Telephoto Zoom Suggestions for D610

connorc · Aug 3, 2016

In need of a new telephoto zoom for my D610. I was using an older non VR 70-300mm which has seen better days. So I've come up with the following as possibilities.

Sigma 150-500mm f/5-6.3
Tamron 200-500mm f/5-6.3
Nikkor 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6 VR

Open to other suggestions, but I'm on a bit of a budget. I'll be studying abroad for the fall semester, and don't want to have to dance in the streets for money.
The Nikkor is tempting mostly because of the price, however I could really use the extra reach of the first two. I'm not also not sure if there's any significant drop off in performance in the Sigma or Tamron. Any help would be great, thanks.

gckless · Aug 8, 2016

What will you be shooting? And what's a realistic budget?

I have the 70-30omm VR, and it works fine for some things, but not so much for others. I used it for shooting cars on track, and it worked fine for me. A lot of other people said it hunts a lot when shooting real erratic movement or when there's a lot of depth movement. I don't have experience with either of your other two choices, but I know a lot of people used the Sigma.

connorc · Aug 8, 2016

I like to do a lot of aviation photography. I was usually able to manage with maxing out at 300mm but depending on location or if I wanted a nose close up, having extra reach would have been really useful. However, for everyday uses I might find myself wanting the 70-300. And with my other zoom I only can reach 85mm.

Budget wise, really really can't do more than $500 and that's even pushing it.

Any thoughts on the Sigma 50-500mm f/4.5-6.3 (came across one for sub $500)? That'd cover all of my bases.

astroNikon · Aug 8, 2016

I had a sigma 150-500 for a short time. It supposedly had better optics than the 50-500
I found it sharp enough at f/8
I only got rid of it because I had a good deal on a tamron 150-600.

If you check my signature line and go to my Flickr you'll find a lot of my aircraft photography. The older ones are the 150-500

The only thing I didn't like that I saw online was the colors are slightly muted compared to Nikon, tamron and the newer sigmas.

The sigma mechanics of the zoom and focus are not as smooth as Nikon and tamron but for the price you get a lot of zoom for a relatively low price. At that price range I would get it again.

I've also used the Nikon 70-300, 300af, and other lenses. It's definitely worth it over those due to the range. Though the mechanics of the tamron 200-500 might be smoother but you'll have to test it to find out.

I used it with a Nikon d7000 and d600

Braineack · Aug 8, 2016

Ive been contemplating selling my 150-600, but not at your budget.

fmw · Aug 9, 2016

Give some thought to getting more days out of your zoom and supplementing its capabilities with a tripod. I can't hand hold a 500mm lens for sharp images. Perhaps you can. I can hand hold 300mm as long as the shutter speed is 1/1000 or faster. That could mean higher ISO and lower image quality. I don't use VR because it compromises image quality as well. If you shoot things that move, save up for a faster lens. If not, the tripod will serve you well.

I don't recommend the Nikon 70-300. I've tested it side by side with the Tamron 70-300 and the Tamron is better and has a metal mount. Nikon makes some very good zoom lenses but this one isn't one of them.

astroNikon · Aug 9, 2016

I recommend the Tamron 70-300 over the Nikon as well. The Nikon causes contrast detection issues, which I had a lot of trying to use it for soccer. But once you get more reach you don't go back. 500mm is pretty awesome. 600mm is moreso.

So if you are doing aircraft photography from a fixed location to the aircraft then it's easy to figure out the focal length that you need. I do various distances.

If you use a Tripod I recommend one of these heads. Aircraft landing and taking off though is on a consistent plane (edit: plane as in line to the runway) and would then be useful ==> https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B...c-608b-4992-992d-ae8ef1ac960c&pf_rd_i=desktop

But I found anything like that not useful for aircraft away from the airport itself. I just move around too much the camera to keep the viewfinder in front of me for any tripod mount to be useful. I'll take photos of them miles away on approach as they turn to make the final runway approach (one pic at 600mm the 747 is larger than the image size). => 747 Turning May 17 2015 (MD-11, A-380 and others )

Since they are turning at various locations being on a tripod is not practical at all.
Even being in the landing zone they approach is staggered so I have to quickly move left/right etc. So I only go handheld. ==> Aircraft

The larger lenses are heavier. The last airshow I did my shoulders did hurt afterwards. All the 800mm prime guys and many Sigma/Tamron zooms were there and only 1 person I saw had a tripod, for a short time before going handheld. ==> 20160622_YankeeAirShow

Braineack · Aug 9, 2016

I dont have a gimbal head, so i hand hold. I'd say that's a must-type head if you require a tripod -- otherwise youre too limited in range of motion.

nerwin · Aug 12, 2016

I have the Nikon 70-300 VR and I really like it. You can pick it up used for a pretty good price and maybe you can get lucky like me and get a new one for $250 haha.

The Tamron version is also very good. Either way you go, you'll have a wonderful telephoto for your D610.

D610 + 70-300 VR

Solarflare · Aug 15, 2016

fmw said:
I can't hand hold a 500mm lens for sharp images. Perhaps you can. I can hand hold 300mm as long as the shutter speed is 1/1000 or faster.

fmw said:
I don't use VR because it compromises image quality as well.

Now could there be possibly any connection betwen those two statements ?

fmw · Aug 15, 2016

I don't see any connection. How do you see one?

Braineack · Aug 16, 2016

because if you use VR with too high a shutter speed it can compromise quality.

if you actually know what you're doing, and don't use it where it's not necessary/applicable, it can improve quality.

but to say straight up "VR compromises quality" is a blatantly false blanket statement that should be challenged.

fmw · Aug 16, 2016

I'll consider it challenged and disagree with you. Compared to using a tripod without VR then VR has a negative affect on image quality - perhaps not a lot but some. Compared to hand holding at an inadequate shutter speed VR is an improvement but that isn't the point. Hand holding at an inadequate shutter speed is not good camera operation technically.

astroNikon · Aug 16, 2016

VR is designed for settings that normally do not give a good photo, such as too slow a shutter speed. It will provide a much sharper image then normal. How many people buy a DSLR and get blurry images when shooting in AUTO ? VR is a nice crutch in those situations, not an end-all technological solution for everything but it helps satisfy the end consumer with better photos than normal.

At higher shutter speeds the manufacturers recommend turning VR off.

Even Nikon's newer 800mm has VR.

Braineack · Aug 16, 2016

fmw said:
Compared to hand holding at an inadequate shutter speed VR is an improvement but that isn't the point.

that actually IS that point.

There's actually a manual that comes with your lenses for a reason, one would probably do himself good to read them, especially the section on VR and when and when not to use it.

Nikon also puts out information like this:

With the following lenses/cameras VR should be "Off" when the camera is mounted on a tripod and the pan/tilt head is locked down and using a cable release:

105mm f/2.8G ED-IF AF-S VR Micro Nikkor

...

With the following lenses/cameras VR should be "On" when the camera is mounted on a tripod and the pan/tilt head is loose (fluid) while using the cameras shutter release button:

105mm f/2.8G ED-IF AF-S VR Micro Nikkor

...

Nikon VR technology in the following lenses can detect minute vibrations that emanate from tripod legs.With the following lenses VR can be "On" when the camera is mounted on a tripod for either technique:

200-400mm f4G ED-IF AF-S VR Zoom-Nikkor

...