Thinking of a super-zoom

[wfooshee]

OK, I need a new lens. My mother would "correct" me and say I want a new lens, but she'd be wrong; I NEED it! She's not around any more, anyway, so again... NEED!

My target has been the Nikkor AF-S 200-500mm f/5.6E ED VR. About $1300, refurb around $1100, and I've seen used down in the $800s from the lens rental shops. My fear, looking at my past images, is that the 200 short end would be an unacceptable hard limit, so that points me to the Sigma or Tamron 150-600 lenses. I'm not a fan of Tamron, and between the Sigmas, I think I'd go the Sport rather than the Contemporary, as from what I'm reading, it's better sealed for weather.

And then I came across used prices for Nikon's AF-S 80-400mm f/4.5-5.6 G ED VR, in the $1,000 range, for a lens that is over 2 grand new. It could replace my AF-S VR 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6G IF-ED, where the supers above would be for completely different use. The 80-400 could be a walking-around lens at races and air shows, as well as a wildlife lens, where the 200-500 or 150-600 lenses would pretty much be wildlife only, I think.

Anybody out there have anything to report with their own experiences with these? Obviously I could go spend some weekends with rentals and see what I find out about them, but input from owners would be welcome.

 

[Braineack]

At races and air shows -- I'd have no issue sporting multiple lenses. (I shoot at these events a lot)

If you were travelling around the world, that's another story.

I really like the 200-500 personally, and would love to own one.

Here's a gallery of mine at an airshow, I was sporting my D610 with 70-200 and Tamron G1 150-600, and then my a6000 for a walk around.

 

[ac12]

. . .

My target has been the Nikkor AF-S 200-500mm f/5.6E ED VR. About $1300, refurb around $1100, and I've seen used down in the $800s from the lens rental shops. My fear, looking at my past images, is that the 200 short end would be an unacceptable hard limit, so that points me to the Sigma or Tamron 150-600 lenses. I'm not a fan of Tamron, and between the Sigmas, I think I'd go the Sport rather than the Contemporary, as from what I'm reading, it's better sealed for weather.
. . .

Warning: IF you zoom with muscle memory, the Sigma lenses on your Nikon may be a problem. This is because the Sigma zoom ring (on the lens that I used and the lenses that I've seen) turn in the opposite direction from the Nikon zoom ring. I shot a volleyball game with a Sigma zoom, and I gave up in frustration after about 15-20 minutes of constantly turning the zoom ring the wrong way, and losing shots. Muscle memory can be HARD to retrain.
When I shoot, I don't think "which way do I need to turn the zoom ring," my fingers just turn the zoom ring in the correct direction.

On the other hand, if you do not zoom with muscle memory, or you are not shooting a FAST moving event, then it likely will make little to no difference. Losing the few seconds to change direction of the zoom ring does not cost you anything.

 

[Strodav]

I use the Nikon 200-500mm f/5.6 on both a D500 and D850 mainly for birding. It is an excellent lens and you should get very good results with it. For wildlife / birding zooms are almost always used at, or near, full zoom. If you are concerned that 200mm minimum is a bit too long, then I recommend putting a nifty-fifty in your pocket. Good ones are not all that expensive (especially used) with great IQ, are fast, small and light.

 

[wfooshee]

This is because the Sigma zoom ring (on the lens that I used and the lenses that I've seen) turn in the opposite direction from the Nikon zoom ring.

That would most definitely be an issue if it's the case with the 150-600. Renting it would hit me with that pretty quickly!

 

[zulu42]

If image quality is top priority, then Nikon 200-500.
The 80-400 sure is a heck of a range. Would be really handy, but I don't think 400mm is long enough for most wildlife-if on an FX body.
I've seen great images from all the competing lenses in this category, but I'm with braineack. I'd love to have the 200-500. I'd trade my 150-600 Tamron G2 for a 200-500 in a heartbeat.

 

[zombiesniper]

I seen images from and shot the Nikon 200-500 and the Tamron G2 and Sigma Sport.
In your situation if I was going to get a walk around lens and a wildlife lens I'd probably get the Nikon 200-500 for wildlife.

 

[beddingfield]

get the biggest you can afford.

DONT overlook the option to use actual telescopes. aperture may not be as adjustable as we would like, but that can be over come. Especially if you have one of those digital cameras..

