Nikon / Nikkor telephoto lens advice please!

Pippa11 · #1 (**permalink**) 28-05-2011, 05:07 PM

Hello,

I am quite new to photography and just wanted to pick people's brains on which telephoto lens to buy.

I have a Nikon D60 and currently have the standard lens it came with and a lovely 105mm VR Nikkor lens that was a Christmas present. I am having great fun with the macro lens for spring butterfly photography but I know I will need something with a bit more range to snap those elusive purple / white letter hairstreaks and perhaps, if I'm lucky, the Purple Emporor later in the summer. I have looked at the Nikon website and there seem to be quite a few telephoto lenses so if anyone can offer any advice it would be greatly appreciated!

Pippa

Endrick · #2 (**permalink**) 29-05-2011, 07:55 PM

Pippa,

I don't know what your budget is or whether you intend to use it as a "walkabout" lens or not. The 300mm f4 is a wonderful lens. You can add a 1.4 teleconverter to get a 420mm lens and it is still sharp although you lose a light stop - i.e F5.6. I wouldn't use anything longer or heavier if you are going to be walking about with it.

I tried the 70-300 and liked it - although not so sharp as the 300mm F4.

Malcolm

Alan Hewitt · #3 (**permalink**) 01-06-2011, 08:55 AM

What is your budget?

nigel_b · #4 (**permalink**) 01-06-2011, 11:18 AM

The 300mm f4 is a very fine lens but with a small depth of focus for what you want I should think. Hire one or take one on trial from a camera shop if you can find one, before you decide.

Lancashire Lad · #5 (**permalink**) 01-06-2011, 11:40 AM

The Nikon AF-S VR 70-300 f4.5-5.6G IF-ED is well regarded. - I have one and am certainly happy with preformance considering cost of lens.

It's worth noting that on your D60, the APS-C sensor will give equivalent 35mm focal length of 105-450mm with this lens - so quite a good range for general wildlife.

Perhaps not quite as critically sharp as the 300mm f4 prime, but several hundred pounds less costly, and being a zoom, potentially more useful as a walkaround "all-round" wildlife lens.

Regards,
Mike.

KentYeti · #6 (**permalink**) 01-06-2011, 02:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lancashire Lad

The Nikon AF-S VR 70-300 f4.5-5.6G IF-ED is well regarded. - I have one and am certainly happy with preformance considering cost of lens.

It's worth noting that on your D60, the APS-C sensor will give equivalent 35mm focal length of 105-450mm with this lens - so quite a good range for general wildlife.

Perhaps not quite as critically sharp as the 300mm f4 prime, but several hundred pounds less costly, and being a zoom, potentially more useful as a walkaround "all-round" wildlife lens.

Regards,
Mike.

For what you are doing the Nikon AF-S VR 70-300 f4.5-5.6G IF-ED could well be a very good buy. The vibration reduction system works very well in my experience.

I got it as my first birding lens , but it wasn't quite up to that, (especially birds in flight). But used as a lens for my steam railway loco shots it's very good indeed. And with the zoom facility I think you will find it very useful for your subjects. A quite easy walk around lens too.

I've moved on to the Nikon 300 f4 Prime lens, sometimes with a 1.4 TC. Indeed I've just ordered a 1.7 TC to help with perched bird shots. But it starts to get a bit heavy as a walk around lens. And for your subject you will lose the facility of the zoom which could be very useful. As well as more than doubling what you will have to pay.

PS, If you go for the 70-300 Nikon make sure you get the one mentioned above, (circa £400), with the VR system. When I searched for it there was also an earlier Nikon 70-300mm lens around for a much lower price, (circa £100). But according to reviews, nowhere near as good, and I don't think it's compatibile with the D60.

Pippa11 · #7 (**permalink**) 02-06-2011, 09:06 AM

Thank you all for your very useful replies - I haven't set myself a specific budget as I'm happy to save up as much as I need even if it takes a while.

The 70-300mm mentioned above certainly sounds like a good contender, it would seem to fit the bill of a good compromise between focal length and weight. I have a three year old that comes out with me a lot so need to limit the weight of my camera equipment as I always have to carry drinks, snacks and a camera and binoculars for him and start to feel like a packhorse sometimes!

I think I'll pop into my local camera shop and try the 70-300mm and 300mm prime lenses out to see what the differences are. I am a complete novice so a £1000+ lens might be wasted on me!

Pippa

momji1971 · #8 (**permalink**) 02-06-2011, 08:34 PM

Hi there,

Don't be fooled into thinking a more expensive lens would be wasted because you are a novice. The improved quality will show in your images and you'll be spurred on by your successes.

Think it boils down to how large you intend to print to. Web, 6x4's go with the 70-300. Any larger grab the 300 prime. AF will improved too as you'll have twice as much light going into your camera.

I have both and can say the 300 prime is very, very sharp!

Have fun with your decision.
Stu.

Alan Hewitt · #9 (**permalink**) 03-06-2011, 07:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by KentYeti

be very useful. As well as more than doubling what you will have to pay.

PS, If you go for the 70-300 Nikon make sure you get the one mentioned above, (circa £400), with the VR system. When I searched for it there was also an earlier Nikon 70-300mm lens around for a much lower price, (circa £100). But according to reviews, nowhere near as good, and I don't think it's compatibile with the D60.

Aaaahh the Nikkor 70-300 AF G - my first telephoto lens!!

I saved up and paid £140 for this from Jessops. In so many respects it was a terrible lens! Autofocus was so slow. It is one of the lenses which do not have a dedicated Autofocus motor in the lens and is screw driven from the camera body, much like the 80-400vr which I also owned. The 80-400 vr while slow did hunt less and was much sharper at different apertures and focal lengths.
It was also made of clingfilm.

The 70-300 was xexexexe wide open at any focal length, actually 0it was xexexexe at any aperture at the extremes of its focal length. I did however take one good photo with this lens and it earned me a few £££, I actually made a profit on the lens!! It was a picture of a feral pigeon which I just caught in beautiful light really bringing out the purples and greens of its neck. If you had conditions where the light was good enough to get this lens up to f/16 and kept it at around 200mm it was actually tack sharp! Quite limiting though.

Yes, make sure you buy the new vr version!

DOXHOPE · #10 (**permalink**) 05-06-2011, 12:40 PM

All the mentioned above lenses are really useful, I recently sold my 80-400VR (and by the way made £200, so they do hold their price very well, an investment) and at times I wish I never parted with it, yes it was slower than the 300 f4 I use now, but the quality of image is excellent, no wonder so many people love this lense..forget the negative hype about it being slow, quality is a virtue for which there is no substitute
I like some above use the 300mm f4 1.4 tc combo, what a combination it is too, sharp at all settings, probably the best combo on the market, and Ive also use the 300 2.8 with the same tc, I know this lense is faster, but I believe the f4 is a sharper lense, and at the difference in price between the two, a much better option, for me...the failing is you dont have the reach at times, but, good wildlife photgraphy comes from having the right equipment, and knowing your subjects, so bush craft and stealth will get you closer,and, the better capture..