Best and cheapest tele-lens solution for raptors in migration (1 Viewer)

Hi all, I would like your ideas please. I have Nikon D800 and D7100 and use them with the older AF-S 300F4 with teleconverter 1.4ii. (I also have the af-s 80-400VR). I would like a bit more reach for migrating raptors that I'm expecting to see in Japan later this month. As I already have 420mm on full frame, I am thinking about getting the 1.7 teleconverter. I just don't know if the loss in resolution would disappoint me. So I'm wondering between getting it, the Nikkor 1.7 TC vs Tamron or Sigma 150-600. I know many would say to include the Nikkor 200-500 but t's just 80mm more than what I have. The 80-400 is a nice zoom for walking around with for other days. I must also say that my wife said that the 500 or 600 F4s are NOT to be considered.

Stoop, it's the age old question - how to get more reach, better, for less :eek!:

I will leave FF vs APS-C deliberations to you, as you would have a good handle on that, and let you know of my solution, since I am in a similar sort of boat.

I use the Nikon D7100 and Tamron 150-600mm f6.3 with a Black Rapid Sling as an all purpose rig with lots of walking around (never tripod). I can highly recommend the setup (within its limitations) and especially the sling - walking around is what gives me great joy o

I always shoot in 1.3x in-camera crop mode (it gives 1 extra fps, and much needed reach). You can check out some results in my user gallery. I have many more shots to post after I wade through the processing, as I've only just passed the 10,000 shot learning curve. All things considered, it's probably a genuine 1150mm 35mm equivalent at full stretch and mostly it stays there, though in maybe 10% of conditions a raptor will co-operate and I can zoom back in, and there's maybe another 10% where good lighting and distance planets align where I can zoom back in to 500mm (~950mm eq), or less.

I will leave you to research the Tammy vs Siggy Contemporary question, and just give you what I have found with the Tammy.

1. The closer the distance, the better the result.
2. There will be unit to unit variation, mine seems pretty average.
3. According to the test sites, stopping down from f6.3 to f8 at 600mm helps. I try and do this at longer distances, but for small birds close in will open up, unless the background and light allows me to stay stopped down.
4. Likewise the last 50mm at the limits of the tele end seem softer, so where possible I throttle back to 500mm.
5. I seem to have settled on single point focusing as the way to go in all but the brightest of light and zoomed back, where the 3-D tracking mostly keeps up.
6. With the D7100, AF is great for the first 4 frames in a burst, and then the limited buffer kicks in and the rig audibly chugs away making staying on the bird a bit harder. It helps not to get too excited and refrain until the distance and aspect (for exposure/lighting) of the bird is optimal before unleashing a continual burst.
7. I have always liked zoom setups as a framing and composition tool, and this rig is really handy and lots of fun to shoot.
8. The VR gives some ridiculously good results sometimes, but a bit of experimentation around your preferred shutter speed is worthwhile to see where the best results lie with your own particular frequency of shaking.

I have a mate who shoots Canon 7DMarkII with a 300mm f2.8 and 2x TC. You wouldn't think that extra 1/2 stop of light would make that much difference, but combined with the quality of that glass, and better, more experienced technique (and often a tripod) the difference can be slightly depressing at times, producing sharpness that I'm very jelly of. At other times I've got the gems, but generally it runs 80-20 his way. His missus shoots a 400mm f5.6, and generally I have the wood on her, but it can be closer to 50-50 close in, with techniques and tripods making bigger differences.

Sadly, and oddly, Nikon has not deemed fit to send its 300mm f2.8 on a diet yet??? If you don't mind the extra 600grams (over what it could be - Canon weight) it might be an option. Or use a Tammy or Siggy until they do lighten it up -- surely that can't be far away? - all the rest of the range has been to 1800Jenny ! :-O


Hope this helps, Chosun :gh:

Basically what chosun said with the exception of after having had both the Tamron and Sigma i would go for the Sigma C,if you add the dock and change the OS to active i found its in a different league.

