Soon time for my BIG birding lens

[KentYeti]

Reckon I'll be moving on from my Nikon 300mm f4 lens plus Nikon 1.4 and 1.7TC before many more months have passed.

Using the Nikon D7000 for a few months has helped me choose where to head. Superb camera and imaging chip, can crop 100% in the right light. Very obviously a long way better than my D80.

I'd always thought the Nikon 400mm f2.8 would be my utlimate birding lens.

But I'm moving closer and closer to the Nikon 300mm f2.8.

Thought I'd bounce the reasoning off those here.

I need a lens I can hand hold and walk around with, without a tripod. Other than when photographing in the garden and such "epics" as the Elmley Barn Owls where I had to use a tripod anyway, (low light), I cannot see even a monopod will be of any use to me for a lot of my birds in flight sessions.

That has to rule out the 400mm lens. But from a number of reviews, (always taken with a pinch of salt), just about lets in the 300mm f2.8. Yetis are big with strong arms and shoulders!

I've read some very detailed reviews recently. Their experience with the 1.4 and 1.7TC is the same as mine with the 300mm f4 lens. V good. And, also with the 2.0TC, which I haven't got as it doesn't autofocus on the f4 300mm lens.

So am I likely to spend a lot of money just to get one extra stop, moving from f4 to f2.8? (Oh, plus the VR system that my current 300mm lens does not have. But I shoot fast shutter speeds anyway for B-I-F.)

It looks like the answer to just getting one extra stop is no. The f2.8 seems to be even sharper than the f4. More so with all three TCs. Add in the superb D7000 images and I may be getting myself a 300mm f2.8, 420mm f4, 510mm f 4.8 and 600mm f5.6 lens that gives really great results. I'll settle for that.

My review work is now concentrating on that latter point to make sure. i.e am I really getting more than just one extra stop of light for a lot of extra money? I may even hire a 300mm f2.8 for few days to test it myself.

OK. That's my thinking.

Many here are way up on me with bird photography, I'm only nine months into it. So please bounce back with comments.

Cheers,

Bryan

[Jim Ford]

Originally Posted by KentYeti

I need a lens I can hand hold and walk around with, without a tripod.

The lens is almost 3Kg. Are you sure you'd like to walk around with it for long?

Jim

[KentYeti]

Originally Posted by Jim Ford

The lens is almost 3Kg. Are you sure you'd like to walk around with it for long?

Jim

Jim, I certainly won't like to walk around with it for long!

But I will walk with it to get decent shots. I'll have to cut back on distance I know. Did ten miles or so on one day last week with the 300mm f4 and a TC round my neck, plus a rucksac. No prob at all. Maybe if I double the camera weight I'll have to halve the distance and have more breaks.

Can't really replicate it in my winter climbs of Snowdon. But I have done that in harsh conditions with a large rucksac plus snowshoes strapped on that. But weight on the back is much, much easier than carrying, or around the neck.

You are right though. It is an issue and I need to think that right through to be absolutely certain.

Cheers,

Bryan

[htcdude]

Originally Posted by KentYeti

Jim, I certainly won't like to walk around with it for long!

But I will walk with it to get decent shots. I'll have to cut back on distance I know. Did ten miles or so on one day last week with the 300mm f4 and a TC round my neck, plus a rucksac. No prob at all. Maybe if I double the camera weight I'll have to halve the distance and have more breaks.

You could always get one of those motorised bicycles and stick a little trailor on the back

[JeffH]

Bryan, have you considered the Nikon 200-400? I know it doesn't give you that extra stop but it's only about £800 and 0.36kg more than the 300 f/2.8 and is widely regarded as the best Nikon wildlife lens currently available by many wildlife pros/semi-pros.

And don't discount the benefits of a monopod - they do help with some BiF shots (especially low-flying birds such as Owls) and can make it much easier to carry a heavy camera/lens combo by putting the weight onto your shoulder rather than around your neck.

Just a thought

Jeff
(Schedule 1 Licence holder for Kingfishers, Barn Owls and Avocets)

[DRB]

a friend of mine uses the 300 f2.8 vr with a d3oo on a monopod with pistol grip head and he takes superb pics

[Jonsfotos]

Originally Posted by KentYeti

Jim, I certainly won't like to walk around with it for long!

But I will walk with it to get decent shots. I'll have to cut back on distance I know. Did ten miles or so on one day last week with the 300mm f4 and a TC round my neck, plus a rucksac. No prob at all. Maybe if I double the camera weight I'll have to halve the distance and have more breaks.

Can't really replicate it in my winter climbs of Snowdon. But I have done that in harsh conditions with a large rucksac plus snowshoes strapped on that. But weight on the back is much, much easier than carrying, or around the neck.

You are right though. It is an issue and I need to think that right through to be absolutely certain.

Cheers,

Bryan

It is a heavy lens Brian but I find it ok to lug around.I have the 300mmAFS11 2.8 Lens ( not the V.R ) and is the heavier of the two but not by much. I mostly have it mounted on a monopod but I have had it on a Bushawk shoulder mount and again, I find it ok to carry about. It works superbly with the 1.4 & 1.7 Converters. If you can find one to try out purely for the weight issue, that would be the best option,as you know they are very pricey but the images this lens produces are superb.

Jon

[KentYeti]

Originally Posted by JeffH

Bryan, have you considered the Nikon 200-400? I know it doesn't give you that extra stop but it's only about £800 and 0.36kg more than the 300 f/2.8 and is widely regarded as the best Nikon wildlife lens currently available by many wildlife pros/semi-pros.

And don't discount the benefits of a monopod - they do help with some BiF shots (especially low-flying birds such as Owls) and can make it much easier to carry a heavy camera/lens combo by putting the weight onto your shoulder rather than around your neck.

Just a thought

Jeff
(Schedule 1 Licence holder for Kingfishers, Barn Owls and Avocets)

Oh that it was £800 Jeff. New it comes out at around £5,000!

I have thought about it, but can't use it with the 2.0 TC. Not the main criteria, but for static work when I am actually using a tripod, I'd like to be able to double the focal length.

Originally Posted by Jonsfotos

It is a heavy lens Brian but I find it ok to lug around.I have the 300mmAFS11 2.8 Lens ( not the V.R ) and is the heavier of the two but not by much. I mostly have it mounted on a monopod but I have had it on a Bushawk shoulder mount and again, I find it ok to carry about. It works superbly with the 1.4 & 1.7 Converters. If you can find one to try out purely for the weight issue, that would be the best option,as you know they are very pricey but the images this lens produces are superb.

Jon

Very interesting Jon. Very good to hear about it's perfomance with the TCs. That confirms the most detailed review I've read. But I'm never quite sure about reviews, always better to hear from an actual user.

Is the autofocus as quick, (with and without TCs), as the reviews state?

And re the points several have made about a monopod. OK, that is an area I need to research and maybe move into.

Cheers,

Bryan

[JeffH]

Originally Posted by KentYeti

Oh that it was £800 Jeff. New it comes out at around £5,000!.....Bryan

Sorry Bryan, so the difference in price is more like £930 then - based on Warehouse Express prices

Jeff
(Schedule 1 Licence holder for Kingfishers, Barn Owls and Avocets)

[momji1971]

lol. Jeff I think it was the fact you missed the word 'more' when you said £800!

regards.
Stu.