View Full Version : Which telephoto? $2000 range
longroad
08-06-2009, 05:56 PM
Hi all, been a while since I've been around here :D
I've still got my D80 and have no plans to upgrade the body.
I am planning to go to Africa next year on safari. I can't live with taking my 70-300mm Nikkor, i know i will be disappointed with the results.
Im looking to sell that lens and upgrade.
If you were in my situation which of the following would you buy?
Keep in mind that i'll be without a tripod or monopod most of the time.
Obviously would love as much reach as i can get but if the below prime Nikkor is any good i could settle for that (looks like no vr though). If i had to choose between extra zoom or picture quality, i'd go with a high quality 300mm over a shabby 500mm.
Nikkor Lens - AF-S 300mm f/4D IF ED
Price $1909
http://www.digitalcamerawarehouse.com.au/prod178.htm
This has no VR??
Nikkor Lens - AF 80-400mm f/4.5-5.6D VR ED
Price: $2299
http://www.digitalcamerawarehouse.com.au/prod119.htm
Bit out of my budget but could stretch if its worth it
Then there are the Sigma's so many to choose from. Are any of them good??
Sigma Lens 50-500mm f/4-6.3 APO EX DG HSM
Price: $1769
http://www.digitalcamerawarehouse.com.au/prod4085.htm
500mm would be lovely.. if it works.
Sigma Lens 120-400mm f/4.5-5.6 APO DG OS HSM
Price: $1349
http://www.digitalcamerawarehouse.com.au/prod3865.htm
Sigma Lens 150-500mm f/5-6.3 DG OS HSM
Price: $1559
http://www.digitalcamerawarehouse.com.au/prod3027.htm
Tamron SP AF 200-500mm F/5-6.3 Di Lens
Price: $2099
http://www.digitalcamerawarehouse.com.au/prod4172.htm
Aldor88
08-06-2009, 06:05 PM
The Sigmas have alot of quality control problems but if you get a good copy I think the IQ is decent.
Personally I'd go with the 80-400VR if I'd have the money. I've heard alot of good things about that lens. I'm sure others here who actually own these lenses are more qualified to offer you advice tho :).
longroad
08-06-2009, 06:22 PM
Yeah i would much prefer to spend in the $1600 mark rather than $2300, but i also dont want to regret my purchase either... :o
TheWengler
08-06-2009, 06:36 PM
How about a Sigma 100-300mm f/4 w/ a 1.4x TC. No VR though.
longroad
08-06-2009, 06:38 PM
If Im going to get a 300mm it will have to be significantly better than what i've already got i.e a prime Nikkor :D
Definitely need VR, have a hard enough time with this one and its got VR!
britkev
08-06-2009, 07:07 PM
Tough to see how you are going to get any major improvement within budget...
the 80-400 will give you a bit more reach and keep VR, but this is an old design lens without AF-S so you will get slower autofocussing (some say too slow). Maybe some increase in IQ - nothing drastic though.
300 f/4 does give you some IQ improvement and an extra stop, but lack of VR will be a handicap.
Either of the Sigma *-500mm will obviously give you extra reach... the 50-500 Bigma is something of a legend... the 150-500 has OS (=VR)... both weigh in at a bit over 4 pounds which can quickly become too heavy for handholding for many folk. NOt sure that IQ of either will be anything amazingly better than the 70-300 VR.
Given that you have a specific mission in mind, presumably this is a trip of a lifetime, you might want to investigate renting rather than buying.
RichNY
08-06-2009, 07:44 PM
All of the lenses you listed are slow glass and you will be challenged during the times of day with low light. I would recommend buying a used Nikon 300 f/2.8 VR with a 1.4 or 1.7 TC. When you return from your trip you can recoup your investment in the glass.
longroad
08-06-2009, 07:44 PM
Well, i'll be using the lens long after my trip. I photography mainly birds and wildlife at home so it will certainly come in handy for many years to come.
Thanks for the info about the Nikkor lenses.
Is the Bigma a legend because of its size rather than its performance though? With such a massive range you have to wonder how effective it is at 500mm!
