Nikon Tele-Photo Lenses On a Budget

paulrpaulr Posts: 1,176Member
edited March 2016 in Nikon Lenses
Having just come back from The Photographic show in Birmingham UK and spending over an hour on the Nikon Stand using the super long telephoto lenses 400mm to 800mm I was amazed how the new technology had improved, especially the auto focus on the long lenses. However at 5 figure prices I could not justify spending that sort of money.
So what was the alternative, Prime 300mm 400mm with two times converter or looking at Nikon manual old AIS lenses.
For over 3 months I have watched the internet market and finally acquired a 800 5.6 Ed Ais lens. Ok its manual but the optics are still unbelievable, I look forward to using this lens and if that fails I pull out my little P900 and get 2000mm
I beginning to think long but at an affordable price.

800mmLens
Post edited by paulr on
Camera, Lens and Tripod and a few other Bits

Comments

  • spraynprayspraynpray Posts: 6,491Moderator
    I was there too Paul. For me the star of the show was the 200-500. Very nice indeed.
    Always learning.
  • paulrpaulr Posts: 1,176Member
    Yes, it's a great lens Nikon told me that the technical data they got from making the 800 mm AIS lens helped develop the latest 200-400 lens, I have to say the autofocus even in low light was blazing fast on the FL 800 I think the guys using this lens with the D5 are going to get some incredible sport shots.
    Camera, Lens and Tripod and a few other Bits
  • donaldejosedonaldejose Posts: 3,417Member
    I have thought about getting one of the manual focus super telephotos but was afraid I would only be successful using it on a sleeping animal!
  • paulrpaulr Posts: 1,176Member
    They are not easy to use, but the focus zoom is very smooth on the 800mm AIS and like any manual lens you get used to it.A Good tripod is the answer, but at under a £1000 for the lens I will struggle on to get shots other photographers cannot get.
    The FOV on this lens is truly incredible.
    Camera, Lens and Tripod and a few other Bits
  • CaMeRaQuEsTCaMeRaQuEsT Posts: 357Member
    Didn't Nikon offer an AF conversion service for this lens back in the days? Also, I believe that there is a TC14 that is able to AF by itself, thus making any manual focus lens you put in front of it an AF lens. BTW, you got quite the bargain there!
  • heartyfisherheartyfisher Posts: 3,185Member
    edited March 2016
    Its the TC-16A and it needs some mod to work with DSLR... I think the AF range is quite limited too ... still better than none :-)
    Post edited by heartyfisher on
    Moments of Light - D610 D7K S5pro 70-200f4 18-200 150f2.8 12-24 18-70 35-70f2.8 : C&C very welcome!
    Being a photographer is a lot like being a Christian: Some people look at you funny but do not see the amazing beauty all around them - heartyfisher.

  • haroldpharoldp Posts: 984Member
    I would not want to give up AF, but after wanting VR on long lenses, with the 400/2.8, I find myself always on a tripod w/ gimbal head and faster than 1/1000 sec. and I turn VR off.

    Had I known, I might have bought the last pre VR version which is just as good optically and saved a bundle.
    D810, D3x, 14-24/2.8, 50/1.4D, 24-70/2.8, 24-120/4 VR, 70-200/2.8 VR1, 80-400 G, 200-400/4 VR1, 400/2.8 ED VR G, 105/2 DC, 17-55/2.8.
    Nikon N90s, F100, F, lots of Leica M digital and film stuff.

  • framerframer Posts: 491Member
    I looked for over two years to find the right 400 f/2.8 and settled on the AF-s II NON VR model. It weighs the least of the non VR models. I found I use it more and for different things than originally purchased. Buying a used lens at a great price you could sell for at or more than you paid.

    If then the 200-500 had been around I might have considered it; however, f/2.8 can't be beat if you need the speed.

    framer
  • PB_PMPB_PM Posts: 4,493Member
    On a budget the older AF-S 300mm F4D IF-ED with a TC14E II is also a good choice. Not as fast or light as the PF version, but the optical quality is great and no PF related issues for shooting backlit scenes.
    If I take a good photo it's not my camera's fault.
  • DJBee49DJBee49 Posts: 133Member
    I agree with haroldp fwith reference to long lenses.

