|
Post by Lawrence Lo on Oct 8, 2010 18:34:05 GMT
Hi Guys, I noticed most bird nuts here use super tele lens, I need some suggestion what lens I should invest to have extra reach for decent bird shots. My current gear Nikon D90+ 70-300mm VR I still dont have TC (planning to get one) Not necessarily a Nikon lens because I might break my bank account ;D 3rd party lens or pre owned is fine with me as long it do the job. Thanks in advance
|
|
|
Post by ppaaoolloo on Oct 8, 2010 19:48:46 GMT
Try the 80-400 VR. I've seen two owners showing excellent results with it.
|
|
|
Post by Lawrence Lo on Oct 8, 2010 20:18:05 GMT
Hi Pao thanks but with my current 70-300mm I just improved the reach by 100mm, are primes expensive that tele zooms? I am eying like 500-600mm FL range... above that its too expensive
|
|
|
Post by ppaaoolloo on Oct 8, 2010 21:00:09 GMT
Any length improvement is significant. F-mount primes www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/380705-USA/Sigma_184306_500mm_f_4_5_EX_DG.htmlPrice: $4,699.00 www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/384408-USA/Sigma_152306_800mm_f_5_6_EX_DG.htmlPrice : $ 6,999.00 www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/520642-USA/Nikon_2172_AF_S_Nikkor_500mm_f_4G.htmlPrice: $8,499 www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/520646-USA/Nikon_2173_Telephoto_AF_S_Nikkor_600mm.htmlPrice: $10,299.95 F-mount zooms www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/551436-REG/Sigma_597306_200_500mm_f_2_8_EX_DG.htmlPrice: $28,999.00 www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/381606-REG/Sigma_595306_300_800mm_f_5_6_EX_DG.htmlPrice: $7,999.00 www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/688212-USA/Nikon_2187_AF_S_NIKKOR_200_400mm_f_4G.htmlPrice: $6,899.95 www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/207360-USA/Nikon_1996_AF_VR_Zoom_NIKKOR_80_400mm.htmlPrice: $1,649.95 www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/682766-USA/Sigma_738306_50_500mm_f_4_5_6_3_DG_OS.htmlPrice: $1,599.00 www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/549256-REG/Sigma_737306_150_500mm_f_5_6_3_DG_OS.htmlPrice: $999.00 www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/549248-REG/Sigma_728306_120_400mm_f_4_5_5_6_DG_OS.htmlPrice: $899.00 Inversely you could use a telescope + camera for digiscoping though the tendency is to go with an actual DSLR lens to take photos because of the modern convenience of autofocus, electronic aperture control and VR.
|
|
|
Post by Lawrence Lo on Oct 8, 2010 21:35:09 GMT
Hi Pao, thanks a lot great lenses you've got me.
The Sigma 50-500mm looks within my reach with almost same price with the Nikon 80-400mm plus additional reach. Are these per order basis? any store that sells this in P.I.?
|
|
|
Post by ppaaoolloo on Oct 8, 2010 21:55:57 GMT
I should get a commission. ;D ASk them for pricing/availability
FOR INQUIRIES, PLEASE CALL 8972561/8995018/09228995018 1082 Pasong Tamo St., Makati City Monday to Saturday 9am to 7pm
FOTOHUB QC Il Terrazzo Tomas Morato Quezon City 11:30am - 9:00PM Monday - Sunday compound is across burgoo Tel nos.: 3322299/3914273 Sun Cell: 09228998260
|
|
|
Post by Lawrence Lo on Oct 8, 2010 22:16:05 GMT
Thanks great help Pao
|
|
|
Post by Bob Kaufman on Oct 9, 2010 8:26:04 GMT
Word of caution on the 50-500. Do a test first if you can. That was my first choice when I was choosing a long lens but unfortunately I wasn't too happy with the results. I ended up with a prime 500mm and it almost broke my bank. ;D. Took me about 3 years before it was fully paid (I bought in the U.S. and if you have good credit they can give it to you for 18 months interest-free. I did it twice with two diff credit cards).