You're right about weight though, could be cumbersome out on the African savannah..
longroad
08-06-2009, 07:45 PM
All of the lenses you listed are slow glass and you will be challenged during the times of day with low light. I would recommend buying a used Nikon 300 f/2.8 VR with a 1.4 or 1.7 TC. When you return from your trip you can recoup your investment in the glass.
You mean the $7000 lens? :eek:
Even second hand would be way above my budget :(
As for renting - i dont even know any places here that rent. Oh there is one that rents a few Canon lenses but nothing for Nikon. As far as i know, lens rental is not big here like it is overseas.
RichNY
08-06-2009, 07:53 PM
You mean the $7000 lens? :eek:
Even second hand would be way above my budget :(
One was just listed and sold on Nikonians for $4250. You'll be out the cash in bank for a few weeks and you'll recoup your full purchase price or even make a few dollars if you buy properly. This is still cheaper than buying a lens and keeping it or renting the lens.
A fast lens will be the difference between being able to take or not take the images you want during certain times of day.
longroad
08-06-2009, 08:08 PM
So how do people survive with the 300mm f/4 without VR?
Would it be pointless to take this to Africa, would I just get a bunch of blurry shots? I imagine i'll have a lot of moving targets and action shots so not a lot of time to rest the camera on the side of the car or wherever.
Also putting a TC with this prime 300mm would reverse its low light capabilities and probably make shake even more of a problem, right?
RichNY - i see what you're saying, but i'm not comfortable outlaying that sort of cash (wouldnt have it anyway), even if i could resell it later. I want a lens i can use for several years.
Looks like there is no right lens for me :(
ecs have a used 80-400 right now basically brand new for $1750 if that helps. dont expect miracles though, especially over 350mm.
optically, the 300/4 is the best option and you can still find used ones on ebay for just over $1k. whack a 1.7TC onto it and you've got alot of reach. as rich said, its not super fast in aperture but i would expect in africa there's heaps of light so i dont think an f4 lens is gonna be a real issue.
of course...no VR so you've gonna have to keep that shutter speed up around the 1/500s mark to get consistent clear shots in the back of a vehicle.
longroad
08-06-2009, 08:32 PM
Well it seems the best lenses have no VR and the ones that have VR have many negative points (reading alot about softness in the bigma). Can't win!
I can see I will end up keeping and taking my 70-300.. ah well that could leave me with money for an extra couple of nights on safari :p
fionndruinne
08-06-2009, 10:05 PM
What about an 80-200mm or 70-200mm f/2.8 with TC? Still not enough reach?
ecs have a used 80-400 right now basically brand new for $1750 if that helps. dont expect miracles though, especially over 350mm.
I was going to make the same post. :D
For anybody who is interested in the 80-400VR Thom Hogan did a very good review on his site some time ago.
A friend of mine has the Sigma 50-500 and it's huge. I have no idea how he gets any decent shots at 500mm with an f6.3 aperture. I think that would be tripod or at least monopod only IMO.
erichlund
08-07-2009, 11:31 AM
ecs have a used 80-400 right now basically brand new for $1750 if that helps. dont expect miracles though, especially over 350mm.
optically, the 300/4 is the best option and you can still find used ones on ebay for just over $1k. whack a 1.7TC onto it and you've got alot of reach. as rich said, its not super fast in aperture but i would expect in africa there's heaps of light so i dont think an f4 lens is gonna be a real issue.
of course...no VR so you've gonna have to keep that shutter speed up around the 1/500s mark to get consistent clear shots in the back of a vehicle.
Of course, on the photo safaris, they actually stop the vehicle so you can take pictures. Many of the vehicles have built in mounts on the frame, which act as your tripod (yes, they've had a few people through with cameras, before).
The high shutter speed you need is in case the animal is moving. But like most things, you usually will catch the big cats only in a rest state, unless you are shooting at night.
