Ideas for a longer Nikon lens please

[Blazing fire]

Having peered through a viewfinder on a friends 70-300 (on a 1.6 c/f Canon), I wasn't that impressed the difference between 200mm and 300mm gave me - I crop more than that with my current lens.

IMO, the difference between 200mm and 300mm on a full frame is not that significant either. It's only about 10% smaller linear wise.

Hey Dave, . I have been reading up quite a bit on lens, cause I got nothing better to do, and it seems to me that you might not need the VR with the 300 f/4. If you are planning on shooting mainly birds, you will most likely be shooting during the day, in the sky, with fast shutter speeds. IE: 500 and above. I believe there should be no problem handholding at those types of speed. I have done it myself (with lesser lens) and have no problem. The only time it becomes a problem is the early morning or late afternoon when the is insufficient lighting. Then reduced shutters do not make good stop action anyway. And the 2.8 gives such a tight FOV that its hard to keep the whole bird in focus anyway. If you are truly concerned, what about a monopod? I actually works quite well and does not take up space like the full "Colin" ordeal. Well, good luck whatever you choose. Hope I made some resemblance of sense.

Agreed. I saw some of thom hogan's bird in flight shots and the dof is really tight.

[Blazing fire]

I hope you will enjoy the 70-300 VR. I enjoyed mine quite a bit although it was kinda slow at times (in terms of AF speed and shutter speed), but definitely not a disappointing lens. I must say that this 70-300, and the latest 16-35mm f/4 are one of Nikon's best lens for the money.

[ScoutR]

Woooohooo Congratulations Dave: I'm really looking forward to seeing and hearing what you think of the 105mm. I'm in the market for another lens and from what I've read that sounds like a good one.

By the way, anytime I've ordered from Amazon delivery has been very quick and usually sooner than stated. Hang in there!

Wendy

[ScoutR]

OK, the deed is done, just waiting on Amazon to deliver now
(what do you mean "it's Sunday, I didn't pay for Express delivery and I only ordered an hour ago", aren't I allowed to be impatient yet?)
Thanks all,

Is it here yet?

[Dave Humphries]

Is it here yet?

Stop it, cheeky!

Don't you think I'm impatient enough?

(Wednesday or Thursday hopefully)

[Shadowman]

I think Wendy is more excited about the purchase than you!

Stop it, cheeky!

Don't you think I'm impatient enough?

(Wednesday or Thursday hopefully)

[Bill44]

Dave, the following shot was taken with the 70-300 VR last Saturday in good light, so don't worry about the report of the lens being "slow", net ball is a very fast game.

EDIT. The posting process sure degrades an image, at A4 print this image is pin sharp.

[Dave Humphries]

EDIT. The posting process sure degrades an image, at A4 print this image is pin sharp.

Hi Bill,

Have you had a read of this, there's a slim chance it may contain something useful for you.

Problems with Image Quality?

Thanks again, must dash,

[Steaphany]

Even at 300mm, you may have to rethink about using a tripod, and more.

I've been doing a photo study of wild flowers which are around 5mm across and smaller. I've been able to find and photograph a nice assortment of flowers that most people end up missing. When using my Sigma 70-300mm lens on my SD14, I have found in post processing that images shot at 300mm of flowers just over 1 meter from the camera, trying to get as large as image as possible, have a noticeable shake from the mirror moving out of the optical path. Apart from this, the image is nicely focused, but these are tiny flowers which don't move except for waving in the breeze. Now I need to go out again and repeat several days shooting when the weather permits. (Hoping that the flowers are still there)

For me, the mirror shake is too significant to be ignored and I could never see trying this hand held. (I'm not sold on image stabilization since it needs to be turned off when using a tripod and, when I need steady, I use a tripod.)

If you look long and hard for that perfect lens, just keep in mind that requirements of a tripod and mirror-up mode may render it useless for birding.

[Blazing fire]

If you look long and hard for that perfect lens, just keep in mind that requirements of a tripod and mirror-up mode may render it useless for birding.

Not a bird shooter, but I remembered what Thom said once...

