thercman
TPF Noob!
- Joined
- Nov 16, 2011
- Messages
- 16
- Reaction score
- 0
- Location
- Spokane WA
- Can others edit my Photos
- Photos NOT OK to edit
Hey everyone!
So I am trying to find a good quality lens to shoot wildlife with using my Sony NEX5n. I have a Nikon 200mm f/4 Ai-s lens but definitely is a little short when trying to fill a frame at distance. With that said I am looking a the Nikon 300mm f/4.5 Ai-s lens and a Sigma 400mm f/5.6. I have found mixed reviews on the quality of the Nikon lens which seems like a fluke. From most reviewers the Nikon Ai-s series are usually top notch. The Sigma seem like decent lenses but maybe not the best is terms of optics (correct me if I am wrong) when compared to say the Nikon. When capturing wildlife it seems as though AF would be almost a must however I am getting away with out it for right now. So in this respect the Sigma would be a plus. The Sigma will also offer the extra 100mm for about the same price as the Nikon (both used). If I go with the 300mm Nikon I can use my 2x tele to bring the 200mm to a 400 f/6 a half stop shorter than the Sigma, but again no AF. So do you guys think the Sigma's optics are close enough to the Nikon to warrant a purchase over the Nikon? Also add in the fact that with a sony A mount I can use in AF mode... Thanks!
Greg
So I am trying to find a good quality lens to shoot wildlife with using my Sony NEX5n. I have a Nikon 200mm f/4 Ai-s lens but definitely is a little short when trying to fill a frame at distance. With that said I am looking a the Nikon 300mm f/4.5 Ai-s lens and a Sigma 400mm f/5.6. I have found mixed reviews on the quality of the Nikon lens which seems like a fluke. From most reviewers the Nikon Ai-s series are usually top notch. The Sigma seem like decent lenses but maybe not the best is terms of optics (correct me if I am wrong) when compared to say the Nikon. When capturing wildlife it seems as though AF would be almost a must however I am getting away with out it for right now. So in this respect the Sigma would be a plus. The Sigma will also offer the extra 100mm for about the same price as the Nikon (both used). If I go with the 300mm Nikon I can use my 2x tele to bring the 200mm to a 400 f/6 a half stop shorter than the Sigma, but again no AF. So do you guys think the Sigma's optics are close enough to the Nikon to warrant a purchase over the Nikon? Also add in the fact that with a sony A mount I can use in AF mode... Thanks!
Greg