Jump to content

Welcome to NikonForums.com
Register now to gain access to all of our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to create topics, post replies to existing threads, give reputation to your fellow members, get your own private messenger, post status updates, manage your profile and so much more. If you already have an account, login here - otherwise create an account for free today!
Photo

Lens for Wildlife


  • Please log in to reply
35 replies to this topic

#1
Steve M

Steve M

    Loyal Member

  • Forum Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 238 posts
  • Country Flag
  • LocationSE Minnesota

Site Supporter

I am new to photography. Maybe nine months. My goal was landscapes, trains and Wildlife. Eagles. I bought a D7200 that came with an 18 to 55 mm and a 55 to 300 mm. For most of what I do the two lenses do what I need except for the birds I wish to get. Mostly Eagles but come summer I monitor bluebirds and Tree Swallows and the 300 mm just isn't big enough. I have been saving for a 700 or 800 but it just seems once you hit that 700 the price goes way up there and out of my price range. I am old and my eyes are not the best so I want an automatic focus if possible. Eagles flying the automatic focus would be nice.

I was thinking of spending up to $2000 but I don't see a 700mm for under that. I can see I have to rethink my budget. Gee I saw a 420 to 800 for $169.00. LOL. Stay away is all I can think.

I ran across this Tamron one which I am told Tamron is a good lens. The is only a 600 mm lens so less than what I want but would maybe get me by The bald eagles are thick right now this time of year. But do I wait and get what I originally wanted which may be What does everyone think of this lens


https://www.bhphotov...f_5_6_3_di.html

#2
Daniel

Daniel

    Forum Veteran

  • Forum Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 512 posts
  • Country Flag

Site Supporter

I like the Nikon 80-400 better. Its focuses faster and is sharper. I had the Tamron 150-600 for a couple of months then sold it



#3
Merco_61

Merco_61

    Nikonian

  • Premium Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,294 posts
  • Country Flag
  • LocationUppsala, Sweden

Site Supporter

There seems to have been quite a lot of sample variation in the 150-600 production at Tamron. Some are about equal to the Nikon 80-400 but longer, some are real dogs and most are in between those extremes. As long as you buy new, you can send it in for calibration if it misbehaves. The Sigmas and the Nikon 200-500 have the same inconsistent quality, it is probably a result of the price point they are built for.



#4
Steve M

Steve M

    Loyal Member

  • Forum Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 238 posts
  • Country Flag
  • LocationSE Minnesota

Site Supporter

I like the Nikon 80-400 better. Its focuses faster and is sharper. I had the Tamron 150-600 for a couple of months then sold it

 

 

I am just afraid the 400 won't give me what I need. I could make the price work in my budget.  I have a 300 and I can't get close enough for the eagles.    Right now with my 300 I have take the photo then blow the photo up quiet a bit.   I sure wish there was a place one could rent a lens. 

 

But I do want something that focuses fast and sharp


There seems to have been quite a lot of sample variation in the 150-600 production at Tamron. Some are about equal to the Nikon 80-400 but longer, some are real dogs and most are in between those extremes. As long as you buy new, you can send it in for calibration if it misbehaves. The Sigmas and the Nikon 200-500 have the same inconsistent quality, it is probably a result of the price point they are built for.

 

 

I am always afraid of the price point products.   I feel that is what I have with my 55-300 right now. 



#5
Merco_61

Merco_61

    Nikonian

  • Premium Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,294 posts
  • Country Flag
  • LocationUppsala, Sweden

Site Supporter

lensrentals.com have several of the long tele zooms for rent. I think they are around $70-80 for 7 days rental. We have similar services here in Europe, even if few of them have as large an inventory. Renting one is a good way to find out if you like it or not.



#6
Daniel

Daniel

    Forum Veteran

  • Forum Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 512 posts
  • Country Flag

Site Supporter

My thoughts are if you can't get close enough with a 400mm then you won't be able to with a Tamron 150-600. I could show some sample picks with the Nikon 80-400 if you like? 

I am just afraid the 400 won't give me what I need. I could make the price work in my budget.  I have a 300 and I can't get close enough for the eagles.    Right now with my 300 I have take the photo then blow the photo up quiet a bit.   I sure wish there was a place one could rent a lens. 

 

But I do want something that focuses fast and sharp


 

 

I am always afraid of the price point products.   I feel that is what I have with my 55-300 right now. 