Narrow it down to one of those and research the situation

Here is a review of the Nikon 200-500 VR,
it's rated as the best "budget" supertele-zoom and also gives good result with TC14III
better than both sigma and tamrons alternatives.
review in swedish but there are a lot of image examples.
(or try google translate)

https://www.cyberphoto.se/info.php?article=200500vr

The 300/4 AF-S is good lens but adding the 1.7x TC on a 24MP APS-C sensor
will probably not gain much, if any, in resolution.
AF will also be slower with the aperture loss.

Looks like you have plenty to consider here Stoop! The Siggy vs Tammy vs Nikon. The Nikon 200-500 wasn't out when I got the Tam, so didn't figure in the equation - don't know which way I would have jumped (but ~1350mm at f8 with decent iq would have been handy . The Nikon is in the ballpark weight and cost wise, and will also take a 1.4xTC, which I believe the other two do as well. Good test info of the 3 lenses compared here (also the Siggy Sport and 80-400 too): https://photographylife.com/reviews/nikon-200-500mm-f5-6e-vr

The author says a Siggy Sport would be his pick over all of them though. Perhaps that may be an option if you keep the 80-400 for walking around. Note the sample variation even in the Nikon. It sounds like the actual individual unit you purchase could be as important as which one of the 3(4). Can you try before you buy?

One other very important thing to consider is what body to put them on FF or APS-C not just in terms of reach, and subject isolation, but probably more importantly in terms of image quality, and AF performance. Shooting the FF D800 in DX mode is like an in-camera crop - I will let you crunch the numbers to see if cropping that further (to equalise the final 35mm eq lengths) gives you more final pixels on the subject vs the final from the 1.3x in-camera crop of the APS-C D7100 (15.4MP? from memory).


Chosun :gh:

Thanks for your advice everyone. To be honest, I have just been checking comparisons between the Sigma, Tamron and Nikon big zooms and my head's a mess. I have tried the 1.4TC on the 80-400 with the D800 and wasn't impressed so I'm suspicious about tele converters on big zooms. I realised I should try it with the D7100. (maybe next weekend on gulls) The raptor migration will occur in Japan near the end of September and I just want raptors overhead so shouldn't need to worry much about backgrounds. I'm waiting for Nikon to announce a 400 f4 PF, which will probably happen a day after I spend my money. Thanks again, Russell.

After going through the same dilemma myself, I wound up going with the Sigma 150-600 Contemporary after renting it and the Nikon 200-500 and comparing the two lenses side-by-side. They're both very good lenses, but they were so close optically that I picked the Sigma because it was lighter, cheaper, and had a larger zoom range. I think there is a good bit of sample variation among all of these lenses, as the Sigma I wound up buying was actually even a bit sharper than the one I rented. I wound up taking the Sigma and the D500 to the Galapagos, and had no regrets.

Here's a set of comparison shots I took comparing the two lenses; I tested them on both the D810 and D5500, and also threw in a few comparison shots with the 300mm f/4E PF and the 500mm f/4D AF-S II for good measure: https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B4M7Ie_2T_HgZ0tBcjg3eUozd0E

Lastly, since you mentioned the 80-400, I did previously use that lens with the D7100, and later the D810. It's also a very good lens without a teleconverter, but I found it very unimpressive as you did with the 1.4x TC. The Sigma is a lot better at 600mm f/8 than the 80-400 ever was at 560mm, at any aperture.

Thank you everyone. I am leaning towards the Sigma 150-600 C and have been thinking about picking one up this weekend, but a minute ago, I found Tamron have just announced or will announce a replacement for their 150-600. No peace.

Stoop - true ! 2nd gen Tammy announced, and should be available in Japan 'later in the month' ..... https://www.dpreview.com/news/6044873650/tamron-announces-2nd-generation-sp-150-600mm-di-vc-usd-g2

Curiouser and curiouser ! :cat:

Apparently lots and lots of nice doo-dads, and sharper too, though optical changes only go to 1 extra element. MTF curve shows handy increments, though it remains to be seen if it is a sharpness game changer in this class. Better AF and purpose built TC's for that extra bit of fun AF at f8 with the 1.4x where supported.

