Help - Selecting a First Telephoto

funfortehfun

Senior Member
Hi guys, long time no post.

I'm in the market for buying another lens - this time, a telephoto for birding, wildlife, anything far. I took a look on Craigslist and found a few selections within my price range (~700 tops):
  • 70-300 VR: $350
  • 300mm f/4 AF (not AF-S): $425
  • 80-200mm f/2.8 (still figuring out if it's AF-S/ring AF-D): $650
Which of the above would have the best value and perform the beast?

Thanks!
 

mikew_RIP

Senior Member
The 300f4 could be the best but it may limit your body choice if you upgrade,if it is as good as the later ones you could add tjhe 1.4 converter.The trouble is you may soon find 300 is not long enough the sigma 150-500 with stabilizing gets good reports.
 

PapaST

Senior Member
For anything far, and of the three lenses listed, I would choose the 300mm f4

If that lens is in excellent condition then I'd say that's a great price.
 

aroy

Senior Member
I would go with 300mm F4 AFS. It focuses faster than the older AF version. You will also have to save up for TC1.4 as that is the best combination.

In case you are short of funds now, postpone the purchase and save up. There is nothing more frustrating; in the long term; than having to live with equipment you really do not like but bought it just because you could afford nothing else. Lenses will remain with you for a long time and you may change four or more bodies before a lense change is warranted. So save up and get what is optimum. Consider that Nikon still manufactures and sell the 300m F4 even though it is decade old design. So frill may be added (Nano coating, VR, better body etc) but the basic design rarely changes. Normally all you get is the same old glass in a new and expensive package.
 
Last edited:

Mike D90

Senior Member
300mm is on the very short end of what is needed for bird photos. Go for more length if you can afford it. You will be surprised just how small a bird will come out on your photos with a 300mm lens unless you can get within just a few feet of them. That is often very difficult to do.
 

aroy

Senior Member
Add a TC1.4 and you get a 420mm lense. With TC2.0 you get a 600mm lense, but with deteriorated quality. At times it is better to get a small sharp and contrasty image rather than a big low contrast image. This is a trade off which has to be experienced and decided on personally.

Normally for small birds the high megapixel DX format will yeald better image simply because the subject is much smaller than the sensor and 1/2 inch high subject on a 24MP FF sensor will have less pixels than on a 24MP DX sensor. FF has an advantage only when its full real estate is utilised. With the DR of lower end FX and DX sensors for the same MP within a stop of each other, unless you shoot at high ISO, image quality is practically same.
 

Pretzel

Senior Member
I can vouch for the 70-300 VR being a GREAT lens for the price! 300mm is really the minimum that I would suggest, as even with that, I find myself having to crop to get the shot I really wanted, and that's on a DX. You can see quite a few examples of wildlife/bird shots in my 365 thread if ya like.
 

funfortehfun

Senior Member
Thanks guys, I really appreciate your help. I read in some places that 500mm is probably the length that you want for birding, since most are really small...
Changing the question, I want to be able to capture the cherry blossoms in bloom in Washington DC. Any recommendations there?
 

Mike D90

Senior Member
Thanks guys, I really appreciate your help. I read in some places that 500mm is probably the length that you want for birding, since most are really small...
Changing the question, I want to be able to capture the cherry blossoms in bloom in Washington DC. Any recommendations there?

How do you want to capture them? Close up? From far away? Want to get a bunch of the blossoms in one shot?
 

funfortehfun

Senior Member
Something like these photos:
cherry_blossom_washington_dc_sunrise.jpg
cherry-blossoms-jefferson-memorial-washington-dc.jpg
Cherry-Blossom-Tool.jpg
I was thinking of something like the 16-35 f/4 VR or 18-35.
 
Top