"And speaking of the long, heavy telephotos: if you use the 400mm, 500mm, 600mm, or the 300mm telephotos with extenders, at a minimum get a Wimberley Sidekick (US$250). This clever device has to be used to be appreciated. Essentially, it's the perfect way to get the weight of the camera and lens balanced and stabilized on your pod. If you use long lenses all the time, consider getting the full Wimberley gimbal head instead (and perhaps even heavier legs). A 600mm f/4 on a Wimberley head moves effortlessly enough to track flying birds, yet gets enough support to render sharp photos. I've seen a lot of other gimbal options, but the Wimberley still seems to be the clear winner. "

I may have interpreted what you said wrongly and I apologize in advance . But I don't think the use of tripods rules out bird photography.

[Dave Humphries]

Nikon AF-S 70-300mm f4.5-5.6G VR and Nikon AF-S 105mm f2.8 VR Macro

They have been dispatched ....

[rick55]

They have been dispatched ....

So do you have a UPS (or whatever) tracking number, so you can see when it moves through each city?

[Philjam10]

Hi Dave : Attached was shot with 70-300mm lens- 1/60, f29, ISO 400 focal lenght 300mm, manual focus. Shot has only been resized and croped, not adjusted in PS. Bird was about 90 feet away (upwards). I tried some shots using auto focus. But the auto adjustment is too slow, and I always end up with a smear. These guys just flit from tree to tree.
The focus ring on the lens is near the camera so you bear the brunt of the weight at all times. So be prepared for the weight. I tend to bracket the focus and shoot as much as possible before he moves.

You're better at PS than I am give him a bit of a brighten, if you will. He's a bit of a rare one- a white throated sparrow.

[Dave Humphries]

Hi,

I'm not sure it's my best effort (it's late), but;


I can see why manual focus is necessary, too many twigs and branches

Good capture, hope I can do something like this ...

[ScoutR]

They have been dispatched ....

[Dave Humphries]

Lenses not here yet

So far, I have one filter only

(I am hoping posting this will 'make' the van arrive)

[Philjam10]

Thanks its better. What did you do? And how do I import this copy?Here is one that didn't turn out as well. He's bigger and about the same distance. Same shutter speed etc., but I think I should have switched from ISO 400 and the fast shutter speed because he so much more in the shade of the forest canopy. But you have to shoot him when he is available. The forest is too thick to chase him any further. Take a crack at it. And any comments. He's called an American Redstart, and his plumage is more orange than red.



Thanks in advance.

[Dave Humphries]

Thanks all for your help.

Well, they arrived, but I have only had a chance to try one out so far and most of that was test shooting in the garden.

It did give me a chance to show you all Bubbles (pic also in Pet Portraits)

Shot today with my new Nikon 70-300mm lens:

Nikon D5000 + Nikon 70-300mm f4.5-5.6G IF-ED VR at 280mm and 1/1000s, f/5.6 at iso800

Outcome of tests, I'm very pleased, it seems to focus accurately and IQ is at least as good as expectations.

Tommorrow (or later today I mean), I'll try the macro and take them both for an outing somewhere, weather permitting.

Cheers,

[Dave Humphries]

Hi Phil,

Thanks its better. What did you do?

Hmm, quite a lot, and I didn't make notes - erm .... ok:
Noise Reduce, Levels inc. grey point, Local Contrast Enhance, sharpening on a new layer then erasing all but the bird and the branch it is standing on, so the background didn't get sharpened

And how do I import this copy?

Import to where?
To be honest, I was doing a quick job on a fairly small jpg, I really don't think it's worth importing anywhere.

Here is one that didn't turn out as well. He's bigger and about the same distance. Same shutter speed etc., but I think I should have switched from ISO 400 and the fast shutter speed because he so much more in the shade of the forest canopy.
~
Take a crack at it. And any comments. He's called an American Redstart, and his plumage is more orange than red.
~
Thanks in advance.

Sadly, as you can see now I've put the image inline (i.e. bigger), due to the little chap singing, there is just no resolved top beak, so this is just not going to be worth the time and effort.

You're correct, you needed a faster shutter speed than 1/60, I would shoot at 1/500 to 1/2000 by choice, or try to get lucky timing when it takes a pause for breath!

Cheers,

[rick55]

Shot today with my new Nikon 70-300mm lens:

Nikon D5000 + Nikon 70-300mm f4.5-5.6G IF-ED VR at 280mm and 1/1000s, f/5.6 at iso800

It looks fantastic. I assume it's hand-held? Beautiful.

Cheers,
Rick