Looking for a wildlife lens under $3,000

[Josh220]

Nikon 70-200 2.8 VRII gets my vote. With a 1.7x TC it performs flawlessly and you have almost zero loss of IQ (personal experience). The 2x TC is where you might notice it.

A DX body with a 1.7x TC/70-200 will give you 510mm if you went this route.

 

[Overread]

When I get a bright day I'm going to compare my 70-200mm f2.8 MII againstmy 120-300mm OS - however even based on optical performance that is only one aspect. Whilst they do share a similar focal range the latter is a much bigger and much heavier lens. If you look here: http://i170.photobucket.com/albums/u275/overmind_2000/IMG_0598.jpg you can see the size difference.

This means whilst they do overlap they are very different lenses to use - the 70-200mm you can easily use all day, indoors (in a large room) outdoors - around town/countryside etc.... The 120-300mm however is different, you couldn't easily use it in many of the same situations as the 70-200mm as it would seriously dominate the situation. Further its weight means that, whilst its adaptable, its a much bigger strain, the kind of lens you might take out on its own or with only one or two back-ups as opposed to taking out a larger setup.

I did worry about my two overlapping, but honestly having both I can see that they are very different beasts.

 

[o hey tyler]

How about a used Sigma 500mm f/4.5 prime??? OR, the 500mm f/4 Nikkor-P.

Derrel, suggesting a SIGMA product?

Someone must be posting on his account for him... Either that, or the apocalypse is near.

One too many hits off the vaporizer this AM dude? Lemme' see....I own a Sigma 80-400 OS, a Sigma 18-125 DC, a Sigma 180mm f/3.5 EX HSM Macro, and a Sigma 100-300mm f/4 EX HSM zoom lens...three of their "best" lenses and one consumer-grade Sigma....

And yes, I was referring to used lenses. The Nikkor 500 is the manual focus (feather-touch, mid-barrel IF focusing ring) f/4-P model, which has a CPU in it. Last time I looked on eBay they were bringing $2,000-$2,300, and the Sigma 500mm f/4.5 was also around the same price on eBay. I do not mean brand-new, retail on either the Sigma 500/4.5 or the 500/4 Nikkor-P, but used lenses, sold by private party sellers, not "The Big Five" web dealers...

Sigma makes some decent offerings in price ranges/niches that the big camera makers tend to neglect, or price VERY high. Sigma makes A FEW superb lenses, like their EX Macro line; I'd also really love to have the new 120-300mm f/2.8 EX OS HSM model Sigma recently re-designed and added OS to. While Canon and Nikon work on oddball crap, Sigma comes out with a lens that is just about the ONLY 3rd party big lens I ever see at FBS-level college football and NFL games...their 120-300, either old or the newer model...

Just stating a fact that this is the first time I've seen you endorse a "Stigma" product as you call them...

No need to have your Victoria's secret up in a bunch!

 

[Infinite_Day]

Just FYI - AF-S Teleconverter TC-14E II from Nikon If you scroll down to "Product Overview" there is a link on the right that shows Nikon TC/lens compatability. If you read the top of the chart it talks about the TC hitting the back glass of the lens with non-listed lenses. Those which are listed are all high-end Nikon glass. You'll also not that the 70-200 f/2.8 has no limitations on focusing ability all the way up to and including a 2X TC. I have the higher-end Kenko 1.4 TC myself and it has, thus far, performed without any problems.

 

[Netskimmer]

Thank you for all the responses! It looks like I'll probably take the 70-200 + 1.7 TC route. Like I said, I planned on getting this lens anyway so the most I have to lose is the cost of the TC, but it seems like it would be a good piece of equipment to have in general. Even if I do like this setup I'll probably go for a long prime down the road but the 70-200 will be more useful to me right now as I could use it in many more situations. It may take me a month or so to get one but I'll post some pics when I do.

 

[Derrel]

Derrel, suggesting a SIGMA product?

Someone must be posting on his account for him... Either that, or the apocalypse is near.

One too many hits off the vaporizer this AM dude? Lemme' see....I own a Sigma 80-400 OS, a Sigma 18-125 DC, a Sigma 180mm f/3.5 EX HSM Macro, and a Sigma 100-300mm f/4 EX HSM zoom lens...three of their "best" lenses and one consumer-grade Sigma....

