Wildlife/Birding lens for Nikon

[J-Cal]

This is where I would start

Nikon Nikkor 300mm F/4 ED IF Autofocus Lens {39/82}

Thank you.

with that lens keep in mind it's a long focus throw which slows down the focus especially if it hunts at all.
You'll also want to make sure that you buy one with the clear filter in the filter tray.

I had one for a couple years. It's very nice. Designed for manual focus with a smooth long and accurate manual focus. in AF it takes a little time if not already focused close to where you want to be compared to a more modern AF-S or even shorter throw AF-Ds.

I had a Sigma 150-500 for a short time. Nice lens though colors weren't very saturated from it.

I used to shoot manual all the time actually and was really comfortable with it. Since then my eyes have gotten worse so i've learned(and am still learning) to use autofocus. I used to get frustrated by missing shots waiting for the autofocus to center in and it was maddening. Doesn't happen quite as much anymore because i'm a little better at predicting/using it.
I'm not sure what you mean by the clear filter tray but i'll google it and read up on it. Thanks for the information.

 

[Peeb73 1]

Having rented both the Sigma 150-600 contemporary and the Nikon 200-500 with a 1.4x TC, I very much preferred the Nikon.

The Nikon was effectively longer (at 700) but it just seemed to produce more keepers for me, regardless of length.

 

[J-Cal]

Having rented both the Sigma 150-600 contemporary and the Nikon 200-500 with a 1.4x TC, I very much preferred the Nikon.

The Nikon was effectively longer (at 700) but it just seemed to produce more keepers for me, regardless of length.

Interesting. Thank you.


Sent from my iPhone using ThePhotoForum.com mobile app

 

[astroNikon]

I'm not sure what you mean by the clear filter tray but i'll google it and read up on it. Thanks for the information.

FYI, Rockwell actually has good pictures and description of the filter tray. If you do test this lens, you do want a L37C in the filter tray.
Nikon 300mm f/4 AF Review

but as mentioned I moved on from that to a Sigma 150-500 (faded color renditions) then Tamron 150-600 (much better color).

I'd love to try the Nikon 200-500. I tend to use mostly Nikon lenses due to their built and color rendition. But I got the Tamron before the Nikon was released.

 

[smoke665]

Facing the same problem, and it's been a slow sell to the wife. No one's mentioned them but what about a good quality rear converter???

 

[J-Cal]

I'm not sure what you mean by the clear filter tray but i'll google it and read up on it. Thanks for the information.

FYI, Rockwell actually has good pictures and description of the filter tray. If you do test this lens, you do want a L37C in the filter tray.
Nikon 300mm f/4 AF Review

but as mentioned I moved on from that to a Sigma 150-500 (faded color renditions) then Tamron 150-600 (much better color).

I'd love to try the Nikon 200-500. I tend to use mostly Nikon lenses due to their built and color rendition. But I got the Tamron before the Nikon was released.

Thanks for the info. A lot of the technical/gear side of things is still a little over my head, but i'll catch up.

 

[astroNikon]

Thanks for the info. A lot of the technical/gear side of things is still a little over my head, but i'll catch up.

If you have the money I wouldn't look at the old 300/4 F
But I would consider the newer 300/4 AFS with TC
But if you can swing that you can also look at the 200-500 which of course is much more versatile.

The 300/4 ended up just being used for outdoor portrait stuff for a short time. If you carry two camera bodies then it could be more useful. But the zooms I've found so much more useful than a fixed lens for subjects that move subject distance a lot.

If lenses weren't so expensive (even to rent) I'd be trying tons of them.

 

[J-Cal]

Facing the same problem, and it's been a slow sell to the wife. No one's mentioned them but what about a good quality rear converter???

See, like this, I

Thanks for the info. A lot of the technical/gear side of things is still a little over my head, but i'll catch up.

If you have the money I wouldn't look at the old 300/4 F
But I would consider the newer 300/4 AFS with TC
But if you can swing that you can also look at the 200-500 which of course is much more versatile.

The 300/4 ended up just being used for outdoor portrait stuff for a short time. If you carry two camera bodies then it could be more useful. But the zooms I've found so much more useful than a fixed lens for subjects that move subject distance a lot.

If lenses weren't so expensive (even to rent) I'd be trying tons of them.

I just bought my first fixed lens (Nikon 35mm 1.8) and it's been interesting. I shot for 6 years or so on my one lens, which was an Nikon 18-200vr. I'm going to keep shooting on it, but I have to say, I prefer the ability to zoom. I guess I shoot a lot of things that are always moving..skateboarders, musicians, animals....