Which to upgrade? glass or body?

[sscarmack]

Yes, however you'll lose two stops of light making it a 5.6 instead of 2.8

 

[HitenNainaney]

personally, i'd upgrade the body first, you'd be able to get a lot more out of your lenses and your photos.

 

[Radical]

Yes, however you'll lose two stops of light making it a 5.6 instead of 2.8

Yes I know but at least I have 400mm instead of 300mm.

 

[Overread]

Ok let me ask you all this, if I would go for the body would I be able to use a 2X tele convertor on my 70-200mm Sigma lens and would it turn into a 400mm?

Yes, but it becomes an effective f7.1 or f8 lens.
You lose 2 stops of light to the teleconverter, making it an actual f5.6 lens at its maximum. However you also lost a lot of sharpness and as a result at the 400mm end you'll want to close down to f7.1 or f8 to claw that sharpness back for the shot.

That said my point raised earlier shows that its not as limiting an aperture as one might think.


Note that thus far the only 70-200mm I've used that can take 2*TC well is the Canon IS MII - the Nikon VR MII can also take a 2*TC well - Sigma side I'm less sure, but their newest 70-200mm f2.8 should be about in-line with the other brands so should be capable - if its an older model chances are you might get a good record keeping lens but not one that's quite good enough.

 

[nzmacro]

Kris knows his subjects and AF extremely well, so in that case it would be good advice for sure. With AF and BIF's, you will need fast PDAF and good tracking and that D7100 seems to keep up well. To get the best out of a 2x TC, you might need to stop the lens down even more than that F/5.6 on the 70-200. They tend to suit primes more. I only use a 1.4x TC now and again.

All the best.

Danny.

 

[JoeW]

I've been in photography ( wildlife) now for like four years. I have the Nikkor 70-300mm f4.5-5.6 AF-S, and the Sigma 70-200mm f2.8 lens. I was thinking of buying the new Tamron 150-600mm lens to fit on my Nikon D3100 but some one mentioned that maybe I would want to think about upgrading my body first to the Nikon D7100 because of the better AF system.
Imput would help, thanks

I'd recommend that you upgrade the glass. Here's my thinking...

1. For shooting birds and wildlife, 200mm really doesn't give you much reach. I'd either want to get the 600mm zoom (and figure that while it's not very fast, it gives me reach I don't currently have). Or I'd look for a much faster version of the 300mm. Basically, in low light, unless you're shooting stationary objects, you only really have a 200mm zoom and that's just not enough reach for wildlife and birds.

2. You can get the D7100...which is a terrific camera. But Nikon is coming out with a D7200 this summer. So you should wait. Either for prices to drop on the D7100. Or for the D7200 to come out.

Ultimately though, I think the real decision is about your specific situation. If you find yourself desiring a more weather-sealed body (though the lens need to be good for bad weather too) or more FPS, than upgrade the body now. However, you can get great photos (as I'm sure you know) with your D3100. B/c it's so small and light (compared to almost any other series), when you attach a bazooka lens on the end of it (like your 200mm f2.8), you'll notice a difference with a bigger body in terms of weight and fatigue.

 

[Mike_E]

I'd probably get the body first because I'd be afraid that the 150-600mm would break the one you have now due to it's weight.

The 150-600 has a foot with a ¼" thread on it. So, when properly used, the lens supports the body and not the other way around.

Yes but, is any camera used the way it's supposed to be always?

Never had someone else pick up your camera and look around with it?

That much mass and that much leverage and some poor unsuspecting soul grabbing the outfit by the body only and swing it up to the sky is libel to tear the lens right off the camera unless the camera body is built pretty tough and unfortunately the D3xxxs aren't.

 

[sscarmack]

I would really like 600mm, not gonna lie.

 

[coastalconn]

I'm still torn on this one. The reason I brought it up besides the obvious AF, etc.. is the ability to fine tune the lens. I find that all long lenses really benefit quite a bit by fine tuning.. you should track down Robbins, he shoots with sigma 70-200 with teleconverters quite a bit on his d5200, maybe he can send you a full size image so you can judge the IQ for yourself?

 

[Radical]

Wow, I really appreciate every ones input, there is excellent thought on both sides which doesn't make my decision any easier by any means. I guess I just keep rereading every ones advice and eventually will make a decision.
Thank you all again for your 2 cents, and this is why I love this site!

 

[goodguy]

Ok let me ask you all this, if I would go for the body would I be able to use a 2X tele convertor on my 70-200mm Sigma lens and would it turn into a 400mm?

Yes

 

[sscarmack]

Do you WANT one more than the other? You have to be leaning someway.


Like I want a 300 2.8, but I decided to just get a 24-70 2.8 and a 2x convertor since I already have the 70-200 vrii.



Nothing feels better than getting a new camera, I will admit that.

 

[Radical]

Yes both, but I'm not sure I can pull it off.

 

[sscarmack]

Yes both, but I'm not sure I can pull it off.

I say get the camera. Its not like your stuck with a fish eye lens. 200 is a nice length and for a couple bucks you can get a tele convertor and be just as happy.

 

[JoeW]

Yes both, but I'm not sure I can pull it off.

I say get the camera. Its not like your stuck with a fish eye lens. 200 is a nice length and for a couple bucks you can get a tele convertor and be just as happy.

I was in Alaska 2 years ago. Cloudy, poor light (but during daylight...early May). I was trying to shoot an Eagle in flight with a 200mm and a teleconverter. Just wasn't fast enough--no usable pictures b/c I needed faster glass.

If the OP is shooting in bright sunlight or all of the birds are stationary, than a 200mm f5.6 with a teleconverter will be fine. if the birds are in-flight, the light isn't bright...than he's stuck with a 200mm that isn't fast..and that's without even using the teleconverter.