And yes, I was referring to used lenses. The Nikkor 500 is the manual focus (feather-touch, mid-barrel IF focusing ring) f/4-P model, which has a CPU in it. Last time I looked on eBay they were bringing $2,000-$2,300, and the Sigma 500mm f/4.5 was also around the same price on eBay. I do not mean brand-new, retail on either the Sigma 500/4.5 or the 500/4 Nikkor-P, but used lenses, sold by private party sellers, not "The Big Five" web dealers...

Sigma makes some decent offerings in price ranges/niches that the big camera makers tend to neglect, or price VERY high. Sigma makes A FEW superb lenses, like their EX Macro line; I'd also really love to have the new 120-300mm f/2.8 EX OS HSM model Sigma recently re-designed and added OS to. While Canon and Nikon work on oddball crap, Sigma comes out with a lens that is just about the ONLY 3rd party big lens I ever see at FBS-level college football and NFL games...their 120-300, either old or the newer model...

Just stating a fact that this is the first time I've seen you endorse a "Stigma" product as you call them...

No need to have your Victoria's secret up in a bunch!

You seriously need to reconsider the fact that you have missed DOZENS AND DOZENS of instances of ME, Derrel, endorsing the Sigma 80-400 OS, the Sigma 105 EX Macro, the Sigma 150 Macro, the Sigma 10-20, the Sigma 18-50mm f/2.8, the Sigma 100-300 f/4 EX MAcro, the Sigma 180 f/3.5 EX Macro, the Sigma 500mm f/4.5, Sigma's superb telephoto converter lineup, and the new Sigma 120-300/f 2.8 EX-OS HSM.

I think enough of Sigma to have gone out and BOUGHT, for MYSELF, the 18-125, the 180mm f/3.5 Macro, the 100-300 f/4 EX, and the 80-400 OS. All Sigma lenses.

You need to reconsider the fact that you have no business at ALL characterizing my posting habits, or my posting history, nor my point of view--especially when you haven't got a fricking CLUE as to what you're saying. Don't spread mischaracterizations about me. And yes, there "IS" a need to get the Victoria's Secrets in a bunch when some mal-informed person characterizes me unfairly, and uninformedly, in a public forum. Don't shoot your mouth off about me. You do NOT speak for me.

 

[Netskimmer]

:shock: ... I noticed you mentioned the 180mm f3.5 macro. A macro lens will be next on my list, have you tried the new 180 2.8?

 

[Overread]

I don't think that is even out yet. It's been revealed, but thus far its not hit the market. The 150mm f2.8 OS has been released and is on the market. Either one is a top choice and there has never been too much between the two save for the 30mm focal length difference - sharpness and build quality they were very much on par and I expect this of the new OS versions as well.

The 180mm however will be heavier (longer reach and f2.8 rather than f3.5 which is more common on other brand 180mm macro lenses) - which I suspect will be the biggest difference between it and the 150mm OS (outside of focal length - even then I think that only really shows up if you start putting things like 2*TCs on for increased background blurring/magnification).

 

[Netskimmer]

Cool, I don't know what I'll end up with, hopefully by the time I'm ready to get one the 180 2.8 will be available and in the hands of some experts who can tell us how it performs. My main concern with a 2.8 at 180mm would be DOF. I'm not even sure what focal legnth I want yet. I love taking macros of anything and everything just to see what they look like but bugs would be a major focus.

 

[Overread]

Well f2.8 is only its max, its actually a bonus having it wider so far as light gathering is concerned as it means a brighter viewfinder image to help focus with. You can stop it down for more depth of field of course (like all normal lenses).

 

[timputtick]

If it was me I'd stretch it to Nikon 300mm 2.8, I don't have one but the reviews are unbelievable. But by god if i had the money, I'd take 4.

 

[Thunder_o_b]

I have had the Sigma 120mm-400mm OS for a little over a year now, I have gotten some good shots at the 400mm (on my 50D so it acts like a 600mm) It can't touch the primes in IQ, but until Canon makes the f/5.6 400mm in an IS version it will have to do.