#7
Steve M

Steve M

    Loyal Member

  • Forum Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 238 posts
  • Country Flag
  • LocationSE Minnesota

Site Supporter

My thoughts are if you can't get close enough with a 400mm then you won't be able to with a Tamron 150-600. I could show some sample picks with the Nikon 80-400 if you like?


Daniel thank you so much. After spending a few hours on the web and reading here the Tamron is off my list. In fact Nikon made a 200-500 and it is off my list. I am most interested in the 80 - 400 and am going to do as suggested above by Nikonian and rent one. There is a place about an hours drive from me I can rent or rent online as suggested.

Thank you for your help,, all of you!

#8
Daniel

Daniel

    Forum Veteran

  • Forum Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 512 posts
  • Country Flag

Site Supporter

your welcome and one thing to note is the Nikon 80-400 produces professional sharp images.  

Daniel thank you so much. After spending a few hours on the web and reading here the Tamron is off my list. In fact Nikon made a 200-500 and it is off my list. I am most interested in the 80 - 400 and am going to do as suggested above by Nikonian and rent one. There is a place about an hours drive from me I can rent or rent online as suggested.

Thank you for your help,, all of you!



#9
Merco_61

Merco_61

    Nikonian

  • Premium Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,294 posts
  • Country Flag
  • LocationUppsala, Sweden

Site Supporter

The 80-400 is indeed sharp, with a nice rendering.

These aren't BIF, but they give an idea about what the lens can do. I have done very little post work on them.



#10
Steve M

Steve M

    Loyal Member

  • Forum Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 238 posts
  • Country Flag
  • LocationSE Minnesota

Site Supporter



The 80-400 is indeed sharp, with a nice rendering.

These aren't BIF, but they give an idea about what the lens can do. I have done very little post work on them.

 

 

All very nice.   Here is an image I took with my 70-300mm.  I was lucky to get this close as they usually get nervous and move on.  This is the original I took and then the second one is after enlarging the photo and taking the center.  As you can see I am way short of the eagle.  I was originally thinking I would need something around a 700mm????

 

 

 

SJM_2643_Original.jpg

 

 

Here is after I enlarged the photo.   I don't want to buy something that does not give me what I need and then be unhappy.  I just wished I could tell how much more of the eagle I would get with the 400 over the 300.  I guess I will find out when I rent.

 

 

File_Feb_28,_8_30_15_AM.jpg



#11
alden

alden

    Nikonian

  • Forum Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,226 posts
  • Country Flag
  • LocationHiding in the hallway

I use a 400mm f/5.6 Tokina that's about 20 years old and it gets me very close most of the time.

 

I shoot in the large file setting to get about the maximum amount of information into every image, so that if I crop later I still get good sized sharp images. I can make a 400mm image look like an 800mm image in post that way.



#12
Merco_61

Merco_61

    Nikonian

  • Premium Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,294 posts
  • Country Flag
  • LocationUppsala, Sweden

Site Supporter

OTRTexan has shot some eagles with the Tamron 150-600 on FX. That is the same field of view at the tele end as the 80-400 on DX. 

 

Eagles - Nature and Animals - NikonForums.com



#13
Steve M

Steve M

    Loyal Member

  • Forum Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 238 posts
  • Country Flag
  • LocationSE Minnesota

Site Supporter

OTRTexan has shot some eagles with the Tamron 150-600 on FX. That is the same field of view at the tele end as the 80-400 on DX. 

 

Eagles - Nature and Animals - NikonForums.com

 

 

WoW what an awesome display.  Well done!    I am leaning at just buying the lens.  

I can save $500 for a used one from B&H Photo.   I am told B & H has one of the highest reputations out there.   Is the $500 worth it or just get new?



#14
alden

alden

    Nikonian

  • Forum Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,226 posts
  • Country Flag
  • LocationHiding in the hallway

WoW what an awesome display.  Well done!    I am leaning at just buying the lens.  


I can save $500 for a used one from B&H Photo.   I am told B & H has one of the highest reputations out there.   Is the $500 worth it or just get new?

 

It's worth it if the lens is in good condition. Why buy new when you can get the same thing for $500 less? A quality lens that has been taken care of will last a lifetime.