|
|
|
Post by Toto Gamboa on Oct 9, 2010 10:20:18 GMT
Just to warn you on your prefered path ... a lot of us here took the path that you are contemplating. I for one is an ex-Sigma user. It was good .. but yeah it was just good. However, if you are planning to achieve something more than good, drop the Sigma idea. A lot of us here had at one point in time opted to use Sigma but only a few of us here remained in that brand. The only few ones that I know now that are still using Sigma are Maam Ixi and Renoir. Both have really excellent copies of their respective lenses. Maam Ixi got hers from the Mastah himself. Renoir had surprisingly a very sharp copy too. But a lot of us who have dropped Sigma already could tell you a lot of stories why we dumped the brand. I just have to be frank that if you can, dont try to experience what we had gone through already. Do not go for Sigma if you cant be sure you will be getting a really sharp copy. Otherwise, you will just end up losing money and a lot of birding opportunities with the brand. Since you are a Nikon user, I would urge you to try get 80-400mm VR. If money isnt an issue go for something much higher. THere is a high chance you get a really sharp copy of a 80-400 than with a Sigma. Or you can go Canon and opt for a 400mm 5.6L prime. Almost on the same price range with the 80-400mm. You will be ok even if you get 100mm shorter. What is important here is image quality. You can compensate with having the shorter 400mm by improving your stalking skills. But you wont be able to improve image quality if you get a lens with just an above average sharpness. Hope this helps! Halong sir!
|
|
|
Post by ppaaoolloo on Oct 9, 2010 12:42:56 GMT
Lawrence I would take Bob's and Glenn's words into consideration before buying the Sigma you are eyeing.
I had the Sigma 170-500mm f/5-6.3 APO RF and the product tainted my view on the brand.
I tried Sigma's ultra wide and the color cast again tainted my view on the brand.
|
|
|
Post by Edu Lorenzo Jr on Oct 9, 2010 13:32:16 GMT
Scrap the TC idea. Get the 80-400 VR. Here is my link.. maybe pictures can paint a better.. er.. picture? www.flickr.com/photos/edulorenzo/The only gripe I have with that lens is USM (Ultra Slow Motor)
|
|
|
Post by Renoir Abrea on Oct 9, 2010 14:42:06 GMT
hi lawrencel' please take the warning and suggestion of Glenn SERIOUSLY...renoir
|
|
|
Post by Lawrence Lo on Oct 9, 2010 16:09:43 GMT
Hi Bob, Glenn, Pao and Edu and Renoir I really appreciate you guys Im thanking you for warning me before I broke my bank account , I was inquiring on some stores and based on your warning I dumped the Sigma 50-500mm idea. I did some thinking of going the prime route, the 500mm Sigma f4.5 EX APO and cost 230T up to 6 months. Any feedback from this lens? is it worth the cost? or with its price a better option? guys thanks for sharing your experience and warning me.
|
|
|
Post by Lawrence Lo on Oct 9, 2010 16:17:16 GMT
Scrap the TC idea. Get the 80-400 VR. Here is my link.. maybe pictures can paint a better.. er.. picture? www.flickr.com/photos/edulorenzo/The only gripe I have with that lens is USM (Ultra Slow Motor) Hi Edu, you've got a very sharp shots even at 400mm and no TC right?
|
|
|
Post by ppaaoolloo on Oct 9, 2010 16:49:49 GMT
I did some thinking of going the prime route, the 500mm Sigma f4.5 EX APO and cost 230T up to 6 months. Any feedback from this lens? is it worth the cost? or with its price a better option? guys thanks for sharing your experience and warning me. I like the Sigma 500 for its weight. It is very light for a 500mm prime User feedback can be read over at www.fredmiranda.com/reviews/showproduct.php?product=131&sort=7&cat=38&page=1If you do buy the Sigma 500 you would be the first to my knowledge to own one locally. As for alternatives I have posted all possible lenses from Sigma and Nikon. You could try digiscoping www.nikon.com/products/sportoptics/lineup/dsystem/index.htm though I feel this is a better fit for bird watchers than bird photographers.