The other part of the equation which surely can't be that far off (can it? is a lighter (<2.4kg) 300mm f2.8 FL ....... this would have to be the superior option with a 2xTC, considering all the options, and even if a 400mm f4 PF does materialise (cost would be close?).

Good luck ! (how long can those raptors wait for migration again?! :-O


Chosun :gh:

Now I think I will wait for more announcements.Thanks for your input everyone. Maybe I will just get a D500 and use my 80-400 on crop

stoop said:

Now I think I will wait for more announcements.Thanks for your input everyone. Maybe I will just get a D500 and use my 80-400 on crop

Click to expand...

Stoop,
I think that's a good way to go. The D500 will be a big improvement over your existing cameras in terms of AF and with 4k video you'll be able to pull acceptable frames for id purposes.
The new Tamron does look interesting but the tele zooms AF slows at the long end. I've got the old Sigma, the Nikon 80-400, Nikon 200-500 and the older and new Nikon 300/4 afs - with teles.
The Cropping ability of the new Nikons is very good. I shot this Common Kingfisher yesterday with the D5 and new 300/4 afs PF lens (no Crop in-camera). Acceptable for id purposes. The D500 would get you in a bit tighter with the same AF and megapixels.
You'll love it.
Neil.
Hong Kong,
September 2016

And form all the reports I've seen the D500 elevates the sigma or Tamron to another level. If you get the 500 I would learn the camera with the lens you know defore investing in new glass. Having said that it looks like the new Tamron is going to be the best in the group if they can avoid the initial problems they had with the first one..
Steve

Hi everyone. I started this thread so I thought I better finish it. Thanks for all the feedback...I was gonna get the Sigma C, then new tamron G2, then D500 but had a rush of blood and got the Nikkor 200-500. It was more than a grand cheaper than the D500 and I wacked it on the D7100. I went to the mountains today for the raptor migration at Yamamotto Mountain, Ojiya, Niigata, Japan and it was.....FOGGY!!! Anyway...a good test for the setup and I'm happy. Very difficult to get good exposures in the mist but I worked on some for my blog and have attached them to this post...Oriental Honey Buzzard and Grey-faced Buzzard (eagle). A bit noisy but it was very dark. I will have one more try tomorrow and might put it on the D800. I hope the light will be better. Cheers, Russell

Don't forget that when comparing MTF charts for lenses, there is a big difference at the extreme right hand side - this equates to the outer edges of the image. The mtf charts always show a big drop in sharpness at the outer edges. In other words, crop sensor cameras (D500, D7200 etc) only use the centre of the lens. Therefore most long lenses perform 'better' on a crop sensor camera.
Mike

stoop said:

Hi everyone. I started this thread so I thought I better finish it. Thanks for all the feedback...I was gonna get the Sigma C, then new tamron G2, then D500 but had a rush of blood and got the Nikkor 200-500. It was more than a grand cheaper than the D500 and I wacked it on the D7100. I went to the mountains today for the raptor migration at Yamamotto Mountain, Ojiya, Niigata, Japan and it was.....FOGGY!!! Anyway...a good test for the setup and I'm happy. Very difficult to get good exposures in the mist but I worked on some for my blog and have attached them to this post...Oriental Honey Buzzard and Grey-faced Buzzard (eagle). A bit noisy but it was very dark. I will have one more try tomorrow and might put it on the D800. I hope the light will be better. Cheers, Russell

Click to expand...

You should be happy with this lens.
Neil.

Thanks Neil. I am happy with it after I get use to the weight. I took it out on a Saturday with the D800 and took over 1300 shots of Whiskered Terns which were an extremely rare visitor to Niigata, (Japan). I felt tired handholding it after a few hours and elected to take the D7100 with AF-S 80-400mm VR the next day. On average, although I got a lot of misses with both setups, I think I got better shots with the D800 and 200-500 because I got more at a closer range. Some results are on my blog: https://russelljenkinsstoop.blogspot.jp/2016/10/whiskered-terns-in-niigata.html
To be honest although focussing can be difficult at times I was surprised with the clarity. I have worked on the shots just a little.