Need a High-End Wildlife Telephoto for under $1,000

[Rafterman]

I currently have the Tamron 70-300mm f/4-5.6 VC. It's a great lens for the price, and the VC is rock-solid. That being said, it's not pro glass by any stretch; the focus speed is less than stellar for moving objects and it seriously suffers in low-light situations due to the slow aperture. It only cost me $350 after a $100 mail-in rebate though, so I knew some quality and capability would have to be sacrificed.

About 70% of my photography is birds and wildlife. The other 30% is landscape/architecture. Therefore, my lens money is going towards what I shoot the most. I want the best multi-purpose telephoto zoom for under $1,000 regardless of brand, new or used.

I'm considering, in order of preference:
(prices are for new U.S. lens)

1. $1,100 - Nikon 80-200mm f/2.8D
2. $770 - Tamron 70-200mm f/2.8 (older version w/o VC)
3. $1,250 - Sigma 70-200mm f/2.8 OS
4. $1,400 - Nikon 70-200mm f/4G VR

The Nikon 80-200 is my first choice because of the build quality and sharpness. Its reputation definitely precedes it, and I can pick one up from KEH in "EX" condition for around $800. The Tamron is a very close 2nd because most reviews I've read have been very positive, it has a focus motor built in, and can be had brand new at a nice price point. If I got one of the other two lenses listed, they would have to be used, because they cost quite a bit more than I'd like to pay.

Any comments, suggestions, or recommendations for a lens I may have overlooked?

 

[pixmedic]

200mm isn't going to get you as far out as you might like for wildlife.
maybe consider a nikkor 300mm f/4 and/or a 1.4x teleconverter.
may also consider sigmas 150-500mm or tamrons 200-400mm

 

[shefjr]

You overlooked what Kris Coastalconn is using. He was able to find a used tamron 200mm - 500mm for a good deal. He produces really impressive images.

 

[PropilotBW]

I agree. ^^^. I'm interested in the Tamron 200-500.

 

[Rafterman]

200mm isn't going to get you as far out as you might like for wildlife.
maybe consider a nikkor 300mm f/4 and/or a 1.4x teleconverter.
may also consider sigmas 150-500mm or tamrons 200-400mm

Adorama has a used 300 f/4 in "D" condition for $1,050 so I'll definitely consider it. They cost too much for me brand new. The other two you mention have great reach, but are not fast enough. The Tamron I have now is f/5.6 at 300mm and I wanted to improve on that, which is why I find the 300 f/4 appealing.

You overlooked what Kris Coastalconn is using. He was able to find a used tamron 200mm - 500mm for a good deal. He produces really impressive images.

He does indeed make great images, but again, I wanted something faster than the f/5.6 I've got now.

Let me elaborate a bit. I wanted a faster lens on the long end, without losing the shorter end if possible. A 70-200 would be great for me to use for outdoor portraits and low-light indoor event stuff as well. For example, my wife and I went to the AKC dog show here in Raleigh yesterday, and my 50mm 1.8D wasn't sufficient to reach the dogs in the ring. It was fast enough, just not long enough. A fast 85mm would have been perfect for that situation, but I like the versatility of the 70-200 range. I know 200 isn't the greatest for wildlife, but I'd have no problem cropping bird images to the size I want if it means I have f/2.8 available when I need it.

 

[shefjr]

I apologize. I didn't see anything where you said specifically that you wanted an f2.8. Only that you complained about what you had and lacked.

I read specifically this part,

About 70% of my photography is birds and wildlife. The other 30% is landscape/architecture. Therefore, my lens money is going towards what I shoot the most. I want the best multi-purpose telephoto zoom for under $1,000 regardless of brand, new or used.

Any comments, suggestions, or recommendations for a lens I may have overlooked?

So reading that I would suggest looking used for something like what Coastalconn has. Obviously if you are going to be doing indoor shoots that is a completely different animal but, again that isn't what you said in your above statement.

 

[Rafterman]

Obviously if you are going to be doing indoor shoots that is a completely different animal but, again that isn't what you said in your above statement.

No need to apologize. I definitely appreciate the suggestions. Sorry that I wasn't clearer in my first post.

Apparently, whenever someone mentions the word "wildlife", everyone immediately recommends either 3rd party super-teles or ultra-long Nikon primes that cost the same as a good used car.

200-300mm has been long enough for the pictures I've taken of backyard and coastal birds thus far. I'm not going to be photographing dangerous animals in Africa or Australia anytime soon. I think my best option is either the Nikon 300mm f/4 or the 80-200mm f/2.8D.

 

[shefjr]

You are right that most people when mentioning wildlife do suggest the longest lenses possible. I can tell you for me, I wish I could get longer than my Sigma 150-500. I feel pretty confident in saying that most people who get into bird photography always end up wanting more. I think it's simply because to stalk birds without them seeing you is really tough and a skill that isn't easily learned and or done.