|
|
|
Post by Tonji Ramos on Oct 10, 2010 4:25:08 GMT
Lawrence, Sylvia and I were long time Nikon users. Even our kids used Nikon. Since our film days we have used Nikon. But when we got into birding we faced the same upgrade path problem you are facing. Nikon supertelephotos are just super expensive. Eventually Sylvia and I switched to Canon. The lens that made us switch is the Canon 400 f5.6. A great lens, at a good price. Its a winner. Light, sharp with fast focusing. It is in my opinion the best lens to get when beginning bird photography. If Nikon made a similar lens then I would say stick with Nikon. If you are planning on getting the Nikon 500mm f4 then stick with Nikon. The Nikon 500mm is super. The Nikon full frame bodies are awesome. But if you are planning on getting something that costs around $1000-1100 then, in my opinion, the Canon 400mm f5.6 is a good choice. But if you are thinking supertelephotos..... The new Canon supertelephotos are going to cost an arm and a leg which is why I say that if you are planning to get the new Nikon 300mm f2.8 ($ 5,800.00) or the 500mm f4 ($8,500.00) stay with Nikon. But you still have a little time to get the current range of Canon supertelephotos before the prices skyrocket like crazy when the new models are out. The current price for a Canon 300mm f2.8 is $4,300 and 500mm f4 is around $6,100.00. With Canon you save $1,500 on the 300mm and $2,400 over the Nikon 500mm. When the new Canon lenses come out the price will be just like the current Nikon lineup. So by then it won't really matter, Nikon or Canon in terms of price.
|
|
|
Post by Edu Lorenzo Jr on Oct 10, 2010 6:14:07 GMT
Yes Lawrence, I don't use a TC.
|
|
|
Post by Lawrence Lo on Oct 10, 2010 6:49:55 GMT
Hi Tonji, half of me regret getting a Nikon too my friends use Nikon thats why I get my self the same brand for lens swapping. I agree with you Nikon lens are expensive compare to Canon counterparts on same specs. I dont know if its still worth to shift, I spend quite a lot with my lineup already. All my lens are Nikon and flashes. Believe me it crossed my mind too on shifting to canon. Tonji thanks a lot for the insights, while Im still searching for my F mount lens I have only two option one is to go Nikon 80-400mm VR (no stock order basis) or make a gamble on 3rd party prime lens Sigma 500mm f4.5 and at the same time break my bank account because it cost 230T pesos and 6 months to pay only
|
|
|
Post by Tonji Ramos on Oct 10, 2010 13:44:56 GMT
Lawrence, its super hard to switch to another brand. Plus Nikon makes great cameras so its hard to justify a switch.
The 80-400 takes really sweet pics. The Sigma 500mm f4.5 takes very nice pics also. JV has one.
Good luck.
|
|
|
Post by JV Noriega on Oct 15, 2010 16:39:02 GMT
Hi Lawrence, like you, i am an avid Nikon shooter, and forever will be. I have JP's former Sigma AF500 f4.5 (non hsm) and it takes really good pics, at par with the 80-400 or the EF400 5.6L. But i shoot a 50D+400 5.6L for BIFs, simply because the lens was made to shoot BIFs. Its very fast and lightweight, easy to hand hold and grip. This lens focuses very fast. The only problem with the 80-400 and the Sigma 500 (non hsm) is focusing speed. But as soon as you have acquired focus on the subject, focus follows really well. I have been experimenting using a 1.4xtc (sigma ex) on my 80-400 and it has given me very acceptable results, contrary to the myth, so now i shoot the zoom/tc combo 80 percent of the time, as my quick-draw handheld rig. You can try the 200-400 VR. Its one of Nikon's sharpest zoom lenses and it's a constant F4 lens. The only problem with the 4005.6L and EX500f4.5 is absence of VR or IS., but then again, a lot of the best bird photographers here don't use stabilized lenses and still get the best and sharpest photographs. In the end, everything will be a matter of technique and handling. Sometimes its not the reach of the lens that matters, but the image quality, the clarity of the shot. There is a great advantage to have VR or IS on lenses in the field of bird photography, as many circumstances occur in underlit situations. Like you, until now i, too, am still confused! Just food for thought!
|
|