    I am almost always using shutter speeds faster than 1/1000 and am usually on a tripod with gimbal head. The only lenses that I use VR on are my 16-35 and 24-120 because I use them both as 'walk around' lenses when I do not normally carry a tripod. With my experience on 300mm (pre-VR f4 and f2,8 VR) and 500mm f4 VR lenses, I would not shell out for VR again but buy the pre-VR versions. I am considering a 600mm pre-VR for this very reason at the moment!
  • snakebunksnakebunk Posts: 991Member
    @paulr: Congratulations! Nice buy.
  • paulrpaulr Posts: 1,176Member
    edited March 2016
    Thanks snake bunk,I am now looking for a Sherpa to help carry this lightweight on average with camera ,lens serious tripod and gimbal head coming in at 10kg.
    Cannot find a suitable lens bag at 25inch length, they are hard to find.
    Post edited by paulr on
    Camera, Lens and Tripod and a few other Bits
  • snakebunksnakebunk Posts: 991Member
    I am no good at inches but I think this bag will work for you:
    http://store.lowepro.com/backpacks/lens-trekker-600-aw-iii
  • paulrpaulr Posts: 1,176Member
    edited March 2016
    Thanks snakebunk, I am On the case, has to take 55cm without body 16.3 Front glass good job it has internal filters
    Post edited by paulr on
    Camera, Lens and Tripod and a few other Bits
  • jdbjdb Posts: 32Member
    edited March 2016
    I've wanted a super telephoto lens for the last 20 years to photograph birds and after trying many other combinations finally purchased a used Nikkor 500 f/4! And somewhat on a budget. I purchased a first generation AFS, pre-VR version for about $3,300 and am extremely happy with it! I don't think I'd ever be able to afford the new version at $9,000, but honestly don't think I need it anyway. For birding you need a very fast shutter speed because birds are always moving and twitching so VR isn't going to help most of the time. I've mostly been using it on a monopod, occasionally on a tripod and even a few times on a beanbag on the windowsill of my car.

    I started out in the mid 1990's with a Nikkor 300 f/4 (pre AFS) version. It was sharp, but focused pretty slowly and didn't take a teleconverter very well. Just a few years ago I purchased a used Nikkor 300 f/2.8, AFS, pre-VR version. This lens worked pretty well with a 1.4 TC, and occasionally I got decent results with the 2.0 TC. This is another good "budget" option. Both these were sold to help finance my 500, and while I haven't been able to use it a lot, I'm very happy with the results so far and would highly recommend checking out some of the super telephoto lenses on the used market.
    Barred Owl
    Post edited by jdb on
    D600, D7100, 300 f/2.8 AF-S, 300 f/4 ED-IF, 16-35 f/4 VR, 105 f/2.8 AF-S VR, 70-300 f/4.5-5.6 VR, 24-85 f/3.5-4.5 VR, 85 f/1.8D, 50 f/1.4D, 80-200 f/2.8 AF, 20 f/3.5 AI, TC 1.4 II, TC 2.0 III
  • manhattanboymanhattanboy Posts: 1,003Member
    The best budget telephoto has been the D7000 series line (eg 7100 or 7200). Being able to shoot at 2x focal length is awesome and allows for shorter primes to be used. I have never shot with the exotics so defer to others opinion. Personally I would not want something that requires a tripod so requiring one is a non starter for me.
  • snakebunksnakebunk Posts: 991Member
    @manhattanboy: Actually you can crop images from any digital camera ;)
  • IronheartIronheart Posts: 3,017Moderator
    But you can't crop 24 mp out of just any camera :)
  • haroldpharoldp Posts: 984Member
    You can out of A D800/810, or Canon 5s, or Sony A7r.Crop formats do not of themselves give you 'reach'. Higher pixel density can, if the lens and holding technique are up to it.
    D810, D3x, 14-24/2.8, 50/1.4D, 24-70/2.8, 24-120/4 VR, 70-200/2.8 VR1, 80-400 G, 200-400/4 VR1, 400/2.8 ED VR G, 105/2 DC, 17-55/2.8.
    Nikon N90s, F100, F, lots of Leica M digital and film stuff.

  • WestEndFotoWestEndFoto Posts: 3,675Member
    But if you are on a budget, what lens is likely to be sharp enough to crop without losing resolution?
  • haroldpharoldp Posts: 984Member

    But if you are on a budget, what lens is likely to be sharp enough to crop without losing resolution?

    You are right, this is equally a problem whether you are cropping with a smaller sensor, or in PP.
    D810, D3x, 14-24/2.8, 50/1.4D, 24-70/2.8, 24-120/4 VR, 70-200/2.8 VR1, 80-400 G, 200-400/4 VR1, 400/2.8 ED VR G, 105/2 DC, 17-55/2.8.
    Nikon N90s, F100, F, lots of Leica M digital and film stuff.

  • IronheartIronheart Posts: 3,017Moderator
    haroldp said:

    You can out of A D800/810, or Canon 5s, or Sony A7r.Crop formats do not of themselves give you 'reach'. Higher pixel density can, if the lens and holding technique are up to it.

    You can't get a 24MP DX sized crop out of a D8x0. It's like trying pull 10lbs of gold out a 5lb brick...
  • WestEndFotoWestEndFoto Posts: 3,675Member
    Ironheart said:

    haroldp said:

    You can out of A D800/810, or Canon 5s, or Sony A7r.Crop formats do not of themselves give you 'reach'. Higher pixel density can, if the lens and holding technique are up to it.

    You can't get a 24MP DX sized crop out of a D8x0. It's like trying pull 10lbs of gold out a 5lb brick...
    You should figure that out Ironheart. It would make you insanely wealthy!
Sign In or Register to comment.