Helpful Posts Helpful Posts:  0
Results 1 to 5 of 5

Thread: Lens comparison for birding and secondary sport.

  1. #1
    Stagecoach's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Suva, Fiji
    Posts
    7,075
    Real Name
    Grahame

    Lens comparison for birding and secondary sport.

    For some time I have been considering acquiring a lens for birds and possibly sport for use with my D300.

    As someone that had never attempted birds seriously either static or in flight some time ago I purchased a cheapo 70-300mm to acquaint myself with the FL limitations and technique, have studied other members work here and technicals, investigated shooting location possibilities locally and tried to quantify what my priorities are.

    So here's my priorities, in order of importance for birding;

    1. I want to own a lens that has the capability of producing very high IQ images and good bokeh (forget the affects of technique for now). This is more important to me than just being able to produce images of different types of bird.

    2. I want to be able to shoot both static and in flight birds and from what I have learnt so far catching them going from static to flight is a challenge I want to be able to address.

    3. I believe that hand holding (which is all I have used so far) is an essential need.

    Ok, so after lots of pondering I have come down to two choices;

    a) AF-S NIKKOR 80-400mm f/4.5-5.6G ED VR
    b) AF-S NIKKOR 300mm f/4E PF ED VR

    Both of the above from what I can see are compatible with a 1.4x TC which I would also purchase.

    It's obvious that the 80-400 is going to be more versatile but the 300mm has the max aperture advantage. I understand that I would lose around 1.5 stops with the TC but even on dull days here it's pretty bright.

    Does anyone have experience of using these two lenses and would suggest why one should be preferable to the other taking account of my priorities 1. to 3. above?

    Grahame

  2. #2

    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Alaska
    Posts
    7,604
    Real Name
    Dan

    Re: Lens comparison for birding and secondary sport.

    I've used both extensively.

    For optimum IQ the 300 f4 is hard to beat. In the Nikon lineup that lens is probably the best bang for the buck to be had. And with the Nikkor 1.4x TC (version 2) there is no noticeable drop in IQ. You only lose one stop not 1.5 with the 1.4x TC. So with the TC fitted you have about the same reach and aperture you would have at the long end of the 80-400. And for about half the cost of the 80-400.

    That said, the AF-S version of the 80-400 is a nice lens. The three obvious advantages over the 300 are the zoom capability, longer reach without TC, and VR. Shooting on a DX body you're using the sharpest portion of the image. With the D300 it's doubtful you will notice any difference in IQ versus the 300 f4. You will notice the difference in bokeh shooting wide open without a TC.

    Unless you are REALLY picky and compared shots side by side, I doubt you could tell the difference in IQ shooting with your D300. Maybe with a D7100/7200 (higher rez, no AA filter). From what I've seen of what you shoot/post, I think you'd be thrilled with either but the 80-400 would serve you best due to the versatility. While the 300 f4 is a classic thing of beauty, the 80-400 is a state of the art work horse. If you go that route I'd not bother with the TC until after shooting a while with the lens. 400mm goes a long way on a DX body.

  3. #3

    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Alaska
    Posts
    7,604
    Real Name
    Dan

    Re: Lens comparison for birding and secondary sport.

    Oh, and zoom is hard to beat for sports if you have limited access to the venue.

  4. #4
    Stagecoach's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Suva, Fiji
    Posts
    7,075
    Real Name
    Grahame

    Re: Lens comparison for birding and secondary sport.

    Thanks for the comprehensive comparison Dan.

    I looked at cost on the Nikon website http://www.nikonusa.com/en/Nikon-Pro...ses/index.page and there's not that great a difference between the two, that is with the new 300mm VR. With regard to the D300 I don't think it's going to be too long before I'm forced to upgrade, the mould behind the rear LCD is expanding and the next body is likely to be the D7200.

    As for sports, of which rugby is what I'm going to have a go at 400mm will be ideal for the far end of the pitch.

    All's looking favourably towards the 80-400 at the moment and I'm going to start contacting camera outlets in New Zealand to see the costs and logistics of getting one sent over.

  5. #5

    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Alaska
    Posts
    7,604
    Real Name
    Dan

    Re: Lens comparison for birding and secondary sport.

    Quote Originally Posted by Stagecoach View Post
    ...I looked at cost on the Nikon website and there's not that great a difference between the two...
    Sorry, Grahame, I didn't pay close enough attention when I read your post. I was referring to the old version of the 300 f4 which is what I had. The new version is widely reported as being just as sharp or better than the old one, half the weight, and has VR. But yes with the cost of TC included it is virtually the same price as the 80-400. You'll love either one relative to what you've shot to date.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •