of good pics.;)

[Rooz]

goddam thats a great shot.

[Telecorder]

dave i saw the size of the prints you mentioned & had a smile to myself. the thought was of a very big house as in lots of good pics.;)

LOL... actually its only a 3Bd 1400sf... The wife has the family room's walls covered in 8x10 pictures of family events with a 36x48 canvas painting of an Eagle landing on one wall. All of my photos are delegated to my office in one of the bedrooms so I'm quite limited in the wall space. I still have a number of 8x10 & 14x20 prints loose, waiting on framing and a place to hang them...:(


...great shot
Thanks for the kudos, as well... I visited a local wildlife rehab site in Big Bear Lake and spent the day with my Bigma, monopod and SB600 flash. It was awkward with the chain link exhibits and near total shade with the tall pines but at least one could get within a couple of feet of the fencing.

http://www.moonridgezoo.org/map/aboutus.html

The rehab site is planning to move to a new, larger location so I had a good conversation with some of the staff about making the new exhibits more friendly to photogs -- Such as affording multiple shooting angles (ie each of the 3-4 sides of the enclosure) for different times of the day & sun angles as well as offering deep framed cutouts with clean glass to allow unobstructed field of views with minimal glass glare.

I haven't been back but I'd highly recommend a visit to any local wildlife rehab sites (and local zoos, as well) as the opportunities for using long/good glass on close up & stationary subjects can result in some excellent images...:)

[Dread Pirate Roberts]

Unbelievable shots Dave, well done

Yeah and I really hate having to sharpen images diferrently for print and screen and different resolutions too.

[WestCoast]

There are people that take excellent photos with the Bigma. It's been a fan favorite of birders for a long time, due to the relatively low cost.

It's difficult to argue with a 10x zoom that can go out to 500 mm for about $900. I just might get one next year.


no one has said it yet but the nikkor 70-300vr is very nice, not as fast or as nice as the ones Rooz posted but not bad. I like mine.

Absolutely. It's also small/light enough to hand-hold comfortably and the price (~$470) is a steal. I've gotten some pretty nice photos with it...

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2117/2429823549_d2e3ee0f23_b.jpg

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3091/2305758998_a4a4b8815e_b.jpg

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2097/2161492356_c600e17953_b.jpg

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2135/2096469074_d09b77e184_b.jpg

[WestCoast]

Secondly, of course the 300 f4 + 1.7TC smokes the Bigma: It's $1200 for the single focal length, before adding the cost of the TC, vs. $999 for the 10x zoom.

Perhaps we're talking about different lenses, but this what Nikon's site says about the 1.7 TC...


Autofocus not possible with, AF-S VR Zoom-NIKKOR 200-400mm f/4G IF-ED, AF-S NIKKOR 300mm f/4D IF-ED, AF-S NIKKOR 500mm f/4G ED VR, AF-S NIKKOR 500mm f/4D IF-ED II AF-S NIKKOR 600mmf/4G ED VR, AF-S NIKKOR 600mm f/4D IF-ED II and AF-S VR Micro 105mm f/2.8G

I have no idea if it's just a slow AF and they don't recommend it. But it doesn't sound like it performs that well with the TC.


For one thing, the Bigma is f6.3 at 500mm, and can only autofocus because it cheats and tells the camera it's an f5.6 lens.

The 1.7 TC would also knock the Nikkor 300 mm f/4 down to f/6.7. Being a prime, the Nikkor is almost certainly sharper (and likely has less CA, vignetting, etc.) than the Bigma, but I don't see how using it in combination with the 1.7 TC makes it "smoke" the Bigma.

[ooverdrive]

Is 70-300 afs+kenko TC possible!

[Rooz]

Perhaps we're talking about different lenses, but this what Nikon's site says about the 1.7 TC...I have no idea if it's just a slow AF and they don't recommend it. But it doesn't sound like it performs that well with the TC.

The 1.7 TC would also knock the Nikkor 300 mm f/4 down to f/6.7. Being a prime, the Nikkor is almost certainly sharper (and likely has less CA, vignetting, etc.) than the Bigma, but I don't see how using it in combination with the 1.7 TC makes it "smoke" the Bigma.

no, you have the right lens. i have it and the 1.7tc and they work a treat. its never gonna be the speed of the 70-200 of course but its half the money. i thought exactly the same as you did until i used one. wasnt long after i bought it. imo its one of the most underated lens in nikkors lineup. certainly the most underrated tele.

and yes, it does smoke the bigma, and by that i was referring to IQ only. not value for money.

[XaiLo]

Rooz, does the 1.7tc work with the 105VR?

[Rooz]

sure does, but i'd recommend the 1.4 for macro. sharpness is critical for close ups.

[WestCoast]

no, you have the right lens. i have it and the 1.7tc and they work a treat. its never gonna be the speed of the 70-200 of course but its half the money. i thought exactly the same as you did until i used one. wasnt long after i bought it. imo its one of the most underated lens in nikkors lineup. certainly the most underrated tele.

Thanks for the info. Nikon must've gotten into some legal trouble in the past or something, as their definition of what components "work" with one another seems to be very conservative.


and yes, it does smoke the bigma, and by that i was referring to IQ only. not value for money.

Yeah, it's tough to believe that a $1,200 300 mm prime WOULDN'T do a lot better than a $900 50-500 mm zoom. Although I imagine that both AF somewhat slowly at 400-500 mm.

All of this talk of "smoking the Bigma" has connotations that are wrong on soooo many levels. :D

[Rooz]

thom did a good balanced review on it.
http://www.bythom.com/300AFSlens.htm

i think with any lens you need to know the limitations. i would never bother with the 300f4 in dim light, thats what you pay for in the 70-200.

[Telecorder]

Is 70-300 afs+kenko TC possible!

Yes; I have both the Sigma EX 1.4X TC and the Kenko Pro 300 DG 1.4X TC. Both will mount the 70-300VR. Both will AF (With the Sigma's first lens' side contact taped) although the Sigma seems to hunt a bit more for AF at times.

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1021&message=23560898&q=sigma+50+500+tc&qf=m

Comparison of bare v Kenko v Sigma at 40'...
http://www.nikonians-images.org/galleries/data/8202/5-6-crop_800x600_.jpg

[jmorgan]

Yes; I have both the Sigma EX 1.4X TC and the Kenko Pro 300 DG 1.4X TC. Both will mount the 70-300VR. Both will AF (With the Sigma's first lens' side contact taped) although the Sigma seems to hunt a bit more for AF at times.

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1021&message=23560898&q=sigma+50+500+tc&qf=m

Comparison of bare v Kenko v Sigma at 40'...
http://www.nikonians-images.org/galleries/data/8202/5-6-crop_800x600_.jpg

Have you heard anything about the 1.5x kenko
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/389042-REG/Kenko_K15AFDGN_1_5x_DG_AF_Tele_Converter.html

at half the price of the 1.4x it sounds to good to be true. Says it is compatible with both AF-D and AF-S lenses


Also does the kenko retain VR function?

Looking at getting one for my 70-300VR