Which Lens

[DuncanE]

Dispite the credit crunch I am making it my aim to buy a lens this year. Anyone have any ideas on a telephoto lens for a Nikon D80 upto £1k.

At the moment I am thinking about a Sigma 150-500mm any other suggestions?

[Lancashire Lad]

Originally Posted by DuncanE

Dispite the credit crunch I am making it my aim to buy a lens this year. Anyone have any ideas on a telephoto lens for a Nikon D80 upto £1k.

At the moment I am thinking about a Sigma 150-500mm any other suggestions?

Hi Duncan, I use a D80, but my interests lie with flowers & fungi so I don't really need the longer telephotos. It would be interesting to know what lenses you already have, and where your particular photographic/wildlife interests lie, so that a better opinion of what lens you might need can be given.

The Sigma 150-500 is undoubtedy a fine lens. I assume you are leaning towards this rather than the 50-500 (Bigma) because it has Sigma's version of image stabilisation?

Regards
Mike.

[eeyore]

being a canonite i dont know much about nikons but the 80-400 VR is suposed to be good , and the 200-400 VR (tho thats outside your price range) is reputed to be outstanding.

other options include the sigma 80-400 OS , the sigma 170-500, the sigma 135-400, and the tamron 200-500.

[Richard G.]

Slight tangent.

I keep looking longingly at the Nikon 200-400mm, but that price cannot be justified by me, no matter how hard I try. However, noticed that it's just increased by around 500 notes on warehouse express and a couple of other places... even more depressing

Personally, I'm waiting patiently for the next incantation of the Nikon 80-400mm VR with AF-S... oh, or that lottery win suggested by someone else lusting after the 200-400mm...

[DuncanE]

I own the 18-70mm kit lens and a sigma 70-200mm f2.8.

the main reasons (and probably a wrong reason) for the idea 150-500 is that its newer design than the 50-500 and slightly cheaper. This could mean I could also get a wide angle lens for landscapes. The VR isn't really a primary requirment but would be usefull for un supported shots.

I know what you all mean by the 200-400 that would be my ultmate lens of the moment if I could justify the expense. (maybe I need more 15hr monthly overtimes!)

My key interests would be birds and animals. I use my 70-200 for that at the moment but could do with getting "closer".

[GerryNick2]

[quote=Richard G.;410068]Slight tangent.

I keep looking longingly at the Nikon 200-400mm, but that price cannot be justified by me, no matter how hard I try. However, noticed that it's just increased by around 500 notes on warehouse express and a couple of other places... even more depressing


No doubt due to the weak pound, imports from Asia are going to be more expensive as they deal in Dollars, and of course dealers and distributors are increasing prices trying to offset reduced profits. Maybe not the best time to be buying camera equipment?

Gerry

[DuncanE]

Originally Posted by GerryNick2

No doubt due to the weak pound, imports from Asia are going to be more expensive as they deal in Dollars, and of course dealers and distributors are increasing prices trying to offset reduced profits. Maybe not the best time to be buying camera equipment?

Gerry

Very true,\but it could work the other way. We're not buying and therefore prices drop to hook us. I'm sure there will be some deals out there its just a matter of where and when.

[pressld2]

Originally Posted by Richard G.

Slight tangent.

I keep looking longingly at the Nikon 200-400mm, but that price cannot be justified by me, no matter how hard I try. However, noticed that it's just increased by around 500 notes on warehouse express and a couple of other places... even more depressing

At the Nikon Expo in December Andy Rouse described it as "the best wildlife lens in the world" and said it was one of the reasons ( along with the high ISO performance of the D3) that he switched from Canon to Nikon. I got to strap one on my D300 for a few minutes and took a few shots in the exhibition hall. The focusing was very, very fast and accurate and the shots handheld at around 1/30th second were surprisingly sharp.

Originally Posted by Richard G.

Personally, I'm waiting patiently for the next incantation of the Nikon 80-400mm VR with AF-S... oh, or that lottery win suggested by someone else lusting after the 200-400mm...

I have the current version of the 80-400 VR and it does get me some very good images at times. But like you I'm waiting for the next version which will hopefully have VR II and a silent wave motor. The current one is a bit slow to focus and hunts occasionally.

Dave P.

[Richard G.]

The trouble with cogitating over these decisions for so long (as I've done ) is that you are missing opportunities in the meantime. I keep trying to convince myself that I should just go with one of the budget lenses for now and if something better comes along later in my price range, then there's no problem with trading up, but at least in the meantime I've hopefully bagged a few shots that otherwise wouldn't have been possible.

I guess I'm in a pretty similar situation to you DuncanE, D80 with the Nikon 70-200mm f2.8 (which is outstanding). You could add a 1.4TC, as I have done, which when all attached to your D80 gives you up to 420mm f/4 and still pretty good IQ(certainly with the Nikon lens anyway).

Haven't used either Sigma zoom, but most reports suggest they have quite similar IQ, with perhaps the 50-500mm edging it if using a tripod, but with the OS of the 150-500mm providing more chance of success if hand holding, so depends how much you tend to, or are willing to, use a tripod. Think my preference would be for the 150-500mm, but I just know I wouldn't be entirely happy and it would most likely be a stop gap.

[glsammy]

Originally Posted by Richard G.

The trouble with cogitating over these decisions for so long (as I've done ) is that you are missing opportunities in the meantime. I keep trying to convince myself that I should just go with one of the budget lenses for now and if something better comes along later in my price range, then there's no problem with trading up, but at least in the meantime I've hopefully bagged a few shots that otherwise wouldn't have been possible.

I guess I'm in a pretty similar situation to you DuncanE, D80 with the Nikon 70-200mm f2.8 (which is outstanding). You could add a 1.4TC, as I have done, which when all attached to your D80 gives you up to 420mm f/4 and still pretty good IQ(certainly with the Nikon lens anyway).

Haven't used either Sigma zoom, but most reports suggest they have quite similar IQ, with perhaps the 50-500mm edging it if using a tripod, but with the OS of the 150-500mm providing more chance of success if hand holding, so depends how much you tend to, or are willing to, use a tripod. Think my preference would be for the 150-500mm, but I just know I wouldn't be entirely happy and it would most likely be a stop gap.

Like you I agonised for months before deciding to change to the Canon 300mm F4. Having done so and looking back at the images I got with the Bigma, it makes me wonder sometimes why I bothered!
Don't get me wrong, the Canon lens is better optically, but the flexibility the zoom lens offers is often sorely missed.