Lens Choice?

Paganman2

Senior Member
If you could choose between a fairly good 300mm zoom like a 70-300VR and shoot at the lens sweet spot of 200mm that is recognized as being pretty dam good at that setting in the center, and then cropping the image in post, or buying a none zoom say 300mm but needing to spend far more money what would you do? would the d7100 resolve enough detail to warrant a very expensive lens, that i would still want to crop with, or would it simply be worth using a 1.4 x extender on the 70-300VR?

P.
 

mikew_RIP

Senior Member
I would forget the idea of a converter on the 70-300 it wont be a good match,depending on the subjects a Nikon 300mm f4 should give better results on the D7100 and allow for better cropping,you will of course lose the versatility of the zoom.
 

skene

Senior Member
The 70-300 lens, while it is a good lens, you would not be able to put a TC on that lens.
The question you want to ask yourself is what do you have to gain and what are your exact goals with a specific lens that you need to stay within the 200mm range?
If you are needing to stay at the 200mm range, maybe you want to look into purchasing a 70-200 F2.8 (Nikon/Tamron/Sigma with or w/o VR/VC/OS), 70-200VR F4, an older 70-210 F4 or 80-200 F2.8.
Maybe you are also working within a certain budget? You should be more specific on your intentions and budget when asking for help with something as general as lenses.
 

Paganman2

Senior Member
The 70-300 lens, while it is a good lens, you would not be able to put a TC on that lens.
The question you want to ask yourself is what do you have to gain and what are your exact goals with a specific lens that you need to stay within the 200mm range?
If you are needing to stay at the 200mm range, maybe you want to look into purchasing a 70-200 F2.8 (Nikon/Tamron/Sigma with or w/o VR/VC/OS), 70-200VR F4, an older 70-210 F4 or 80-200 F2.8.
Maybe you are also working within a certain budget? You should be more specific on your intentions and budget when asking for help with something as general as lenses.

I have not long brought the 70-300Vr and brought the d7100 to go with it just after, before this i had the 55-300Vr but changed to the 70-300 for its better AF and improved IQ, i understand and have found the IQ from the 70-300 if dropped down from 300mm to somewhere between 200-250mm at the center is Superb and very very close to a lot of the expensive primes.
I was and still am dictated to by a tight budget and purchasing the 70-300Vr even second hand nearly crippled me along with the d7100 on top, so i am at a situation of trying to squeeze every single - minute teeny tiny last inch of quality out of it, as i need to crop all my pictures as they are of aircraft in flight or BIF pictures.
I was before getting the 70-300vr intrigued to know if a 300mm f4 prime would have been vastly better, esp as i would have had to buy the cheapest old beaten up version i could afford, so i guess a question mark would have been raised regarding getting a mint 70-300Vr (the one i brought) or a beat up very old probably non vr 300mm f4 prime?

P.
 

skene

Senior Member
Well if it's something along those lines...
prime > zoom

If it's a budget that you are trying to keep with, then maybe I would suggest trying to find a used Tamron 70-300 VC. Good optics, very raved and reviewed "VC/VR" and slightly less expensive alternative to Nikon's 70-300.
If you are trying to photograph BIF and planes, then you would probably need to delve further into your budget and opt for Tamron's 150-600 F5-6.3 VC which would be better suited for outdoor shooting, keep in mind it is a bit more expensive, and you would want to use a tripod/monopod or tripod/gimbal head to go with it (which would add cost, but may be easier to track objects with), but I feel due to what you are stating that this would be the better route.
 

jay_dean

Senior Member
If you're shooting BIF or aircraft, you're after long reach on the cheap, right? The Nikon 70-200 f2.8, may be a bit short. The VRI is just as good as a VRII on a DX frame, but you'd want a converter. The 300mm f/4's are starting to hit the second hand dealers as the new VR version is being released, but again a converter may have to be considered. Or cheapskate option is the Sigma 50-500 'Bigma', which is a great lens
 

Paganman2

Senior Member
Thank you all for the replies, i was trying to find out in actual using and not lens tests, what the difference is in IQ between using 300mm and 250mm, and if the difference with say a good improvement at 250mm, would it allow me to crop more to reach the 300mm end and then some?
I was wondering if many with this lens choice to use it for BIF shots but at say 250mm and crop more knowing its sharper than 300mm and a good sharp crop is better than a soft one.

P.
 

jay_dean

Senior Member
Most zooms don't work well at their total maximum end. Its better to pull back just slightly, so pull back to around 280mm to get a sharper image. Basically, the more you crop, the more noise and image degradation you'll introduce, or use your maximum focal length but have a softer image. Its your choice which image you'd prefer. The alternative is a longer focal length (e.g. 400mm+) lens that handle images taken at 300mm more effectively.
 

Paganman2

Senior Member
Most zooms don't work well at their total maximum end. Its better to pull back just slightly, so pull back to around 280mm to get a sharper image. Basically, the more you crop, the more noise and image degradation you'll introduce, or use your maximum focal length but have a softer image. Its your choice which image you'd prefer. The alternative is a longer focal length (e.g. 400mm+) lens that handle images taken at 300mm more effectively.


Thanks for that, with my d7100 fortunately i have a bit more room to crop, but on the other side due to my lens size i need to crop by half my original image size, it was that dilemma when i brought both as i could have done ideally with the Nikkor 80-400Vr but that was way out of my league and similar with the Siggy 80-400 i would not have been able to buy my d7100 then and would have had to sell my D90 so may have had enough just for a lens but with no body for it?

P.
 

jay_dean

Senior Member
i could have done ideally with the Nikkor 80-400Vr but that was way out of my league....

P.
I had the Nikon 80-400VRIIG (new) version. I traded my Sigma 50-500 (non OS) in for it. For the extra £1000 or so i got slightly better af and slightly better bokeh, and lost 30mm at the bottom, and 100mm at the top end. Did i think it was worth that amount over the Sigma? No. I'm not saying its a bad lens, its just not worth that amount over other alternatives imo.
 

Paganman2

Senior Member
I had the Nikon 80-400VRIIG (new) version. I traded my Sigma 50-500 (non OS) in for it. For the extra £1000 or so i got slightly better af and slightly better bokeh, and lost 30mm at the bottom, and 100mm at the top end. Did i think it was worth that amount over the Sigma? No. I'm not saying its a bad lens, its just not worth that amount over other alternatives imo.

I keep telling myself "i have to learn to live within my means" £800 on a d7100 and 70-300Vr was all i had so i must learn to be thankful and make the best of what i have, and being out of work it is a Massive amount of money to spend on a hobby.

P.
 

jay_dean

Senior Member
I keep telling myself "i have to learn to live within my means" £800 on a d7100 and 70-300Vr was all i had so i must learn to be thankful and make the best of what i have, and being out of work it is a Massive amount of money to spend on a hobby.

P.
Agreed! good luck in finding employment very soon
 

Paganman2

Senior Member
Yes. A full time job in itself. I've known people in the same situation

Thank you for saying that unfortunately its a labor of love - literally as i dont get paid, thats why i said what i did about spending so much immoral money, photography certainly is a disease and you get hooked...

P.
 

jay_dean

Senior Member
Thank you for saying that unfortunately its a labor of love - literally as i dont get paid, thats why i said what i did about spending so much immoral money, photography certainly is a disease and you get hooked...

P.
Its certainly an addiction, and very expensive one at that
 
Top