A couple of years back, a coworker came back from his African Safari. He got great shots with his D70 and the old Nikkor 70-300G (the one we all call a paperweight). It's not the size, it's how you use it. ;)
erichlund
08-07-2009, 11:40 AM
BTW: Just be smart about getting too close to the animals. To a lion, you just don't look like food, so the only reason they would be interested in you is if you piss them off. One of the most dangerous animals is the giraffes. Even lions give a full grown giraffe a wide berth. Their kick is deadly.
Reminds me of a guy in Yellowstone park. Candidate for a Darwin award (loser in the natural selection process). He wanted to get a better picture of a grizzly next to his vehicle, so he was pushing it. The grizzly was pretty tame, so he lived, but I wouldn't have given him good odds.
RichNY
08-07-2009, 01:54 PM
You are going to be shooting from a vehicle- some have mounts but bring a big bean bag to rest your lens on for support.
VR is of absolutely no use shooting a moving target and will only help with your movements holding the camera. Moving targets need a lens that focuses fast and a fast lens that lets in lots of light so that you can get shutter speeds fast enough to freeze the action.
Like Eric said a few posts back you are going to capture resting state shots at dusk and that is where you'll again want a faster lens.
Of the lenses you have suggested I believe that your best choice is going to be the 80-400VR. (There are always a bunch of nice ones for sale on the used market for much less than retail which puts it into your budget) You are going to want reach and you are going to want to be wider than 300mm for many of your shots where animals are much closer. Be sure to take your Tamron macro lens as it is f/2.8 and you'll at least be able to shoot wider and then crop your images for the dusk shots.
I would also be sure to bring your 18-135 as there will be plenty of times where you will want to shoot wide.
Don't be afraid of maxing out your ISO later in the day. A noisy shot that can be cleaned up significantly will be much better than an out of focus shot without the noise.
http://cgi.ebay.com.au/NIKON-AF-S-300mm-f-4D-ED-IF-KIRK-collar-Hoya-filter_W0QQcmdZViewItemQQ_trksidZp3286Q2ec0Q2em14Q QhashZitem4a99b760e2QQitemZ320406511842QQptZAUQ5fC amerasQ5fPhotographicQ5fAccessoriesQQsalenotsuppor ted
http://cgi.ebay.com.au/NIKON-AF-S-300mm-f-4D-ED-IF-KIRK-collar-Hoya-filter_W0QQcmdZViewItemQQ_trksidZp3286Q2ec0Q2em14Q QhashZitem4a99b760e2QQitemZ320406511842QQptZAUQ5fC amerasQ5fPhotographicQ5fAccessoriesQQsalenotsuppor ted
I would rather have the Nikon but there is also a Sigma 50-500 lens there at the moment that, get this was purchased for an African Safari and hasn't been used much since. :)
It lives in Gippsland in Victoria.
Why not just rent a lens for the safari, then if you like how it performs you can buy it later.
I'm not sure how Australian companies would feel if you told them you were taking their lens to Africa. The bond to rent a lens here is fairly horrendous so if anything happens you would be out of pocket virtually the cost of a new lens with I suspect no ability to claim insurance.
Dread Pirate Roberts
08-08-2009, 08:13 PM
I reckon you might be looking at the wrong end of it. Surely there will be great landscape and people shots to be had. Is a brilliantly sharp lion going to be as interesting in a few years as great landscape or village shot?
Sure the 70-300VR is consumer glass but it's pretty good and the 80-400 isn't going to improve reach or sharpness much. I'd go the 300F/4 so you can get sharp wildlife sometimes but I sure wouldn't sell the 70-300. Animals are unpredictable and you could be shooting at any distance, you want to be prepared.
My best giraffe shots, my lens wasn't wide enough.
Oh and I think Rich is right, buy and sell a 300 F/2.8. Hell I want to buy one of those, I'm just stingy.
longroad
08-09-2009, 02:46 AM
You are going to be shooting from a vehicle- some have mounts but bring a big bean bag to rest your lens on for support.
VR is of absolutely no use shooting a moving target and will only help with your movements holding the camera. Moving targets need a lens that focuses fast and a fast lens that lets in lots of light so that you can get shutter speeds fast enough to freeze the action.
