What Nikon lens to get for wildlife photography? somewhat in depth here...

[matthewo]

so, I sold my sigma 150-500 after not being very happy with it. I could get decent shots every once and a while but it was always maxed out at 500mm where the lens is already not very sharp. the 150-500 had no auto focus problems but was somewhat slow and didn't always lock on as reliable as my Nikon lenses. not really too bad of a lens for the price but it is time to go a different route.

let me get a little into what I already have and how I can use it, it is important because it will help sway what i get. also i would like to say wildlife is just a hobby. i have a d800, i will be using, in full, 1.2x, and dx(1.5x) crop modes with whatever lens i get(prime) to make it "zoom" if needed, i also own a nikon v1 with FT-1 converter. and i also own a 70-200vr II and a TC14e II converter.

OK, so my lens options are as follows. nikon 300mm AF-S F4. to use with the TC14e converter for around 420mm. this would also work with the nikon v1 for fun, at over 1134mm.

the other option, the one i am thinking about more now. is an old nikon 500mm F4 P manual focus lens, with a TC16A auto focus converter that gives limited auto focus to manual focus lenses.


so why am i thinking these totally different lenses? well first is. will 420mm be enough, if i already didnt think the sigma 150-500 was long enough at 500mm. probably no. the other reason is i can use my nikon v1 with the 70-200mm with tc14e for 260-750mm and auto focus center point. i can also just use my nikon d800 with the 70-200 vr ii with teleconverter and get 280mm in fx mode and 420mm in dx crop when i need autofocus and top quality images, and not super range. also there is just something about the 500mm f4, i dont think any other lens is going to produce results like this one. well other then the other super expensive telephotos nikon makes(that i cannon afford). i know the keeper rate of the 500mm manual focus will be lower, but the keepers will be like no other, and im sure nothing like i could get from a 300mm af-s f4.

so i have a lot of reasons why i like the 500mm manual focus option. i guess i have almost talked myself into getting it. the plus with the 300mm f4 af-s would be. it has real auto focus that would be more acurate and useful then the TC16a autofocus, its nice and small, hand holdable, would still work well with the tc14e ii which i already have, it would work with the nikon v1, i would use it more because of its size.

i think the main thing is would i just not use the 500mm much because of its size. the sigma 150-500 i could lug around with me without much trouble, it would fit in a small backpack with other camera gear and could go pretty much anywhere easy. when we talk about any prime nikon super telephoto its not really a lens that goes anywhere. i know i would use it less because i wouldnt go on much of a hike with it, or it would be in a back back much of the hike and not in my hand like the 300mm f4 could be. but when i did get it out and on a tripod it would give me pictures i would never get with the 300mm. hmmm options.


i hope this still makes sense.

 

[KmH]

the 150-500 had no auto focus problems but was somewhat slow and didn't always lock on as reliable as my Nikon lenses.

At 500 mm the 150-500 has a max aperture of f/6.3.
F/6.3 limits the amount of light that can get to the AF module in the camera.

Any 300 mm f/4 used with a 1.4 TC will be effectively be a 300 mm f/5.6, and the 1.4 TC will diminish IQ to some degree.

 

[SCraig]

I've heard several times that the Sigma 150-500 is not very sharp at 500mm ...

I tend to disagree with that statement.

 

[matthewo]

you are right, I have photos I really like with the sigma, but it was not reliable enough.

 

[SCraig]

you are right, I have photos I really like with the sigma, but it was not reliable enough.

Not trying to derail your topic, but out of curiosity what reliability issues did you have? I've had mine a year and have had zero issues with it.

 

[The_Traveler]

I rented the 300 f4 for some bike race shooting and wasn't enamored.
Certainly there must have been operator error but it just didn't snap into focus quickly enough and the DOF didn't isolate enough for the bike racing shots I wanted.

 

[Tony S]

If you are having problems with reach and 500mm does not do it for you learn to get closer to your intended subjects, it's way less expensive and rewarding. Depending on which wildlife you are trying to shoot there are all kinds of ways to get closer. Start by reading some bow hunting magazines, they have great tips for getting in close.

I shoot a ton of wildlife and rarely find I need more than 400mm, often times being within range of my 70-200. Just be ready to replace your tripod when the herd of elk runs it over and breaks it (yes, there is a story to that).

 

[Derrel]

I own and am familiar with the TC16A. My question though is--does it actually function on a D800, to provide AF with the 500-P? Does the TC 16A's AF actually work on the D800? I'd be interested in hearing that answer.

As to the 300/4 + TC 1.4...yeah....that would be an option I think. I've used that pairing a few times, and it gave decent results. The TC 14-e or E-II is a very good match on the 300/4 AF-S.

The 500mm-P Nikkor, or maybe a Sigma 500mm f/4.5 prime both seem like pretty good choices, and I think either would be significantly better than the Sigma zoom.

The BEST part of the entire situation is the D800's huge resolution, which ought to allow you plenty of cropping flexibility as compared with say, a 12MP FX Nikon body. Plus, the crop-modes are pretty darned handy too!

