Faster zoom

R

Rorie

Senior Member
Thanks for all the replies.

I will have a look at teh longer focal length lenses then as i think thats the best way to go by the sounds of things.

I did see that sigma 200-50mm lens. I think i may need excess baggage for that too haha.

So for the long reach lens, i have the choice of
Tamaron 150-600
Sigma 150-600 and
Sigma 50-500?

Just a thought, can you hand hold while focuses to 600mm or does it really need a tripod or monopod?
 
J

J-see

Senior Member
The Sigma and Tam 150-600mm have VR but don't expect miracles at such a focal distance. You need a pretty fast shutter speed to eliminate all shake. Or a good technique which, as I experience, takes more than a thousand clicks, to develop. A tripod would help a lot. It might be hard to get a Sigma since it is just released.

If I was you, I'd consider upgrading the cam too. A D3300 as an example is very cheap for the quality it delivers. It has double the pixels as your D90 which allows you to crop quite some and still have the same pixel/quality as you got now. It also has better ISO performance than what you have now which will translate in more light if you need it. It costs some 500 here and even when being "entry" outperforms yours at every level. That's what new technology does. If you'd invest more, there are plenty of great cams available.

I think it's a shame if you'd buy a new lens to get great shots on your trip and then drag the D90 along which will impact the quality any of those lenses can deliver.
 
Last edited:
J

jay_dean

Senior Member
Rorie said:
Thanks for all the replies.

I will have a look at teh longer focal length lenses then as i think thats the best way to go by the sounds of things.

I did see that sigma 200-50mm lens. I think i may need excess baggage for that too haha.

So for the long reach lens, i have the choice of
Tamaron 150-600
Sigma 150-600 and
Sigma 50-500?

Just a thought, can you hand hold while focuses to 600mm or does it really need a tripod or monopod?
Click to expand...

Dependent on your budget, the Sigma 50-500mm is the cheapest option, try and find the OS version if you're going for this one. The Siggy and Tammy 150-600's are newer and more expensive, and i'd expect (tho i've never owned one) better, especially at 500mm. If you're hand holding at 500-600mm, you'll have to shoot at at least 1/800-1/1250 to help with shake, add to the fact that you need to step down to around f/8 to get the best out of these lenses, leaves you in a situation where your camera body could be struggling for light at times(outside on a bright day you'll be okay). Thus, as mentioned before, you could probably do with a camera body that will handle higher ISOs better
Tripods and monopods are great at their job, and do help prevent blur, but are no fun to lug around on walks or hikes
 
R

Rorie

Senior Member
I will have a look into cameras. I am somewhat out of touch with the different nikon so just now as it's been a long time since I've looked.

with regards to the 3300, is that not just a beginners camera? How does it compare to a d90 other than the mp and ISO?

i had a quick look at all the cameras via nikons "dslr finder" and it seems most camera now have 24mp other than a couple pro cameras. Is that right?

any good comparison sites to help select what I'd need/want?
 
J

J-see

Senior Member
I mentioned the D3300 as cheapest and most compact travel option. It's sold as entry indeed but that only means it lacks some buttons. The sensor is what does the hard work. It's a 24Mp sensor without AA filter. The other DX options are the 5300 or 7100.
 
B

Blacktop

Senior Member
jaydean said:
Dependent on your budget, the Sigma 50-500mm is the cheapest option, try and find the OS version if you're going for this one. The Siggy and Tammy 150-600's are newer and more expensive, and i'd expect (tho i've never owned one) better, especially at 500mm. If you're hand holding at 500-600mm, you'll have to shoot at at least 1/800-1/1250 to help with shake, add to the fact that you need to step down to around f/8 to get the best out of these lenses, leaves you in a situation where your camera body could be struggling for light at times(outside on a bright day you'll be okay). Thus, as mentioned before, you could probably do with a camera body that will handle higher ISOs better
Tripods and monopods are great at their job, and do help prevent blur, but are no fun to lug around on walks or hikes
Click to expand...

I just saw a shot that @480sparky put up a little while ago. Tamron 150-600mm handheld at 420mm with a 1/20th shutter speed. Sharp as a knife. Sorry but I just can't find the thread now.
edit..I found it. http://nikonites.com/telephoto/2722...a-today-2.html?highlight=sparky#axzz3KhuJs6bm
 
Last edited:
4

480sparky

Senior Member
Blacktop said:
I just saw a shot that @480sparky put up a little while ago. Tamron 150-600mm handheld at 480mm with a 1/20th shutterspeed. Sharp as a knife. Sorry but I just can't find the thread now.
Click to expand...