Like Eric said a few posts back you are going to capture resting state shots at dusk and that is where you'll again want a faster lens.
Of the lenses you have suggested I believe that your best choice is going to be the 80-400VR. (There are always a bunch of nice ones for sale on the used market for much less than retail which puts it into your budget) You are going to want reach and you are going to want to be wider than 300mm for many of your shots where animals are much closer. Be sure to take your Tamron macro lens as it is f/2.8 and you'll at least be able to shoot wider and then crop your images for the dusk shots.
I would also be sure to bring your 18-135 as there will be plenty of times where you will want to shoot wide.
Don't be afraid of maxing out your ISO later in the day. A noisy shot that can be cleaned up significantly will be much better than an out of focus shot without the noise.
Nice points, thanks. Will certainly take my other lenses.
Rooz dont tempt me with that ebay link LOL
longroad
08-09-2009, 02:48 AM
I reckon you might be looking at the wrong end of it. Surely there will be great landscape and people shots to be had. Is a brilliantly sharp lion going to be as interesting in a few years as great landscape or village shot?
Sure the 70-300VR is consumer glass but it's pretty good and the 80-400 isn't going to improve reach or sharpness much. I'd go the 300F/4 so you can get sharp wildlife sometimes but I sure wouldn't sell the 70-300. Animals are unpredictable and you could be shooting at any distance, you want to be prepared.
My best giraffe shots, my lens wasn't wide enough.
Oh and I think Rich is right, buy and sell a 300 F/2.8. Hell I want to buy one of those, I'm just stingy.
Im thinking of buying another body so i can have 2 lenses ready.. dont really want to be changing lenses in that dust
when are you goign to africa ?
hey Rich...200/2 or 300/2.8 ?
the 200/2 seems to have the best quality i've ever seen but that 300 really has me thinking...
RichNY
08-10-2009, 07:02 PM
hey Rich...200/2 or 300/2.8 ?
the 200/2 seems to have the best quality i've ever seen but that 300 really has me thinking...
If I were only going to have one exotic lens I would go with the 300 f/2.8 over the 200 f/2. I say this because of the focal length rather than the image quality. Both lenses work great with a 1.4x or 1.7x TC. With a FF body like your D700 the FOV really is much larger than I'd like when I want reach.
Although my 400 f/2.8 is a better performer than the 300 with a TC, a 300 with a TC sure would be nice at times when you want to handhold and not be shooting everything on a monopod. I've thought about adding the 300 f/2.8 but then reality sets in and I snap out of it.;)
Dread Pirate Roberts
08-11-2009, 06:40 AM
What do you think cheap out and get an old 300 F/2.8 without VR or pay the premium and get the latest?
RichNY
08-11-2009, 10:31 AM
What do you think cheap out and get an old 300 F/2.8 without VR or pay the premium and get the latest?
It depends on what you are shooting. I use my long lenses for shooting sports and turn off the VR anyway. I wouldn't hesitate to save the money unless you are going to be handholding shooting stationary objects at slow shutter speeds.
the 400/2.8 is a little too big for my purposes. i'm agonising over which one to save for. i want the reach of the 300/2.8 but i'm just so blown away by the IQ of the 200/2.
achuang
08-11-2009, 06:24 PM
It depends what you're using it for. If it's for long range portrait work then the 200 f/2 is a no brainer. But if it's for the subjects that you've been shooting with your 300 f/4 like birds, then the 300 f/2.8 would be more suited as there's just more reach. If you have the 200 f/2 and have to crop or us a TC to get the same reach as the 300 then you're losing the advantage in image quality that the 200 f/2 has.
RichNY
08-11-2009, 07:04 PM
the 400/2.8 is a little too big for my purposes. i'm agonising over which one to save for. i want the reach of the 300/2.8 but i'm just so blown away by the IQ of the 200/2.
