The dream kit wish list

[rioja]

Taking up photography and birds when I finished work, I have amazed myself how hooked I have become. I can loose myself for hours at a time.
I took a year to decide which pieces of kit I would buy and finally took the plunge and bought a D200 and 80-400 VR lens. I recently added a small lens for holiday snaps etc.
A friend has given me a cheap but reasonably effective tripod which has demonstrated the benefits of using one on occasion. It is, however, not suitable to carry around with the camera mounted as it is not sufficiently well made to risk !
The question I ask is this. Where would you go from here. Like everyone else I have become obsessed with the need for more and more detail and I haven't ruled out the purchase of a big prime lens such as the Nikon 600mm.
The costs involved are huge, but the return in hours of pleasure make it worthwhile even though I can't explain why I do it ! ( Why do we take photo's and what do we do with them ?!)
It's false economy buying make do kit, I want a big lens, a good tripod with quick release capable of holding a big lens, spotting binoculars and a bag for carrying it all !
What would you suggest and in what order would you add them to your kit. Lets say you have a budget of £4000 ( agh, frightening to even think about it ! ).
Having decided what to buy, where would you buy them ?
Is it cheaper to actually travel abroad and buy in Hong Kong or the USA ?
I have bought from Hong Kong via post for items up to £150 but I would be very wary of risking too much money on E Bay. I see obvious scams on big money lenses on a regular basis.
I look forward to hearing your dream list, but I am also interested in the opinion of those who already have the kit. Is a 600mm really the lens to aspire to or is it limited in practical terms because it's too heavy to carry around very far ?

[Doug Greenberg]

You have a lot of decisions to make here! First of all, be aware that Nikon is coming out with a new version of its 600mm. f4 supertele, one with an updated design that incorporates vibration reduction. The bad news is that 1) it will, certainly, be slow to reach the market, and when it does the professional photojournalists will undoubtedly get first crack at it; and 2) the price is definitively higher than your budget.

On the other hand, with every crisis comes opportunity: LOTS of photographers already are selling their 600mm. lenses in anticipation of the arrival of the new lens. You very well might be able to get a very good second-hand 600mm. AF-S lens at a price within your budget. But you may have to go through ebay or another resale agency/system to do this. You can avoid scams by being wary of "too good to be true" offers and listings that are set up to avoid the ebay system guidelines.

There are other alternatives, particularly if you wish to keep your expenses down. If optical quality is your primary consideration, you might think about getting an older MF 600mm lens. Yes, once upon a time all of us focused manually and we survived! I own three MF Nikon superteles, 400mm., 500mm, and 600mm f5.6, and all take superb photos. Would I rather own an AF-S high-tech model? Of course. But those prices are ridiculous.

Finally: yes, a 600mm lens is very large and heavy. There will be times you will NOT be happy about carrying it out into the field. If that's a major consideration then you might instead get a 500mm. f4 lens, which is smaller, lighter, and less expensive. If you add a top-quality 1.4x telextender you have a first-rate 700mm. f5.6 optic.

[Den]

Doug talks sense, but a 600mm gives you about 20% extra 'reach' and a beautiful bokeh behind the subject. You can pick up a good used 600mm f5.6 manual lens for £700 or less. I've still got the one I bought in 1980 and it is still crisp and contrasty. The older Nikon Ai IFED lenses have a wonderfully light manual focussing ring. I'd try to get one of these if funds don't run to a 600mm F4 auto lens. Even second hand, these are many thousands of pounds.
As for the rest of the kit, get the sturdiest tripod/head you can carry, you will be rewarded with sharp pics. VR is great for hand/monopod holding but a good tripod is worth its weight in gold. I for one will not be upgrading to the new 600mm VR as I seem to get rather sharp pics without!!! VR is great on monopods or handholding but not a lot of use on a tripod. It may be useful at very slow shutter speeds but birds have a habit of moving a bit, therefore negating the VR advantage quite a bit.
Here's a pic of my well-used kit. 600mm F4 on a D2Xs. Razor sharp lens, lightning autofocus, brilliant gimbal head. With any old 600mm, you will stop lusting for more magnification forever. You've got the perfect carry/hand hold/flight shot/holiday abroad lens in the 200-400 and getting a 500 will not satisfy you- I promise.