Freedom_2987post.jpg


ETA: 100% crop from this shot:

Freedom_2987100crop.jpg
 
Last edited:
J

J-see

Senior Member
E

egosbar

Senior Member
thats a great shot with the tamron , definitely on my radar one day , ill have to try one first though

as for the op , imo id upgrade the camera to a d810 and keep the 70-300 with a tele convertor , the iso capabilities of the newer cameras negate the higher apertures , depends on your budget though i guess
 
J

J-see

Senior Member
The D810 would require quite an investment. For low light fast action I'd pick the D750 over the D810 but even that is not a cheap upgrade.

I tried a 2x teleconverter on the 70-300mm and that doesn't work too well. I loses its ability to auto-focus. Maybe a 1.4 or 1.7 could work but it would still require lots of light.
 
Last edited:
R

Rorie

Senior Member
I have marked down all the nikon cameras kicking about just now….along with their prices. From what i can see, the cheapest FX is the D610 and its a fair jump up in price from the DX cameras. I know we are talking about iso and MP here, so what influence would the FX sensor have on this, other than allowing more light in? I guess this is quite an important factor? Or should i just stick to DX? I can see its going to take a while to get my head into the differences between them all again!
 
Last edited:
R

Rorie

Senior Member
I think I am maybe best sticking to a DX, for the price if nothing else!

The D7100 seems to be hitting most boxes just now. I prefer that over the d5200, but is there others I should consider?

i normally run around with a GPS hooked on as I travel a lot, but it's really badly designed and the connections are broken now. I see the D5300 has a gps built in.... Are there any other DX camera that have this? Or lower end FX?
 
R

RocketCowboy

Senior Member
Rorie said:
i normally run around with a GPS hooked on as I travel a lot, but it's really badly designed and the connections are broken now. I see the D5300 has a gps built in.... Are there any other DX camera that have this? Or lower end FX?
Click to expand...

I'm not a fan of the built-in GPS on the D5300. On our Mediterranean cruise last spring, the D5300 struggled to acquire satellite lock, so I have no Geo-tagging on any of those images. I have not sprung for a GPS for the D7100 yet, and after reading some of the posts where others have been able to GeoTag off their cell phone, I likely won't if I can get an alternative working.
 
S

SteveH

Senior Member
RocketCowboy said:
I'm not a fan of the built-in GPS on the D5300. On our Mediterranean cruise last spring, the D5300 struggled to acquire satellite lock, so I have no Geo-tagging on any of those images. I have not sprung for a GPS for the D7100 yet, and after reading some of the posts where others have been able to GeoTag off their cell phone, I likely won't if I can get an alternative working.
Click to expand...

J-see said:
I intensely dislike built-in GPS since it's not just my shots that are Geo-tagged. So am I.
Click to expand...


I used cell phone geo-tagging a lot - It's free (Apart from the actual phone!) uses none of your mobile data if you don't want it too, and you can decide in LR which photos to tag, and then you can strip location info when exporting too so it is very flexible.
 
4

480sparky

Senior Member
FYI: While there are smart-phone apps for geotagging, it should be mentioned that the phone does not need cell service for geotagging to work. Any functioning phone, even without cell service, can geotag the images. You might need to pair it up with your wireless router, however. But if you've upgraded phones and kept your old phone it can be put into service in such a manner.

All my old smart phones are in the hands of my neighbor's grandchildren. They can play games, listen to music, watch videos and such, and download schtuff from the innernets using their home's wireless.
 
R

Rorie

Senior Member
So, i know my iPhone geotags photos i take….on it…. but how does this work with your dslr? What app is this, and how does the app know when your taking photos? Or is it not that smart?

I really like seeing my map on Lightroom, but the plug in and clip on GPS devices are so badly designed i wouldn't be keen on buying a new one (and its another 100GPB) so this sounds like a good idea for me!
 
4

480sparky

Senior Member
Rorie said:
So, i know my iPhone geotags photos i take….on it…. but how does this work with your dslr? What app is this, and how does the app know when your taking photos? Or is it not that smart?..........
Click to expand...


Both your camera & phone have clocks. The app merely records GPS locations at intervals you set (shake the phone, every 15 seconds, 30 seconds, 1 minute, 10 minutes, etc. depending on how fast you're moving), and the software marries up the location with the images using the timestamps.
 
Top