I can't imagine you not being blown away by the IQ of the 300 f/2.8 also :) There is 300VR for sale on Nikonians for $4200 right now. If you are looking for a really sharp 200 the 200/4 micro is every bit as sharp as my 200 f/2 at a fraction of the price but only a great choice if you are going to always use it on a tripod.
Dread Pirate Roberts
08-13-2009, 05:18 AM
It depends on what you are shooting. I use my long lenses for shooting sports and turn off the VR anyway. I wouldn't hesitate to save the money unless you are going to be handholding shooting stationary objects at slow shutter speeds.
Thanks thats pretty much what my wallet was telling me too.
Thanks thats pretty much what my wallet was telling me too.
http://shop.ebay.com.au/ian.hobday/m.html
Dread Pirate Roberts
08-16-2009, 01:23 AM
Thanks mate I'll watch it but to be honest it's not the AF-S version, and I really prefer that. I'm seriously thinking of blowing cash on a 300 F/2.8
take a closer look thru the items for sale. it is afs, just not VR.
I can vouch that if you wait and watch ebay you can pick up pro grade lenses at incredible bargain prices. :D
achuang
08-17-2009, 12:57 AM
Did you manage to get the 70-200VR cheap from someone who is upgrading to the new version?
No. Unwanted birthday present. He has a D300 with a 80-200 he loves and didn't see the need to upgrade. The lens had never been on a camera and is so new that the owners manual talks about the D5000. It's also legit with Australian warranty and was in the carry bag from a very well known Melbourne camera shop.
RichNY
08-17-2009, 08:28 PM
Rooz- Found you a mint 300 AF-S for $2750 US.
Rooz- Found you a mint 300 AF-S for $2750 US.
So that's around Aus$3350.00 when a new one here only costs around Aus$7750.00.
Is that a bargain? :D
RichNY
08-17-2009, 10:02 PM
At that price I'm starting to think hard enough about it to hope someone on the big Island buys it instead of me :)
Rooz- Found you a mint 300 AF-S for $2750 US.
where ? IM pls. :)
Does that mean there is a 300 f4 about to come on the market in Australia?
if i get one, then the answer is...maybe. lol btw: there are 3 versions of afs 300/2.8
versI afs
versII afs swm, (this is the one i want)
current version is afs swm VR, (too expensive)
RichNY
08-18-2009, 10:20 PM
Rooz- I sent an email offering to buy it (if you didn't want it I was going to keep it). It was the AF-S Version II. I found out tonight that someone else had a prior offer on it and it sold. I'm a bit bummed that Bush wasn't in office another year so we'd be able to buy much more gear at such discounted economic prices. :)
dammit. thanks anyway mate. that VII lens is rare as hens teeth. and dont get me started on the 200/2. impossible to find here used.
i can get a new VR version for $6400AUD which is around $5300USD. used V1 afs lens' go for around $4000AUD, ($3300USD), and i've never seen a VII lens for sale used in Oz
there is a used 300/2.8VII at the moment on ebay that i'm watching but he says no worldwide postage.
Blast, I was just about to cancel this new car so I could pick up a bargain 300 f4. :p
RichNY
08-18-2009, 11:15 PM
dammit. thanks anyway mate. that VII lens is rare as hens teeth. and dont get me started on the 200/2. impossible to find here used.
i can get a new VR version for $6400AUD which is around $5300USD. used V1 afs lens' go for around $4000AUD, ($3300USD), and i've never seen a VII lens for sale used in Oz
there is a used 300/2.8VII at the moment on ebay that i'm watching but he says no worldwide postage.
If you need it forwarded let me know if I can be of any help.
Dread Pirate Roberts
08-19-2009, 02:27 AM
If you need it forwarded let me know if I can be of any help.
Is that how you got your lens collection Rich? - "forwarding" people their lenses:D
achuang
08-19-2009, 04:35 AM
http://cgi.ebay.com.au/Nikon-200mm-f-2-G-ED-IF-VR-Nikkor_W0QQitemZ270442237339QQcmdZViewItemQQptZAU_ Digital_Cameras?hash=item3ef79d0d9b&_trksid=p3286.c0.m14
How about this? It's in Sydney too.
i'm watching that one, its a fair price, but not a bargain. i think i need the reach of the 300/2.8.
i'm watching that one, its a fair price, but not a bargain. i think i need the reach of the 300/2.8.