With all that said, I shall digress. I have no experience in fast glass. IMO I will say that I think it is not worth going the cheap route. I regret purchasing lenses because I set myself to a limit when I could have saved just $500 more and got what would have been what I wanted plus a little more.
Great glass is forever and will hold it's value through time.
Just my opinion though.
Good luck in your search and new purchase. :thumbup:

 

[coastalconn]

I knew my ears were ringing for a reason I have another suggestion for you. How about a Sigma 100-300 F4? I have not shot one, but I have seen stellar reviews about them. You don't loose much on the short end, you gain a stop on the long end and you could still throw on a 1.4x TC for a 420 F5.6... Sigma AF 100-300mm f/4 EX DG HSM APO (Nikon) - Review / Test Report I think they are discontinued so check with Sigma if they are still serviceable. The same site has a review of the nikon 300 F4 so you can compare apples to apples Nikkor AF-S 300mm f/4D IF-ED - Review / Test Report. 745 at KEH Nikon Autofocus 100-300 F4 SIGMA APO D DG EX HSM INTERNAL FOCUS (82) *WITH HOOD, CAPS, CASE , 35MM SLR AUTO FOCUS ZOOM TELEPHOTO LENS - KEH.com

Everyone raves about the Nikon 300 F4, I tried the older one a few weeks ago. It was a touch sharper than the Tamron 200-500, but it had uncorrectable

 

[Rafterman]

I knew my ears were ringing for a reason

Hah, I was hoping you'd chime in.

That Sigma 100-300 is not one I had seen before or considered. For $750 in good condition, it's definitely on the list though. :thumbup:

On a side note, for those saying 200mm isn't long enough, here's some sample images from the Sigma 70-200 f/2.8 I mentioned above. I am totally satisfied with these types of pictures. Add to that the ability to shoot indoors without flash and it's hard to say no. I don't need a 500mm bazooka on my camera to be happy. I did originally say that I want the best multi-purpose telephoto lens for under $1,000. Multi-purpose meaning birds, plus other things as well.

 

[coastalconn]

It's true, if you have enough field craft shorter lenses are useable, but at times you really need the reach. BTW the older Tamron 70-200 didn't get very good reviews because of slow focus speeds.. I'm a big fan of KEH, they have great customer service, a 14 day return policy and 6 month warranty (extendable I think). They have the Tamron 70-200 for 550... maybe you should consider a 2 lens solution?

 

[pixmedic]

I have a nikkor 180mm f/2.8 and love it.
pair it with a teleconverter and you get faster glass with reach.

 

[jake337]

If most of what you do is bird photography, wait!, and save a bit more and get the lens you really want. Not just one that will work for now.

I know it's twice your budget but the 500 f4 P is a great lens! But hey it is a bazooka!!!

Nikon Manual Focus 500 F4 P ED INTERNAL FOCUS (39) WITH FILTER, CASE , 35MM SLR MANUAL FOCUS TELEPHOTO LENS - KEH.com


Or if you can find a 400 f3.5 ais it might be a bit closer to your budget.

Also the 300 f4.5 ais is well in your budget.

 

[Rafterman]

It's true, if you have enough field craft shorter lenses are useable, but at times you really need the reach.

With backyard birds, 200mm is definitely plenty for me personally. Yes, I sometimes have to sit quietly for a while, but I still get the shots. I took some nice ones when I had the Nikon 55-200 VR. At the beach, I often can't get as close as I'd like, but fortunately, the birds are bigger and fill more of the frame. The hardest ones to shoot are the little sandpipers. They run FAST and they're very skittish, making composition difficult. What I usually do is have my wife go around them from behind so that they run right at me and I get nice shots from the front. Having the bird move instead of me is easier because I'm usually lying prone in the sand for a better perspective. Even with these small birds though, I don't need anything longer than 300mm at the most because I can get within about 10-15ft of them on a consistent basis.

BTW the older Tamron 70-200 didn't get very good reviews because of slow focus speeds.

I was seeing that mentioned a few times as I read more reviews on it. The new version with VC is available for pre-order, but it's $1,500 which is way over my limit.

I have a nikkor 180mm f/2.8 and love it.
pair it with a teleconverter and you get faster glass with reach.

252mm w/the 1.4 TC and 306mm w/the 1.7 if I picked up a 180, but then I'm only at f/5.6, which my Tamron 70-300 is already capable of at the long end.

If most of what you do is bird photography, wait!, and save a bit more and get the lens you really want. Not just one that will work for now.

I know it's twice your budget but the 500 f4 P is a great lens! But hey it is a bazooka!!!

That's sound advice, and that lens is HUGE! f/4 at 500 would be pretty sweet, I gotta admit. It'd take me at least another 8-12 months to put away $2,300 worth of "fun money" though, so something that large and fast would only be a blip on the radar at this point in time. Thanks for the suggestions though. I'll take a look at the others you mentioned as well.

I'm a big fan of KEH, they have ... the Tamron 70-200 for 550. maybe you should consider a 2 lens solution?

Hmm, pick up two $500-ish lenses instead of one $1,000 lens? I hadn't thought of that. A fast 85mm would definitely solve the low-light indoor situation and the Nikon 1.8G is only $400 brand new. I could also get the highly-touted Tamron 28-75 f/2.8 locally for $475 new or $350 used which would solve the indoor equation as well.

I guess my decision now is not so much which 2.8 zoom to buy, but if I should buy one at all. :???: I'm obviously not going to get anything faster than f/5.6 at 300mm unless I spend some SERIOUS coin.

We'll be at the beach for a week in May, so maybe I'll hold onto my 70-300 until then and see how it does. If the need arises for a fast mid-tele between now and then, I'll get something that fits just that purpose.

 

[pixmedic]

did you rule out an older ED AF nikkor 300mm f/4? easily under 1k used.