• Welcome to BirdForum, the internet's largest birding community with thousands of members from all over the world. The forums are dedicated to wild birds, birding, binoculars and equipment and all that goes with it.

    Please register for an account to take part in the discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.
ZEISS DTI thermal imaging cameras. For more discoveries at night, and during the day.

equipment advice (1 Viewer)

R

Ray Guilfoyle

Member
I am just starting out on the DSLR bird photography route and would appreciate comments or any advice on the following possible equipment choices. I have shortlisted three possible options which fit into the monies available and put them into what I consider order of best option. I already own a decent tripod and head set up. Once again any advice would be appreciated.

1) Nikon D90 with Nikon 80-400mm F4.5-5.6 AF VR lens plus Kenko Pro 300 1.4 converter.

2) Nikon D90 with a Sigma 150-500mm F5-6.3 DG OS HSM ( with image stab)

3) Nikon D90 with a Sigma 50-500mm F4-6.3 EX DG lens ( no image stab)
 
Could I offer a 4th choice such as the D90 and a 300/4 & 1.4tc or this slightly over budget? You may want to look at the D5000 as well and may save a few pounds.

My daughter has a D90 and its a very nice body and performs very well, I can't comment on the zooms though
 
Steve's right, don't go for those Sigma lenses or the 80-400. The former, and sorry all owners out there please don't shoot me for telling the truth isn't the best quality wise; only today I had a user write to me about that 50-500 saying that it wasn't that sharp. Sigma are great lenses for the price and great value for money BUT if you want quality and have the wedge for it then it has to be Nikon. But that 80-400 is an old VR and hunts a lot, very slow. Good quality though. Agree with Steve, with the D90 crop and a 3oomm lens and 1.4 you will have full framers if that is what you are after.
 
I use the D90 with Sigma 150-500 + Sigma TC 1.4x DG and am quite pleased. Search the Nikon forum for my thread on using this kit. Just understand even a 500-700mm focal length is not that much for most large birds beyond 40-50m unless you are photographing big game. Small birds demands you be under 20m or less.

If you think you will be at longer distances, you might want to look into digiscoping with a fieldscope and pocket digicam where focal lengths tend to go from 2000mm to 5000mm.

Lastly, if you are just starting out down the dslr path you may also want to consider the new Pentax K-7. It has several VERY useful features for the birder and is amazingly small and lightweight, not to mention more robust build quality and weather proofing.

cheers,
Rick
 
Andy and Steve said it all .
If you have the cash - then 300 F/4 +TC is the best combo . ( A prime lens is ALWAYS better ) .
BUT - I would suggest another very good option that has not been mentioned :
Tamron 200-500 .Same category as the Sigma , about the same price , and in my opinion - it gives the best value for the money . It has it's drawbacks - just like any other zoom lens, but it is still a cracking lens. I have used it on a d70 and a D300 - great results .
 
Just for the record I photograph a lot of small birds here in the UK and not just "big game" so am well aware of the distances involved. Fieldcraft, not gear, is the key to always getting close enough. All of my work on my website, which is uncropped and on a full frame sensor, has been with a 600mm or less so it can be done, that is why we were recommending smaller gear.
 
Agree, it's to easy to crop a small image, it's so much more satisfying to get images that fill the frame, it may be constraints in time and location that mean I don't always achieve it but it always at the front of my mind when out n about. For those that know me fieldcraft when you my size has a whole new meaning;) it's like trying to hide a castle behind a small bush.......
 
Andy Rouse said:
Steve's right, don't go for those Sigma lenses or the 80-400. The former, and sorry all owners out there please don't shoot me for telling the truth isn't the best quality wise; only today I had a user write to me about that 50-500 saying that it wasn't that sharp. Sigma are great lenses for the price and great value for money BUT if you want quality and have the wedge for it then it has to be Nikon. But that 80-400 is an old VR and hunts a lot, very slow. Good quality though. Agree with Steve, with the D90 crop and a 3oomm lens and 1.4 you will have full framers if that is what you are after.
Click to expand...