[Phil Bishop]

Bear in mind that if you get a big lens you will need a substantial tripod and head. For a 600mm you will need something like a full size Wimberly and a 5500 series Gitzo-thats about £1k taken care of. Even with carbon fibre its still a heavy tripod.
A 500mm weighs less and you can put it on a somewhat smaller tripod/head.

If you decide to go the manual route (and there are situations where af is more trouble than its worth) then consider the 500 F4P-the P means it is chipped and fully compatible with modern camera meters. I have used one of these for ten years now, and have never had any regrets even though it set me back over £3000 then.
Grays of Westminster currently lists one for £1200 and they also have suitable converters too.
http://www.graysofwestminster.co.uk/products/secondhand.php?cat1=3

If you run into bird photographers dont hesitate to have a chat-most of us are happy to talk and you will at least get an idea of how various pieces of kit handle . And its just possible that some may even let you use their stuff-many years ago at a twitch someone let me use my body on his 600mm. Most unexpected but a great gesture on his part.

[TBMike]

As already mentioned a high quality 1.4X TC and a sturdy tripod would be your next steps. I would also consider a monopod for field work.

[Steve Makin]

Dave remember me from Conway ?, that Sigma 300-800 is within your budget, I got mine from Warehouse Express but I've since seen it almost £500 cheaper at Pureley Gadgets (and I've since used them and the service is excellent)

If you recall its not an easy lens to either carry or indeed handle, its great in hides with a bean bag, but for field shots a better quality tripod and head is required.

And as with any big lens the depth of Field is minimal, the bigger the lens the thinner the depth of field for any given aperture, and while this is great for backgrounds it means that your focusing has to be spot on, my success rate is around one sharp shot in 10/20/30.

the 80-400 VR you are using is a good lens but from what I hear and read it is slow to focus and its never long enough (neither is the Sigma !) but the point I'm making is that you'll be swapping one set of problems for another, but at least you'll be closer to the birds :-)

I might well be able to make Conway sometime soon, maybe this saturday if you want to have a play with the lens ?, PM me to arrange and I'll see if I can make it over

oh, and you'll have to show me around the Great and Little Orme as well !

Steve

[pe'rigin]

Rioja,


I can fully understand your dilemma of where to go next, photography is compulsive; it’s like a disease you can’t pass a camera shop without sneaking in and having a play.


I think you have a good set-up already, what would I do in your shoes, would be to get another body, maybe the D300 and use in combination with the D200. Maybe purchase the 105 VR or 300mm 2.8 to use on the D200.

I have the 600mm, and its heavy, but there again I tend to position myself and wait and wait and wait. You can get cold, but people will always tell you that your turning blue.

The new 400mmVR is looking to be a lens and a half, but it would wipe out your budget, but I would look at it as a long-term investment. With this lens you’ll be mobile and its quick.

[rioja]

Thanks everyone for your views and opinions.Keep them coming, the more advice the less chance I'll make a big mistake.
I do find a problem with manual lenses though, perhaps because I wear varifocal glasses, so they are a no no I think.
Steve, I will PM you on the NWBF !

[K-Lex]

Tripod tripod tripod. You can spend thousands on a lens that gives you fabulous image quality and so on but you screw up the shot by camera shake, you may as well have stuck a potato on the mount. Don't make the same mistake I did and buy the Manfrotto 322RC2 head, it's a waste of time for birds and wildlife, dig deep and buy a Gimball type.

[paul goode]

Don't make the same mistake I did and buy the Manfrotto 322RC2 head, it's a waste of time for birds and wildlife, dig deep and buy a Gimball type.


And then put it on a Gitzo tripod.

[K-Lex]

And then put it on a Gitzo tripod.

Bingo!

[rioja]

Thanks again everyone. A tripod is definitely were I'll go next. I'll start researching them as I know virtually nothing !
Apparently you can put a converter on the 80-400 VR but you loose auto focus which would present me with problems. I'll buy my next lens with a teleconverter in mind.

