Lighter options for bird photography

06Honda

Senior Member
My current bird photography setup is:

Nikon D7200
Nikon AF-S 80-400MM F/4.5-5.6G ED VR

As my body ages i am finding it a little heavy lately even when using the Cotton Carrier. My question is are their any Nikon lighter lenses that give me 400mm (min) that are a fair bit lighter than my current setup. A friend of mine has a AF-S NIKKOR 300mm f/4E PF ED VR and it is very light weight but only tops out at 300m. For the cost adding a teleconvertor to me seems a waste of money on the intial purchase of this lense as you will end up with F5.6 as far as I can tell. Any suggestions are welcome, I have thought about a tripod but this will only make my current setup even heavier to carry.
 

hark

Administrator
Staff member
Super Mod
Contributor
I have the 300mm f/4 PF and have used it with a Nikon 1.4x TC as well as a Nikon 1.7x TC. I prefer the reach of the 1.7x TC but wide open it is f/6.7. Sometimes I miss shots which wasn't nearly so much of an issue when I used the 1.4x TC. As you mentioned, when used with the 1.4x TC, wide open it is f/5.6. I haven't found any other alternatives that are as light as this combo.

I believe someone here bought a 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6 VR lens and attached a Kenko TC. But there is a more noticeable degrading of images with that TC. The Nikon teleconverters are worth the cost when it comes to quality. But only you can justify the cost.
 

canuck257

Senior Member
I too have age related carrying problems so you have my sympathy at the frustration they cause. I use a D500 with 500 PF extensivly though it does become heavy more rapidly than it used to:eek: When that occurs I find the 300 PF with 1.4 to be a lighter option and much more managable size wise. I have never found the 5.6 max. aperture to be a disadvantage as both lens combinations work very well wide open.
 

hark

Administrator
Staff member
Super Mod
Contributor
I too have age related carrying problems so you have my sympathy at the frustration they cause. I use a D500 with 500 PF extensivly though it does become heavy more rapidly than it used to:eek: When that occurs I find the 300 PF with 1.4 to be a lighter option and much more managable size wise. I have never found the 5.6 max. aperture to be a disadvantage as both lens combinations work very well wide open.

If I remember correctly, the 500mm PF weighs about the same as the Nikon 70-200mm f/2.8 (and I have the 70-200mm). Since I have chronic tendonitis in my right hand, I find the weight handheld to be much heavier than I'd like. So I prefer using the 300mm PF with a TC. I too haven't found anything else that comes in at such a light weight.
 

canuck257

Senior Member
I think the 500 PF is lighter than the 70-200 which I sold because of it's weight. Certainly the 500 PF "feels" lighter or maybe it just balances in the hand better?
 

bluzman

Senior Member
At 76, I'm all for as light a rig as possible for capturing wildlife images. My set up currently is a D7500 with a Sigma 100-400mm F5-6.3 DG OS HSM Contemporary lens that I carry on a BlackRapid RS-4 strap. The lens is almost a pound lighter than the Nikon AF-S 80-400mm f/4.5-5.6 G ED VR (41 vs 56 ounces). The Sigma loses a bit at the short end compared to the Nikon. I find this rig to be comfortable to handhold and easily maneuverable for action shots.
 
Last edited:

Woodyg3

Senior Member
Contributor
I don't have one, but know several wildlife friends who use the 500 PF. They love it and it certainly is light for the focal length.
 

Roscoe Primrose

Senior Member
The D5600, 300PF, & TC17EII would save you 27oz. off your current setup... 11oz of that is just for the body swap, so still a full pound if you just switch lenses. Knock off another oz. if you go with the TC14E series. Of course, your wallet will be much lighter as well ;)

Roscoe
 
Top