But the long body REALLY maximizes bounce, and when your at full zoom, its a drag trying to find what you want in it.

 

[viathelens]

OK, I need a new lens. My mother would "correct" me and say I want a new lens, but she'd be wrong; I NEED it! She's not around any more, anyway, so again... NEED!

My target has been the Nikkor AF-S 200-500mm f/5.6E ED VR. About $1300, refurb around $1100, and I've seen used down in the $800s from the lens rental shops. My fear, looking at my past images, is that the 200 short end would be an unacceptable hard limit, so that points me to the Sigma or Tamron 150-600 lenses. I'm not a fan of Tamron, and between the Sigmas, I think I'd go the Sport rather than the Contemporary, as from what I'm reading, it's better sealed for weather.

And then I came across used prices for Nikon's AF-S 80-400mm f/4.5-5.6 G ED VR, in the $1,000 range, for a lens that is over 2 grand new. It could replace my AF-S VR 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6G IF-ED, where the supers above would be for completely different use. The 80-400 could be a walking-around lens at races and air shows, as well as a wildlife lens, where the 200-500 or 150-600 lenses would pretty much be wildlife only, I think.

Anybody out there have anything to report with their own experiences with these? Obviously I could go spend some weekends with rentals and see what I find out about them, but input from owners would be welcome.

Hi. I have the Nikon 200-500 and the Nikon 80-400. I photograph a lot of wildlife, mostly with the 200-500 on a Nikon D500, so a crop camera. I also have an older Tamron 150-600 that turned out to be a read dud and I don't use it at all. I love the 200-500. Once I got the 200-500 I seldom used the 80-400, it's taken mostly as a backup lens. If you can afford it, you might want to look at the Nikon PF lenses, the newest one is the 500mm. I rented one and it was very light and very easy to shoot with hand-held. They, like all equipment, are expensive.

 

[zombiesniper]

DONT overlook the option to use actual telescopes

Since wildlife was stated as the main purpose for the longer lens, this is very bad advice as not only is the aperture not adjustable the focus would be horribly difficult. This would be a huge waste of money.

 

[weepete]

I've got the Tamron 150-600mm and it's a superb focal length. I only have one lens between 70 and the 150 and that's a manual focus 135mm prime. Can't say I've ever missed the bit in between. I use it mostly at 400mm and above, with most of my shots at 600mm. I'm pretty sure I'd miss it on the long end if I was to pick up a different lens though.

I've been pretty happy with mine and I don't think there's a lot in it between it and the Sigma C. There's a lot of focal lengths in this category currently, so we are spoiled for choice though it can make trying to choose the optimum one for yourself difficult.

 

[Original katomi]

Re post 3
Whilst I am Canon, the muscle memory problem is the same when using Sigma.
And after getting use to the Sigma, going back to Canon, the problem starts again.
More so in the dark where #I# rely on working by touch and memory

 

[ac12]

Re post 3
Whilst I am Canon, the muscle memory problem is the same when using Sigma.
And after getting use to the Sigma, going back to Canon, the problem starts again.
More so in the dark where #I# rely on working by touch and memory

hmm your Sigma lens appears to turn in a different direction.
The Sigma 17-50/2.8 and some of the others that I've seen pictures of, turn in the same direction as the Canon zoom ring.

I have a technique that "might" work.
I shoot my Nikon with my left hand holding the lens 'thumb forward, wrist back.'
When I shoot my Olympus (opposite turning zoom ring), I reverse my grip and hold the lens 'thumb BACK, wrist FORWARD.'
I seem to turn the zoom ring based on my thumb. So by reversing my grip I can work the Olympus zoom without the muscle memory confusion.
BUT, that does not always work, as I still get confused when I use the Sigma.

 

[Original katomi]

Just a thought for you
Rem I speak canon .
With canon and some of Sigma lenses there was/is a problem of the two not talking to each other.
Dont know if this effects you

 

[floridafan]

I did a fair amount of research on the Nikon 200-500 and the Tamron 150-600g2. Most of what I read indicated that the Tamron was at least as good as the Nikon. We have an 80-400, so the 150-600 made more sense. It is mounted on a D850. We had it out for the first times this weekend and my wife was very happy with it.