It's really rewarding to get close enough to get a full frame image (essential for a pro like Andy!), but a decent mid-length lens will still give decent results and working on technique and fieldcraft to get closer (ok, perhaps not much use for birds out on water unless you've got a wetsuit!). All this does depend on your own sense of image quality though, what might be ok for me may well be somewhat dire for others!

You're absolutely right Andy, the Sigma really isn't all that - I have one but don't use it often, I get better results with my Nikon 70-300mm VR lens even when cropped to the same level. If you can live without VR Ray, then a 300mm f/4 prime with a 1.4x teleconverter is a stellar combination, capable of capturing incredible amounts of detail. I use one a lot around my garden and it really is superb. Personally I find VR a huge advantage when shooting handheld, so tend to use the 70-300VR on walks (the lens is more flexible for landscapes and close up insect work too) but it's pretty short and doesn't have the superb clarity that the prime does (only to be expected).

The Kenko teleconverter you list is a good choice, I use one with my 300mm f/4 and its effects are minimal. I really wouldn't use one on a lens slower than f/4 though as you'll lose af, and if you use a lens with screw-drive AF then the AF speed becomes pretty slow - my old 300mm prime is pretty slow focusing anyway and with the teleconverter fitted becomes almost unusable. Ok for static subjects but using it with moving subjects is extremely hit and miss!
 
Last edited:
I know what you mean about fieldcraft Duke - I'm not a small guy either and it can be tricky to creep up on birds but I don't do too badly for a newbie. Sometimes you don't need to though if you pick the right subject - I befriended a young Robin and managed to get some photographs of it using a 90mm macro lens!

Just goes to show, although a lot of the time the longer the lens the better you don't 'always' need a huge artillery piece to get close, detailed shots if you have patience. :t:
 

Attachments

  • DSC_8329_LR_BF.jpg
    DSC_8329_LR_BF.jpg
    223.8 KB · Views: 69
that's a cracking shot I did a similar session with a Nikon 85/1.8 last year on my Starlings in the garden, its quite satisfying using a shot lens
 
Many thanks to all who have replied to my request. As a complete novice all the advice and experience you have inparted has been gratefully recieved. I am leaning towards the 300 prime lens with a 1.4 converter. Once again guys many thanks.
 
would agree with the others, if you plan on staying with the birding then buy the best glass your wallet will handle,,

the quality will long be enjoyed after the price is forgotten,,

Derry
 
Duke Leto said:
that's a cracking shot I did a similar session with a Nikon 85/1.8 last year on my Starlings in the garden, its quite satisfying using a shot lens
Click to expand...

It really is - nothing like getting really close to birds. I find it really fascinating looking at the really small details... I never realised that the ring around the eye is actually made of tiny feathers, I thought it was thickened skin or something.
 
On the advice of many here I just bought the 300mm+x1.4 on a D300 and so far it is magic. I'm still learning with it and I'd even say that the straight 300mm (without TC) is enough for many situations. If you can do it go for the prime. Having said that I went for four years with a D70 and Tamron 200-500 (better than the Sigma) and I was very happy!!!!! See my gallery.... Good luck. SBM



Fozzybear said:
It really is - nothing like getting really close to birds. I find it really fascinating looking at the really small details... I never realised that the ring around the eye is actually made of tiny feathers, I thought it was thickened skin or something.
Click to expand...
 
Warning! This thread is more than 15 years ago old.
It's likely that no further discussion is required, in which case we recommend starting a new thread. If however you feel your response is required you can still do so.

Similar threads

W
Considering a Partial Camera Upgrade - D500 w/ 200-500mm lens
2
Replies
34
Views
4K
BriLee
B
shrek48
D7200 + sigma + TC ?
Replies
3
Views
736
gerald762
gerald762
P
Advice for getting back into bird photography - Camera and Zoom lens
Replies
7
Views
1K
MelospizaMelodiaFan
MelospizaMelodiaFan
B
Advice please
2 3
Replies
49
Views
3K
PaulCountyDurham
P
J
Lens advice please
Replies
6
Views
1K
justabirdwatcher
J

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Back
Top