I reckon it will be over $6k by the time it ends.
5600 buy it now...
they can be bought grey for around $6400
Yes but as soon as somebody places a bid the buy it now price goes out the window and I'm sure once there is a bid there will be a couple of others following.
are you trying to tell me something ? lol
if i could get it for $5k i'd buy it, keep it for a few months and sell it for around the same price. you lose nothing by buying these exotics as long as you have the cash up front. renting that lens alone would cost you $200/day.
You could do your best Moose Peterson impersonations with that one. :D
Wish I had the money to have something like that simply for the shock value. Mmmm, an idea. Lightweight plastic replicas of that and other exotic pro Nikon glass that fit over the standard kit lens. The ebay $100 "Look at me I'm a pro" kit. Reckon I'd sell heaps. :D
Dread Pirate Roberts
08-19-2009, 06:40 AM
That is a great marketting idea
RichNY
08-20-2009, 09:08 PM
Is that how you got your lens collection Rich? - "forwarding" people their lenses:D
LOL- funny. I've been really fortunate buying most of my glass at times used when the right deal comes along more so than at times where I had an actual need to be filled.
My favorite story of how I built my kit (and my warped sense of logic) http://www.dcresource.com/forums/showpost.php?p=345784&postcount=12
* With the subsequent jump in Nikon prices this turned out to pay for most of my vacation.
Dread Pirate Roberts
08-21-2009, 10:08 PM
Good story, I wish I lived in NY too:(
ended up going for just $5k. thats a pretty good deal.
ended up going for just $5k. thats a pretty good deal.
I saw that I got an email from ebay saying the auction was closing at at that stage it was still $5k. Sounds like a bargain if you have the money lying around.
the search continues for a 300/2.8. there is an ebay store selling them for $6180 shipped. as cheap as i've ever seen one; thats a full $1k cheaper than DD.
achuang
08-23-2009, 06:14 AM
http://cgi.ebay.com.au/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=160357443902&ssPageName=STRK:MEWAX:IT
I wonder how much this one will go for. That's the one you're looking for right? The II AF-S version.
way too pricey imo and only 1 sale. too risky.
RichNY
08-23-2009, 11:37 AM
Rooz- You've got me going looking for a 300 f/2.8 now. I just lost out on a nice VR for $3600US. I think I'm secretly hoping that when I find one for you that you won't want it and I'll be 'stuck' with it :)
I'm sure a good deal is sure to be found around the corner. We just need for the people with the right glass to become unemployment statistics.
faisal
08-23-2009, 12:52 PM
I'm sure a good deal is sure to be found around the corner. We just need for the people with the right glass to become unemployment statistics.
LOL!!
The corner should not be that far away then!! ;)
Dread Pirate Roberts
08-24-2009, 05:34 AM
http://cgi.ebay.com.au/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=160357443902&ssPageName=STRK:MEWAX:IT
I wonder how much this one will go for. That's the one you're looking for right? The II AF-S version.
Hey Rooz, that lens is located in Adelaide if you need a pick up.
It's too pricey for me though, champaign taste and beer budget.
Out of curiousity do you have the 300 F/4 AF or AFS? I didn't get the AF one you linked to, though it went for a good price $900.
Dread Pirate Roberts
08-27-2009, 06:38 AM
My 70-300VR is my favourite lens. I just wish I could get slightly more subject isolation, much cleaner bokeh and a bit sharper at 300mm.
I'm considering adding a 70-200 F2.8 VR and a 300 prime (probably F2.8 old version or F4 new AFS version), would also keep the 70-300.
Anyone know if there's a significant improvement?
I'm considering adding a 70-200 F2.8 VR
Don't unless your numbers came up recently. Your bank balance will never recover because all of a sudden every other lens you have will need to be replaced. :D
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.1.9 Copyright © 2012 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.