Need dryland wildlife lens help

At a recent charity auction we “won†a 1wk photo safari trip to South Africa. I have been told it is nice to have a 400mm lens for this type of trip. I have the Nikon 80-200, 2.8, AF-D. Are there are any options that don’t cost +$2000? How effective are the teleconverters for possibly fast moving animal photography.

Thanks….

I will preface that I am Canon but went through a similiar delema when I was looking for a topside wildlife lens.

I can say most certainly that getting the 100-400IS L was the right choice. You definately want the 400 end of the lens for wildlife. I have added teleconverters to it and depending on the available light it worked fine but required manual focus. Something which may be tough for moving subjects.

The nice thing with the 400 was when they did get close you can change up the look fo the photos and fill frames with head type shots too.

I did find in low light the teleconverter did not allow me to get the shutter speed I felt I needed for a properly exposed photograph.

I hope this helps and look forward to your insights and photos upon return.

Todd

Hi,

If you'll be shooting from a truck, where you can rest your camera and lens on a beanbag or monopod, then you can get by with a slower non-stabilized lens. Your 80-200 f2.8 with a 2x teleconverter may just do the trick. Another alternative would be to look at a slower 300 or 400mm lens like a Nikon, Tokina or Sigma 400mm f5.6

If you're going to be on foot or hand-holding, then you should look at the 80-400 VR lens. If you are bold, you can buy the 200-400 AFS VR and use it with a 1.7x teleconverter, then sell it when you get home...:-)

HTH

James

NWDiver, your lens has a mechanical drive for the autofocus system. Nikon TC-XXEs don't pass the mechanical linkage from the body to the lens.

So, if you want to retain autofocus, you will have to use a Tamaron or Kenco TC.

My experience is that if the TC was designed specifically for the lens, the results are spectacular, and just like using the next-larger lens. For example, when I put a TC14 on a Nikkor 300 2.8, the results are indistinguishable from using the Nikkor 500mm f4. If I put the TC14 on, say, a 180mm f2.8, I will regret it.

So, I would anticipate truly mediocre results with a 2x TC not specifically made for your lens, although I haven't used this lens combination myself. Just general experience with TCs in a broad sense.

Options:

Best optical results: If your bodies will support a manual focus lens, and you don't mind twisting the little focus thingy, pick up a Nikkor 400mm f3.5 EDIF. eBay for about $1000. Superb glass. If you've never used one of these, don't worry about focusing...the object will suddenly snap into crispness, leaving no doubt that you're focused.

Gotta have autofocus: sell your 80-200 and pick up a 80-400 VR. You'll lose a couple stops, but still be fully functioning.

Cheapest: (and will look it) is to get a TC.

Keep in mind, the closest I come to shooting fast-moving wildlife is football players.

All the best, James

I think the best focal length for buck is the Sigma 50-500 EX. It's definitely a daylight lens but if you pump up the ISO to 400 (acceptable even for a Nikon :-)

you should get the shutter up to prevent lens shake problems. Just stop down to f8 and it will give you some excellent pics, even at 500mm. It's no prime but for the money, nothing beats it for under 1k 500mm. I believe you can use the Sigma 1.4 or 2x TCs for 1000mm. Just don't expect a lot from the 2x results.

The ultimate safari zoom lens right now is the Sigma 300-800. Try that with a 2x, and you'll need to manually focus but what a sight!

Thanks for the input. Once again looking to do some wildlife and sport photography. Would like to keep expense down -$2000. Camera is a D100.

Options are

1.To sell my pretty much new Nikon 80-200 and buy one of the below lenses.

2.Or keep 80-200 and add a teleconverter.

I guess the big question is: is there a significant difference in photo quality and performance between the below lenses and my 80-200mm + teleconverters.

Sigma APO 80-400mm F4.5-5.6 EX OS

$999

Sigma Zoom Normal-Telephoto 50-500mm f/4-6.3 EX DG HSM Autofocus Lens for Nikon AF-D

$999

Nikon 80-400mm f/4.5-5.6D ED Autofocus VR Zoom

$1500

Or

Current Nikon Zoom Telephoto 80-200 f/2.8 ED AF-D with a 1.4-2.0 Teleconverter

$329-$434

NW Diver = North West, as in Pacific North West, right...

If so, why not rent some large artillery.

Glazer's Camera in Seattle rents the 80-400 AFS VR for $20/day, and the 500 f4 AFS for $80/day...

A week is 4 x daily rate, and a month is 3 x weekly rate (so a month is 12x daily rate).

So you could rent an 80-400 for a month for $240, or a 500 f4 for $960.

I would recommend getting the lens(es) for longer than a week, or rent them a couple of times before you go, so that you can get a feel for them and if you want to be hauling the bigger-mutha (the 500 f4) around with you or not.

This is the route that I would take in your situation, rather than investing in additional glass beyond my 70-200 AFS.

When is your trip?

I expect the 18-200DX VR lens to come out sometimes in December.

It should be around $750 or so and add a teleconverter, it should be pretty decent. You lose a few F-stops but gain VR. It is a newer VRII technology which suppose to give you about 4 F-stop advantage over non VR lens.

It most likely won't be as good as 70-200VR lens but with teleconverter, should be similar to the 80-400 VR and is not as big nor as expensive.

I do have the Sigma 50-500mm since I can't afford an expensive telephoto lens yet. It is heavy but pretty sharp upto around 400mm.

Definitely not a very handheld lens though.

