The best that I can do with song birds

[cgipson1]

Charlie that does look great, my contention would be that if you took the same shot side by side with a D7000, you would have the same resolution at 1/3 the cost, and if you took the same shot with a D600 you would actually have less resolution People do need to understand that. I have already seen it in other places like "I had a D3100 and I got a D600 why do my birds look smaller?" Believe me I would love to shoot a D800 and I know that the resolution is awesome, but for me being a full time birder I would rather have a crop sensor in a D300 body with D4 AF. The D800 also is more of a studio/landscape type camera and doesn't have the frame rate I like for capturing diving Ospreys for instance... Just saying...

Oh.. trust me! I agree... a crop sensor has an advantage in situations like this... but considering the other features the D800 has (like better focusing).... and the cropping ability, I will stick with it! I also agree that the more limited FPS would be an issue in some situations... but I hardly ever need it for what I shoot. If I did, I would buy a D4!

 

[makeitso]

Great pics, I'd be happy if I get pics that good.

 

[Radical]

I wish I could get shots like that.

 

[shefjr]

Thanks again everyone for commenting on my photos.

Of course my curiosity has to know why you shot at 400 not 500mm? Can you get them as sharp wide open? I'm thinking it would be F5.6 at 400? If your the original owner Sigma should calibrate it for free minus shipping. Especially if you show them you are at -20 to get these shots.

Kris,
For the past few days I've become more and more dissatisfied with this lens. So I decided two days ago to play around with the AF fine tune. I basically picked a spot on one of my feeders and started shooting it. I ran through a lot of tests and variations. I came up with a -20 AF fine tune and determined that I could probably fine tune a little more but, that's all the camera will allow. So then I went and started to search online for information on what I could do to further correct this and get crisper images. The reoccurring themes, were to not shoot at 500 (the lens is outstanding at 400), and shoot at f9.
I to be honest have been frustrated with the quality of images that the lens has been producing and so I really didn't vary from the recommendations that I found. To be blunt I just needed a GOOD DAY. I usually excel at whatever I do(not that I choose the most difficult hobbies) and I just haven't been able to get a solid grasp on photography. I hate to fail.
Anyway, now that I know it can produce crisp images, I do plan on working my way back out to 500mm and f(whatever) just to see where I can push the limits of the lens to.
I also spoke with Sigma and they will take the lens in for free. My only concern with that is that they would like me to also send in my camera with the lens so that they can essentially marry them. I'm not sure how I feel about throwing my camera in the mail. That makes me a little uneasy.


To the group (Kris, Charlie, Scott)

You guys do bring up excellent points about the full frame cameras and where they would lack from a birding standpoint. My plan was/is to first invest in glass. (70-200 2.8 vrii, and something similar to what charlie was saying 300 f4) That investment is going to take some time. Especially if my wife and I have a baby soon.(trying) So the way I'm looking at it, by the time I can buy a full frame I'm hoping that Nikon comes out with a reasonably priced camera that gives a higher fps than the d800 or d600. I don't know if that will happen but, either way it never hurts to buy quality glass. The other thing for me is that I have to expand past birding. I have plenty of room for improvement when it comes to photographing birds but, I would like to be a little more broad than just birds. My crown jewel would be to capture a bald eagle but, I don't have any good locations with which I can get close enough to them around here. All the locations where they hang out are on private property and if I try and walk the bank they spot me and fly off. I have spent whole weekends tracking them this past summer and this is as close as I can get.

Eagle sample by Shefjr, on Flickr

So I figure I enjoy nature and want to expand and improve on my landscapes, light painting, and night photography. Which means I guess that even if Nikon doesn't design something with faster fps, I can still use a full frame to capture some of my other anticipated hobbies and the fast glass will also work great on the d7k (which I will keep).

Of course, when we have a baby that could all change.

Thanks for the comments everybody! I now feel like there is pressure to produce images to that level or better. lol! Yikes! You guys as always challenge me and give me things to consider that to be honest, I never even thought of. :hail:

BTW,
Charlie Damn! that 100% crop is impressive and really makes me want to run to full frame and also grab the 70-200.

Scott, I have a 2X TC and it's garbage. It's not a Nikon though. When I first started out I thought I could buy everything on the cheap and that I would get just as good results. I hope I learned my lesson.

Sorry about the book I just wrote.:lmao:

 

[Buckster]

Love 'em! The framing of the blue jay in that round feeder is fantastic!

 

[matthewo]

i would say keep the d7000, i had one and loved it, but i sold it when i bought the d800, now the d7000 is on the list again as my next purchase for a secondary body. the d7000 is just such a good value right now.

also i wouldnt just give up the 150-500, its a nice lens for the price, if your budget limited and or dont want a lens that is twice as heavy and or large in size there are not many other options. us nikon people dont have a bunch of options for cheap telephoto thats good quality. canon has the 100-400 which is a really good lens for a budget birder for size and quality it produces. i guess the closes nikon is the 300mm f4 with a tc14e ii converter, that would be my choice if i was budget limited.

i personally love the d800 for wildlife, the only downside is 4fps full frame or 5fps (1.2x crop or 1.5x crop) i can live with that for the ability to have better noise control at higher iso, and the ability to still get 16mp 1.5crop images from a full frame camera.

i owned the 150-500, then sold it and got a manual focus 500mm p lens, and was pretty happy with it, but i just wanted a smaller lens and autofocus, so i sold it and i have a 300mm 2.8 on order. the first and second verions 300mm af-s i and ii are a great compromise between all other options as far as supertelephoto goes.

the used 300mm af-s i and ii are at least half or more off the price of the big boys(500mm f4, 600mm f4, 400mm f2.8, 200-400 f4, etc.), the IQ is just as good if not better, the build quality is just as good, the size and weight of the 300mm is much less, the only downside is obviously its limited focus distance. but the 300mm with a 1.4x converter and the 2.0 version 3 will give me increased focal distance when i do need it, and then i still have a 300mm f2.8 when i dont need the distance.

if you are serious about birding an wildlife i would just start saving, like i said i tried a few difference lenses and was not really happy with them, in the long run i wished i just waited and saved for this 300mm 2.8 in the first place. i also own the 70-200mm with tc14e II on it and used it for birding and wildlife, and it works quite good, but obviously is only 280mm, so you need to be able to get close, but its iq and size and weight is very good, but if you want similar distance just get the 300mm f4, its quality is better then the 70-200 with tc14e on it.

 

[shefjr]

Thanks Buckster and Matthewo.

Matthewo, thanks for the advice. For right now I'm just gonna keep saving up my cash. If I behave myself with my spending I could have a new lens by the end of February. If I were really good with my allowance (self inflicted) by the end of the year I could have a 600mm but, I am not a pro and just don't think that I could drop that kind of 10k on a hobby. Honestly, I think I'll probably have a hard time when I go to buy the 70-200 2.8. I do absolutely nothing to get paid for the equipment that I buy.

 

[matthewo]

yes, hobby here also. but at least nikon glass if bought used usually holds its value well. its kinda an investment you can use and get your money back if you need. that is of coarse if the lens stays in good shape.

i bought my 70-200 vr ii for $1750 a year ago, its in excellent shape, no doubt i could get that and more out of it now