NAS strikes....again!!!

[rtbaum]

Temptation is a terrible thing. Found myself with another wind fall and decided to use it to either update or augment my kit.

My current kit includes two bodies; Nikon D90 and Nikon D750.

Lenses: Nikon 28mm f/1.8 (love it!!)
Sigma 50mm f/1.4 Art (everything they say is true)
Nikon 70-200 f/4 VR (no complaints)
Tamron 90mm f/2.8 Macro (no complaints)
Sigma 400mm f/5.6 (kinda like an old dog, learned to shoot without VR, has worked well, but VR
would be nice)

To my way of thinking, I had two ways to proceed; fill some of the gaps in focal length or replace the aged telephoto. With these factors in mind, I narrowed the choice down to five lenses.

NIKON AFS 24-70 F/2.8E ED VR
NIKON AFS 24-70 F/2.8G ED
NIKON AFS 14-24MM F/2.8G ED
NIKON AFS 200-500 F/5.6E ED VR
NIKON AF-S 300MM F4 PF ED VR N with 1.4 teleconverter

I will say that the purchase has been made, but I am curious if others would have chosen as I have. It is should be said that I have developed a propensity to shoot a lot of nature themed images. I am trying to broaden my horizons toward landscapes with the odd candid thrown in. I am at a stage in my photography where I prefer excellent sharpness and resolution.

I would value your opinions......there is a return policy after all

[Manfred M]

Randy - I have had both the NIKON AFS 24-70 F/2.8G ED and the NIKON AFS 14-24MM F/2.8G ED for three or four years.

The 24-70mm G is really my "go to" lens for most of my shooting. I love the mid-range zooms and probably do about 2/3 of my shooting with it. I love it.

The new 24-70mm E is getting less than flattering reviews; it seems the older version is lighter and less expensive, but does not have VR (which I feel is unnecessary for the focal lengths on a FF body). DxO labs have given it scathing review.

http://www.dxomark.com/Reviews/AF-S-...DxOMark-scores

I also have the 14-24mm lens and it is more of a niche lens and I use it perhaps 5% of the time. It it a great lens for those wonderful ultra-wide shots; I've always been an ultra-wide lens "junky". It produces amazing shots but is a hard lens to use. That comment is not specific to this lens, but to ultra-wides in general; you need to cover off your foreground and middle ground really well in order to get a good shot. Moving it 1/2" in any direction can make the difference between an okay shot and a stunning shot. The other thing to think about is that you cannot put any filters on this lens; there are no filter threads The lens hood is permanently mounted on it too.

Bottom line is I love both lenses, but get more value out of the 24-70mm.

[Shadowman]

In order of first choice.
14-24MM although you may or may not use it that much.
200-500MM a bit more reach and a possibly more reliant lens than the Sigma (heard stories about compatibility issues).
24-70MM, you've got that range covered but why not.
300MM, maybe.

[rtbaum]

In order of first choice.
14-24MM although you may or may not use it that much.
200-500MM a bit more reach and a possibly more reliant lens than the Sigma (heard stories about compatibility issues).
24-70MM, you've got that range covered but why not.
300MM, maybe.

In regards to the Sigma, never a problem with compatibility; I think that is a Sigma/Canon thing. Shooting any telephoto is a challenge, without VR and slow focus by modern standards has been an interesting journey.

[pnodrog]

14-24mm as you don't have a wide angle lens. Mind you if only ever take birds in flight it will be no use what so ever.

[billtils]

Did you look at the Tamron 150-600mm? I have it on my D7100 crop format and a friend has one on his Canon 5D3 FF. We both love the lens.

[rtbaum]

I did not mention the fact that I am a little quirky. I quickly discounted the 24-70 VR because it was not that well received by reviews and it was considerably more costly. I have been shooting the Sigma 400 without VR for quite a while now and have as a result become pretty stable. I am confident that the non VR version will not be a problem. As John mentioned, I feel that I do have two stellar lenses within that range. Any 24-70 will have to wait until the next attack of NAS.

The 14-24 is real temptation, I envision sweeping mountainscapes set against colorful skies......Minnesota has no mountains.....we have corn, prairie, and dense piney woods. I just could not rationalize this lens at this time.

So it eventually came down to the 200-500 VR vs the 300 PF VR, I am a birder after all.

The 200-500 has been receiving good reviews, it has the image stabilization, it is sharp; the problem is....5 freaking pounds and very long at 500mm !!!! I can envision shooting an oriole in a cherry tree in front of the White House......and being tackled by secret service.

The 300 PF VR is an interesting lens. PF stands for Phase Fresnel. I had to do a bit of research on this one! As I understand it, as light passes through a lens, different wavelengths bend differentially and separate. A Fresnel lens has concentric rings etched on one side to redirect those back into position as it strikes the sensor. The practical benefit is that it results in a very sharp image with very little chromatic aberration....and 30% less weight and a smaller package. The con on this lens...VR has been a concern between 1/60 sec and 1/160 sec, plus the Fresnel produces some weird halo effects when pointed into strong light sources.