 

[o hey tyler]

One too many hits off the vaporizer this AM dude? Lemme' see....I own a Sigma 80-400 OS, a Sigma 18-125 DC, a Sigma 180mm f/3.5 EX HSM Macro, and a Sigma 100-300mm f/4 EX HSM zoom lens...three of their "best" lenses and one consumer-grade Sigma....

And yes, I was referring to used lenses. The Nikkor 500 is the manual focus (feather-touch, mid-barrel IF focusing ring) f/4-P model, which has a CPU in it. Last time I looked on eBay they were bringing $2,000-$2,300, and the Sigma 500mm f/4.5 was also around the same price on eBay. I do not mean brand-new, retail on either the Sigma 500/4.5 or the 500/4 Nikkor-P, but used lenses, sold by private party sellers, not "The Big Five" web dealers...

Sigma makes some decent offerings in price ranges/niches that the big camera makers tend to neglect, or price VERY high. Sigma makes A FEW superb lenses, like their EX Macro line; I'd also really love to have the new 120-300mm f/2.8 EX OS HSM model Sigma recently re-designed and added OS to. While Canon and Nikon work on oddball crap, Sigma comes out with a lens that is just about the ONLY 3rd party big lens I ever see at FBS-level college football and NFL games...their 120-300, either old or the newer model...

Just stating a fact that this is the first time I've seen you endorse a "Stigma" product as you call them...

No need to have your Victoria's secret up in a bunch!

You seriously need to reconsider the fact that you have missed DOZENS AND DOZENS of instances of ME, Derrel, endorsing the Sigma 80-400 OS, the Sigma 105 EX Macro, the Sigma 150 Macro, the Sigma 10-20, the Sigma 18-50mm f/2.8, the Sigma 100-300 f/4 EX MAcro, the Sigma 180 f/3.5 EX Macro, the Sigma 500mm f/4.5, Sigma's superb telephoto converter lineup, and the new Sigma 120-300/f 2.8 EX-OS HSM.

I think enough of Sigma to have gone out and BOUGHT, for MYSELF, the 18-125, the 180mm f/3.5 Macro, the 100-300 f/4 EX, and the 80-400 OS. All Sigma lenses.

You need to reconsider the fact that you have no business at ALL characterizing my posting habits, or my posting history, nor my point of view--especially when you haven't got a fricking CLUE as to what you're saying. Don't spread mischaracterizations about me. And yes, there "IS" a need to get the Victoria's Secrets in a bunch when some mal-informed person characterizes me unfairly, and uninformedly, in a public forum. Don't shoot your mouth off about me. You do NOT speak for me.

Derrel, you made your point. There's no way that I could possibly read every single one of your novelesque Hemmingway posts. Calm down, take some Prozac, maybe a Midol or two.

Maybe you shouldn't be so two faced, and refer to them as "Stigma" which I see more often than not, that would at least make you not a hypocrite.

I'm glad you like Sigma products, I do too. I just don't rag on them when someone posts a thread with a QC issue, like you do.

My first post was purely in jest. I thought someone of your proclaimed intelligence level could decipher that, and by some slim chance take a joke. Apparently I was wrong. Sorry.

 

[MReid]

I have the 50-500. Does ok in good light at F8 only.

Looking at this from another viewpoint.....all the solutions for lens suggested here are compromises in some way and true professional quality images will probably not result. There is no free lunch. Save your $3000. until it is $5000. and get what you really need.

Have you though about spending money on a camera with a larger crop factor like Olympus or a smaller mirrorless camera with an even greater crop factor?
That is a cheaper more efficient way to get more magnification, just an idea.....a cheaper way to go than spending $5000. for a proper birding lens.

 

[Netskimmer]

Hi MReid, I have pretty much decided on a rout similar to your first suggestion. I know I want a 70-200 VRII and my 'need' for that lens trumps my need for a bird lens right now. The TC is the only gamble, from what I have seen the IQ should be sufficient until I can acquire a proper bird lens.
The 300mm seems a little short for birds, especially if I go full frame in the future. If I was going to spend upwards of 6k I would probably buy a Nikkor 200-400mm.
I don't really like the idea of going multiple platform just to get s little more magnification. By the time you buy a decent camera and all the accessories (extra batteries ect) and a good telephoto lens I would probably be coming close to what a good super tele would cost. I would also need to lug around all that extra gear on outings.