wildlife lens

[desertdave]

Seriously looking into a long lens. Budget; about a grand. Been considering the bigma 50-500. (used of course) Any thoughts?

 

[Overread20]

I know its a canon based site, but each of these reviews compares the sigma offerings in that rough price and length range with the canon equivalents so it gives you some idea of the spread of quailty and the range (at least from sigma)

Juza Nature Photography

Juza Nature Photography
(note juza has said that the OS in the copy he compared in this review is likley to be faulty, the OS reports I have read from this lens all show a significant improvement and performance of the feature).

Juza Nature Photography

Sadly I don't know what Nikon offer in the wildlife ranges in the price bracket you are in.

 

[Phranquey]

Never used one, but what I have read in reviews is that they are fairly sharp wide open from 50-200mm, but go somewhat soft beyond that. In order to get sharper at the longer focal lengths (200-500mm), they need to be stopped down a stop or two. Unfortunately, since this is a variable aperture lens, at 500mm you are already up to f/6.3 wide open, and if it needs stopped down to f/8 or f/11 for sharpness, you are going to need either a lot of light or very good high ISO performance (or both). This likely isn't a lens you are going to be shooting birds with at 500mm on a cloudy day. I have a 500 f/4, and on a cloudy day or lower light conditions, even I have to bump the ISO a few stops to get decent results.

 

[desertdave]

Never used one, but what I have read in reviews is that they are fairly sharp wide open from 50-200mm, but go somewhat soft beyond that. In order to get sharper at the longer focal lengths (200-500mm), they need to be stopped down a stop or two. Unfortunately, since this is a variable aperture lens, at 500mm you are already up to f/6.3 wide open, and if it needs stopped down to f/8 or f/11 for sharpness, you are going to need either a lot of light or very good high ISO performance (or both). This likely isn't a lens you are going to be shooting birds with at 500mm on a cloudy day. I have a 500 f/4, and on a cloudy day or lower light conditions, even I have to bump the ISO a few stops to get decent results.

With the d90 I do get great high iso performance. But I don't know if I would be able to get the shutter speed I would need. Great thoughts, I will look into it. But the question remains, With a thousand bukaroonies Will I be able to get the length and performance I need? God this sounds like a cialis commercial! :blushing:

 

[djacobox372]

Most wildlife photographers use 400 or 600mm prime lenses.

For around $1500 you may be able to find a nikon 600mm f5.6 ais lens. It won't meter with the d90, but outdoor exposure is pretty easy to set without metering (it doesn't vary much).

The price is steep, but these lenses hold their value. Don't think of it as "buying" it--more lie "borrowing" it with a $1500 security deposit.

 

[Big]

If you're shooting anything decent, you won't even touch below 200mm in my opinion. I've wished I had at least a 400mm a few times so even larger would be great for a wild life photographer. A lens with more focal range may seem like a great idea but there are downsides to it too.

 

[table1349]

My wildlife lens is the 400mm f2.8. I also have the Canon EF 1.4 II and the EF 2X II TC's. Depending on your definition of wildlife 400mm is about as short as you want to go. The wildlife I am shooting is in the mountains of New Mexico including Deer, Elk, Buffalo, Bear and Mountain Lions.

With animals like bear and mountain lion, if you are filling your viewfinder with either one and you are shooting less than 400mm you are frequently known as dinner.

Upside to the 400mm f2.8. It is a razor sharp lens. The IQ degradation with either of the TC's is minimal.

Downside to the 400mm f2.8. COST!!! Cost!!! Cost!!!

 

[desertdave]

Thanks for all the input. I would really love a prime but I think it might narrow my opportunities in the field. I live in FL (when I'm home) and the birds and wildlife are all fairly close. No big mountains or valleys to shoot across Mostly sunny. I'm leaning towards the bigma or the sigma 150-400 or is it the 150-500? I can't remember right off the top of my head. I think I have bokeh brain...but that's for another thread. Thanks again for all the input, it really helps us newbies out.