#15
Daniel

Daniel

    Forum Veteran

  • Forum Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 512 posts
  • Country Flag

Site Supporter

Hawk shot at 600mm Focal point with Tamaron 150-600. Will give a sample with the Nikon 80-400 in a minutes.

 

Sorry I cropped the Ospreys wings but that shot will be printed and so that is why. Osprey shot with the Nikon 80-400

 

Notice the grain in the hawk show and the clarity in the Osprey shot. 

Attached Thumbnails

  • DSC_4541.jpg
  • DSC_5621b copy copy.jpg


#16
alden

alden

    Nikonian

  • Forum Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,226 posts
  • Country Flag
  • LocationHiding in the hallway

Osprey is much clearer.

 

Nikon glass is just superior.



#17
Steve M

Steve M

    Loyal Member

  • Forum Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 238 posts
  • Country Flag
  • LocationSE Minnesota

Site Supporter

Hawk shot at 600mm Focal point with Tamaron 150-600. Will give a sample with the Nikon 80-400 in a minutes.

Sorry I cropped the Ospreys wings but that shot will be printed and so that is why. Osprey shot with the Nikon 80-400

Notice the grain in the hawk show and the clarity in the Osprey shot.

Great comparison! Big difference. Thank you so much



I just saw some photos taken by a sigma 150-600. The photos were very crisp and clear. Any comments on the Sigma

The more expensive one is a bit less than the Nikon

#18
Steve M

Steve M

    Loyal Member

  • Forum Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 238 posts
  • Country Flag
  • LocationSE Minnesota

Site Supporter

Well I rented a Sigma 150-600mm f/5-6.3 DG OS HSM Sports Nikon F. Glad I rented. I am not happy with my pictures. Out of 100 pictures 95 are blurry. Even with using my tripod they are blurry. I have the lens for seven days but at the rate I am going I will probably send back early.

I looked to see if I needed any special software for my D7200 but don't see that I do. If anyone has any tips or suggestions I would appreciate it. If I stay under 300mm then I seem to get a pretty old picture but still not as crisp as one would expect.

#19
Dogbytes

Dogbytes

    Forum Veteran

  • Premium Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 560 posts
  • Country Flag
  • LocationCornwall

Site Supporter

Out of 100 pictures 95 are blurry. Even with using my tripod they are blurry.

If I stay under 300mm then I seem to get a pretty old picture but still not as crisp as one would expect.

 

That kind of photography is not what I specialise in and I've never used any of the lenses mentioned but, going back to basics, the first thing to consider, if you're not happy with how sharp your pictures are, is whether the culprit is subject movement or camera movement.

 

A 600mm lens is a difficult thing to keep still. Your tripod and head will need to be up to the task, a flimsy, lightweight one will not do it.

With animals, if they're not absolutely still, you tend to need higher shutter speeds than you might expect - hence the use of fast (and expensive!) glass by the pro's. What shutter speeds are you achieving with the sharp pics as opposed to the blurry ones? Is there a difference?

 

I'm sure there are better qualified people on here than me who will suggest something. However this is quite a demanding type of photography in which good technique is very important - and it is always easy to blame the gear...



#20
Steve M

Steve M

    Loyal Member

  • Forum Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 238 posts
  • Country Flag
  • LocationSE Minnesota

Site Supporter

That kind of photography is not what I specialise in and I've never used any of the lenses mentioned but, going back to basics, the first thing to consider, if you're not happy with how sharp your pictures are, is whether the culprit is subject movement or camera movement.

A 600mm lens is a difficult thing to keep still. Your tripod and head will need to be up to the task, a flimsy, lightweight one will not do it.
With animals, if they're not absolutely still, you tend to need higher shutter speeds than you might expect - hence the use of fast (and expensive!) glass by the pro's. What shutter speeds are you achieving with the sharp pics as opposed to the blurry ones? Is there a difference?

I'm sure there are better qualified people on here than me who will suggest something. However this is quite a demanding type of photography in which good technique is very important - and it is always easy to blame the gear...


You are right in everything you say. Me being a beginner this lens is probably too much for me. I called Sigma and sent the a bunch of pictures. They are going to go through them. I even set my camera on my pickup hoping there would be no movement. Even with a row second delay the picture still turned out blurry. I took over hundred pictures again and one was well almost there.

Glad I only rented it. If it is movement I have a long ways to go. This lens is not for me.

Back to square one and get the 80 to 400 Nikon.