[rtbaum]

I took a chance on this one......I am quirky as I said......and went with the Nikon 300mm f/4 E PF VR and 1.4 teleconverter. My reasoning being that I prefer to walk afar when I am photographing wildlife. I need to lighten my load on my excursions and I can not justify buying a lens heavier than the Sigma 400 I have now.
I must say this is a very small, light telephoto, it does not come with a tripod ring and really doesn't need one. It is easily carried and I will appreciate that.
The preliminary results:


First target is always the dog Setting: dark room lit by single bulb heavily filtered
420mm, f/5.6, 1/15 sec, iso 3200 vr-on

It was after sunset before I got home and began testing, I dove in with the gnarliest situation that I could envision


chain lock 30' down a dark hallway reflecting light from fore-mentioned lamp
420mm, f/5.6, 1/6 sec, iso 3200 vr-on, monopod

I don't normally use a telephoto in situations this dark....so....Today, under grey skies


iso 3200, 420mm, f/5.6, 1/400 sec I could have sacrificed shutter speed for iso

iso 800, 420mm, f/8, 1/125 sec

iso 3200, 420mm, f/5.6, 1/200 sec

[Shadowman]

Some nice captures in this series.

[rtbaum]

Thank you, John. This is a cool lens, I really appreciate the VR and the light weight. The only nitpick thus far is that the AF is not real fast, but it gets you there. AF would not lock on in low light.....but maybe I am spoiled by the Sigma 50 f/1.4 Art

I can't wait for actual sunlight, might be awhile with rain, clouds, and snow for the foreseeable future.

[Manfred M]

the AF is not real fast, but it gets you there. AF would not lock on in low light

What AF mode are you using? I found that all my longer lenses tend to "seek" and focus slowly unless I use a single focus point. There seems to be too much material for them the decode if any of the multi-point focus modes are used.

[rtbaum]

What AF mode are you using? I found that all my longer lenses tend to "seek" and focus slowly unless I use a single focus point. There seems to be too much material for them the decode if any of the multi-point focus modes are used.

Hi, Manfred. I used both single point and center-weighted, but in all fairness...it was a very dark hallway and I was using the teleconverter. I was actually surprised that I was able to capture an image. I have this weird compulsion to test lenses in the worst situation possible, under the assumption that it will establish that point where the setup is better in the bag than around my neck.

[Shadowman]

Hi, Manfred. I used both single point and center-weighted, but in all fairness...it was a very dark hallway and I was using the teleconverter. I was actually surprised that I was able to capture an image. I have this weird compulsion to test lenses in the worst situation possible, under the assumption that it will establish that point where the setup is better in the bag than around my neck.

Does your particular teleconverter affect auto-focusing? I have a 2X that I use with my 70-300mm and when shooting at 300mm it does tend to search, vibrate, and hesitate. When I use LiveView it auto-focuses quickly, obviously different focusing system but very reliable.

[rtbaum]

Does your particular teleconverter affect auto-focusing? I have a 2X that I use with my 70-300mm and when shooting at 300mm it does tend to search, vibrate, and hesitate. When I use LiveView it auto-focuses quickly, obviously different focusing system but very reliable.

I am at a stage where I am familiarizing with the new lens and tele, the last time that I used one was 20 years ago. I am using the Nikon 1.4X version III; it does inhibit light, but under my normal shooting conditions should work pretty well. I am playing with trying a 2X, but feel intuitively that it will be a bit of a crap shoot as far as AF.

It should be noted that when I shoot birds, I usually depend on manual focus as much as AF. This lens is kind of neat in that it has three modes for focus: M, A/m, and a/M. I have been using A/m, which is Automatic priority with manual override. a/M is Manual priority with automatic override, this one is my next test as I can see the benefit of manually prefocussing for quicker shots in cluttered woodsy conditions.

[Shadowman]

I am at a stage where I am familiarizing with the new lens and tele, the last time that I used one was 20 years ago. I am using the Nikon 1.4X version III; it does inhibit light, but under my normal shooting conditions should work pretty well. I am playing with trying a 2X, but feel intuitively that it will be a bit of a crap shoot as far as AF.

It should be noted that when I shoot birds, I usually depend on manual focus as much as AF. This lens is kind of neat in that it has three modes for focus: M, A/m, and a/M. I have been using A/m, which is Automatic priority with manual override. a/M is Manual priority with automatic override, this one is my next test as I can see the benefit of manually prefocussing for quicker shots in cluttered woodsy conditions.

With the 2X teleconverter at 70mm it limits me to f/9 and at 300mm f/11, so there is that to contend with, but it allowed me to get extra reach until I decided if I wanted a new lens.