 

[matthewo]

as far as research goes it seems that the tc16a would work with a d800, there is a guy who sells the modified versions on ebay and a d800 is listed, and while that really doesnt mean it will work. i will try to do more research. i guess im confused on why it wouldnt as the teleconverter just uses the incamera screw drive and then the teleconverter moves to focus other then the lens actually focusing its own elements. i am positive the 500mm p and the tc16a work together once you get focus close, in other words its not going to go the whole distance, maybe only 1/4 so you need to get it close.

yes i agree that the d800 is pretty nice as far as resolution. the only problem is its 4fps, but it does 5fps in dx and 1.2x crop mode, should work ok for me. you can also get 6 fps with a grip i guess, but its not that important for me.

I own and am familiar with the TC16A. My question though is--does it actually function on a D800, to provide AF with the 500-P? Does the TC 16A's AF actually work on the D800? I'd be interested in hearing that answer.

As to the 300/4 + TC 1.4...yeah....that would be an option I think. I've used that pairing a few times, and it gave decent results. The TC 14-e or E-II is a very good match on the 300/4 AF-S.

The 500mm-P Nikkor, or maybe a Sigma 500mm f/4.5 prime both seem like pretty good choices, and I think either would be significantly better than the Sigma zoom.

The BEST part of the entire situation is the D800's huge resolution, which ought to allow you plenty of cropping flexibility as compared with say, a 12MP FX Nikon body. Plus, the crop-modes are pretty darned handy too!

 

[matthewo]

focusing mostly. it had problems with birds in flight, sometimes. it would also back focus and i found that -11 focus correction made it better. and ISO needed to be high when used at such a small aperture. like i said for the price and what it did it was very good, considering the price of other lenses. but its just time to get a little more. i guess i want a little more creamy back ground also. f6.3- f8 was not enough for me.

you are right, I have photos I really like with the sigma, but it was not reliable enough.

Not trying to derail your topic, but out of curiosity what reliability issues did you have? I've had mine a year and have had zero issues with it.

 

[matthewo]

like i said it would take good photos, you just had to work hard and the keepers where only a few. i still loved the lens for its size and its range and its decent quality. and OS was nice too. i felt i had to crop a bit to get what i wanted, and then the IQ really started to show, most of my photos needed a lot of processing and sharping and always on the edge of what i could really do.

a lot of these where 33% crops or so.

 

[matthewo]

thanks for the input on that.

I rented the 300 f4 for some bike race shooting and wasn't enamored.
Certainly there must have been operator error but it just didn't snap into focus quickly enough and the DOF didn't isolate enough for the bike racing shots I wanted.

 

[matthewo]

Ok the tc16a will autofocus with a d800 Also, the auction lists a d800e as the test camera for the modified tc16a

But.again its not afs good, just a little extra help to lockon once close, but that is the hard part, I can manual focus close, but with thin dof acuracy is the time consuming part

 

[jamesdak]

Hmmm, I'd say go for the 500mm myself. But also work on your long lens technique. It really does to tough to nail the shots as the lens get's bigger. But, also work on your fieldcraft. For almost 20 years I got by without having a lens longer than 400mm. I relied on my skills in the woods. But age, injuries, and common sense made me move to bigger stuff. Not able to skinny up a tree as fast as I could in my younger years, LOL!

If you are creative and in good shape you should be able to hike with the 500mm. I can rig up and carry my old manual focus 800/5.6 on the mountains so I'd think you can come up with a way to carry the 500. If you are already using a small backback you can probably rig some straps that will let you carry the lens attached to carbiners to the front of your shoulder straps for quick access.

 

[coastalconn]

This is one place in the Nikon lineup that falls flat. I have a Tamron 200-500 that I got very cheap. It is what it is I guess, but I have gotten some pretty good results. I agree with many of the responses here. One thing that you have to realize is that you still have to get close to your subject with the background relatively far away to get your isolation and creamy backgrounds. As far as consumer 500's the Tamron does pretty well, but no VR obviously..
It seems to me that a 500 F4 MF (semi-auto?) with a TC doesn't really seem like a great setup especially if you mention BIF. Everyone swears by the 300 F4 AF-S, but I have a mind-block always having a TC on. I know there are millions of beautiful shots with the combo. Have you thought about a TC20III with the 70-200? I have seen a few positive reviews with the combo. Jut a thought.

Someone mentioned field-craft which is what I practice. At 10-20 feet roughly, at 500 mm from f6.3 to f8, on a crop sensor the DOF is less than 2 inches and provides decent subject isolation. Like I said the Tammy is what it is, but here are some examples of what I mean...
Here are 3 examples...

Chickadee by krisinct, on Flickr

Sparrow by krisinct, on Flickr

Red Tail Hawk by krisinct, on Flickr

under 10 feet you have less than 1" DOF up to F9

Small warbler - Low Tide by krisinct, on Flickr

BIF is tough and you need many things to go right, like the bird being in the right light, having enough light and fast enough shutter speed.
Slow birds you can get away with a slowish shutter speed.. this is at 1/1000th, but faster birds need to be at 1/2000th ideally...

GBH in flight by krisinct, on Flickr

As jamesdak said if you are crafty you can set yourself up with a easy setup to carry big lenses, this is my rig... If you want more info ask..