[Rob Chace]

Thanks again everyone. A tripod is definitely were I'll go next. I'll start researching them as I know virtually nothing !
Apparently you can put a converter on the 80-400 VR but you loose auto focus which would present me with problems. I'll buy my next lens with a teleconverter in mind.

Buy a Kenko pro 300 1.4x & you will keep autofocus.

[Doug Greenberg]

Buy a Kenko pro 300 1.4x & you will keep autofocus.

But with any zoom, even a pretty good one like the 80-400mm., there will be a significant falloff in optical quality.

[pe'rigin]

Rioja,

On the tripod, I think you have to decide on whether you wish to be mobile or partly limited with maybe the new 500mm VR. A good head and stand will set you back close to £1000. You'll definitely need one for the 600mm, unless your superman or Nigel Blake.

My reasoning for the 400mmVR F2.8 is that over the next few years the new sensors will get better, replicating the image quality of fine transparency films from the past. With luck limiting the need for these super telephotos for the enthusiasts market.

[rioja]

I have started looking at tripods.... it's a jungle !!!!
I have decided it will probably be 12 months before I buy the lens, the tripod comes first.
I believe that using a teleconverter looses light so the biggest aperture the better. Correct ?
I have also started thinking seriously ( thanks to comments given here )that the 600mm may well be a bit on the heavy side. Although the 80-400mm is great for going walkabout, I am finding that I am prepared to wait ( and wait, and wait) as never before. Consequently the bigger lens is intended for more static use.There are still occasions though were you have to reach your hide etc and weight will be an issue.
I suppose a prime 400mm with a 2x converter would be almost as good as a 600mm on it's own ?
What about the 500mm ? Nice size but what converter can I get away with without too much quality loss.
Given that one of the latter two lenses will be my choice which tripod do I go for.
Gitzo have a list as long as your arm ?
Is the Gimball head still the best type for such a smaller lens.
Thanks in anticipation for your advice, it makes very interesting reading. I will be off line for a few days but look forward to hearing anymore views.
regards
Dave

[K-Lex]

Tripods are a minefield and you very much get what you pay for. There is no substitute for having a play with them all and choosing from there. ALWAYS make sure you get a tripod that extends to head height without using the central column extension. If you use the extending column, you're effectively turning it into a glorified monopod and doesn't give it much stability. I've sawed my central column off so I'm never tempted to use it. In the shop, put the legs at silly angles and different heights and give it a push. If it falls over (provided of course you're not trying to defy the laws of physics), walk away and buy another one. I've never spent less than £200 on a new tripod and head - money well spent. Tripods always seem to shrink in the field. Simple rule, the heavier the better but a good carbon fibre one will stand it's ground with the best of the heavy ones. Gimball head isn't necessary for smaller lenses, but I wouldn't go out and buy a seperate head for smaller lenses if I used a gimball for longer ones. I use a Manfrotto 055ProB tripod which is good, but there are better ones. You can't go far wrong with Gitzo.
Yes that is correct about teleconverters. A 1.4x converter on say a 200mm f4 lens would make it a 280mm f5.6. A 2x converter would make the same lens a 400mm f8 but you would likely lose AF and much more image quality. No a 400mm prine with a 2x converter won't even be in the same league as a 600mm. There will be a noticable difference in quality, however there will be a similar difference in your wallet! A fast 400mm with a 1.4x TC would still have inferior image quality by comparison but then a fast (f2.8) 400mm Canon lens (not sure about Nikon) costs around £4000 and a fast 600mm lens costs nearer £7000. The little drop in quality you'd get doesn't, to me, equate to nearly 3 thousand quid. You don't need a f2.8 400mm though, an f4 or f5.6 will be MUCH cheaper and not a million miles deficient quality wise.
A fast 600mm lens would require the arms of Arnold Schwarzenegger or a medium sized family hatchback to carry around for any length of time!
A 500mm should take a 1.4x converter without to much fuss. I never advocate using a 2x converter - you lose too much light, quality and functions.

Best of luck with your shopping list!