Never considered renting, good idea. Between new lenses coming out, ebay, and renting this is just getting more complicated. I just want some expert to tell me what to do.

Forget the new 18-200 zoom lens. You need the 400. I like Craig's idea of renting the thing (80-400mm VR). I'd probably do that for such a trip. I think it will work better than a 2x tele and 80-200mm, which BTW I have used (now the 70-200mm VR).

Even better would be the newer 200-400mm AF-S VR. I am afraid to even look at how much that would cost to rent.

Even better would be the newer 200-400mm AF-S VR.  I am afraid to even look at how much that would cost to rent.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

From Glazer's, $65/day, $260/wk, $780/month

Less than the 500 f4 AFS

On balance, I think that's the lens that I would take on the trip being described. But NWDiver had better not be planning on taking this trip in July of '06, coz I'm taking that lens to Costa Rica for two weeks B)

Craig, no worries we are looking at going in Feb. I think I am leaning to selling my 80-200mm and buying the 80-400. Just to make sure the one you all like is the "Nikon Zoom Telephoto AF VR Zoom Nikkor 80-400mm f/4.5-5.6D ED Autofocus Lens"?

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller...egoryNavigation

Thanks for all the help

The reviews I have seen for the 200-400mm AF-S VR are all excellent. The lens provides an excellent range and if you need a little more you can use the TC. I say unless you are a dedicated topside wildlife photographer with an extra $5K to burn. Rent the lens and enjoy your trip. Considering you won the trip in a auction, the savings can somewhat offset the rental costs.

James

Martin,

I do not own the 80-400mm VR but the one knock I have read in several reviews is that the auto focus is slow. Now I guess "slow" is a relative term to what subject you are shooting but knowing this I might want to test the lens for myself before buying.

James

Well I am going to rent the 80-400 and 2xteleconverter this weekend and will let you know the results.

Well I am going to rent the 80-400 and 2xteleconverter this weekend and will let you know the results.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Try before you buy has kept me from wasting my money, that's for sure!

BTW, do NOT rent/borrow or otherwise use the 200-400. Inexplicabally, you will accecpt the next credit card offer that comes in the mail.

All the best, James

I would skip the 2X TC. The 80-400mm isn't very fast and when you lose 2 stops with the TC it gets really slow. If you are shooting anything that moves, you will have a problem. Plus, I think you lose the VR feature, so it's like 2 stops of light and four stops of camera shake.

This is why I recommended the VR 80-400 over the 80-200mm with 2xTC

I do have the Sigma 50-500mm since I can't afford an expensive telephoto lens yet. It is heavy but pretty sharp upto around 400mm.

Definitely not a very handheld lens though.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

So writes a man who has a D2X, Subal housing AND 2 kidneys!

Well I am going to rent the 80-400 and 2xteleconverter this weekend and will let you know the results.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Also try the Sigma 50-500. It won't break the bank and definitely is a good safari lens in the day. Don't expect it to do well in lowlight but not many lenses will either. There's sigma4less.com which sells grey market at good deals.

If you want a more budget alternative, try the 170-500 from sigma. Takes good pics in good light, quite sharp and under $600. Then you'd have 80-500 covered in 2 lenses.

There's also the Tamron 200-500 that's pretty sharp all around if stopped down... f8 and below for all these cheaper lenses I'm afraid.

I've used the 170-500 and the Tamron 200-500 before and they are good performers for the weight and price. I bought the 170-500 when my 500 lens didn't make it out of customs for 4 days (they wanted to tax me for it), was very light and pretty sharp. You don't really need VR if you aren't shooting later in the day. Most of the good stuff happens morning time anyways and at ISO400 you should be able to get the shutter speed up to 1/250 at f/8 which should be ample except for high action (hunting). You'll also be in a vehicle so just bring a bean bag or monopod.

So writes a man who has a D2X, Subal housing AND 2 kidneys!

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Well, exactly because of the D2X and Subal housing, I can't afford expensive glass anymore

Sad to say but I have to admit that I took way way more u/w pictures with my D2X than land pictures. Carrying D2X on land is just not as fun as underwater for some reason. Right now I am still trying to figure if I want to get the 70-200VR or just go for the 18-200DX VR as I am not even sure how often I will get to use that.

I am saving one kidney for when D3xyz/Subal housing comes out

Hi

NWDIVER

I posted a question regarding the 80-400VR a few weeks ago,

as many reviews of this lens all complain about slow focusing...

So i popped the question on the list, and made a comparison to the 60mm Micro's focusing as its the same system ( driven by the motor in camera and not lens)

the response was indeed positive, with my likeness being confirmed.

I still have to make my choice of what to buy as i'm going to borneo next year and wanted a lens to deal with the Orangutans.

My Short list was

Nik 80-400VR

Sig 80-400 OS

Sig 100-300 F4 with 1.4x TC

I recently purchased a 80-400 OS Sigma.

Very nice well built extremely rugged and exceptional tripod mount should you require it.

HOWEVER its heavy.. but it is 80-400 Glass.

Now I had an issue with the lens on my D70

It was Locking out whilst focusing , i had to resort to turning my camera off to regain control.

It was also making some real strange grinding noise when the OS was suppose to work..

I ended up taking the lens back and getting a refund, ...

Although images that came from it were excellent and sharp

I'm now going to try another 80-400 os as i think i maybe had a bad lens.

If its the same, then its the 80-400VR for me i think.

regards

craig

take a look at www.fredmiranda.com for reviews