Select lens for "Wildlife Shooting" (70-300 mm)

[ravikiran]

Which one do you suggest me to go with?

1. Sigma - APO 70-300mm F4-5.6 DG MACRO for Nikon
2. Tamron - AF70-300mm F/4-5.6 Di LD Macro

I would go to National parks and reserve forests as well for shooting which have low light in some cases.

I have a nikon D50 in excellent condition. My budget is about $300 and I can't stretch it any more.

Please drop your suggestions (suggestions about other brands are also welcome)

Thank you in advance,
Ravi.

 

[Do'Urden's Eyes]

Ive seen some amazing pictures taken with that tamron. I've never used it before but a few people on this forum definitely have. Don't know too much about the tamron though...

 

[gsgary]

I wouldn't buy either if you will be shooting in low light F5.6 will not cut it

 

[Mike_E]

If you could afford it a Nikon 80-200mm f/2.8 (used non-VR, get the VR if you can afford it) and a 1.7X tele-converter. The f2.8 will get you a lot of shots and the 1.7X gets you to 340mm at around f/3.5. I say Nikon here because you can usually get a used Nikon for the same or a little less than a new Sigma and if you want to sell the Nikon in 10 years you won't loose any money.

 

[Pure]

If you could afford it a Nikon 80-200mm f/2.8 (used non-VR, get the VR if you can afford it) and a 1.7X tele-converter. The f2.8 will get you a lot of shots and the 1.7X gets you to 340mm at around f/3.5. I say Nikon here because you can usually get a used Nikon for the same or a little less than a new Sigma and if you want to sell the Nikon in 10 years you won't loose any money.

+1

in low light, especially where you'll need faster shutter speeds [birds?] you really won't want to have to jack up your ISO. there is no way around faster glass.

 

[dxqcanada]

Hmm, does anyone make an f/2.8 telephoto zoom for <$300.00 ??

How about f/3.5 ... or f/4.0 ??

 

[Mike_E]

If you shoot a Nikon that can use/meter with an AI or Non-Ai that's been modded (AI'd") and you don't mind shooting in manual, you can get by.

I bought an old Nikkor Q 135mm f/2.8 a couple of years ago for around $15 and a 2X for not much more than that (3rd party). So if you add them together for around $30 it comes to 270mm f/4 and with the 1.5 conversion factor works out to 405mm @ f/4. And isn't too shabby really. It's no 400mm f/2.8 but you don't get a hernia carrying it around either.

I was fooling around with it the other night at a church dinner, this is from about 40 feet..

The large catchlights in her eyes are sconces on the wall she was standing next to and the smaller rectangular ones are the florescent ones in the vaulted ceiling. Not too bad for hand held.


btw, if you are on a real budget you can pick up a sigma or tokina 80-200mm f/2.8 used on ebay for $300 or so.