-
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.
The Old Which lens question (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter karpman
- Start date
karpman
Well-known member
Hey guys,
Spoke to dave123 his photos are a real inspiration to me, Looking at the 170-500mm as most likely option at the moment, Would be looking to add a 300 f4 at some point too.
Looked at the 135-400 how did it perform jaff as reviews are mixed at best.
cheers
karpman
P.s hopefully will have new lens by next week.
pps. how did ya find the 70-300mm Ed i kinda like it but feel i need more now as always lol.
Spoke to dave123 his photos are a real inspiration to me, Looking at the 170-500mm as most likely option at the moment, Would be looking to add a 300 f4 at some point too.
Looked at the 135-400 how did it perform jaff as reviews are mixed at best.
cheers
karpman
P.s hopefully will have new lens by next week.
pps. how did ya find the 70-300mm Ed i kinda like it but feel i need more now as always lol.
I'm not a Nikon user, but have the Tokina 80-400mm zoom on my Canon 450D (mainly because it was the lens that was within my budget at the time).
I've been pleased with the majority of shots I've taken with it so far, so it gets a :t: from me.
Richard
EDIT - Too late, see you've already made your choice!!!!
I've been pleased with the majority of shots I've taken with it so far, so it gets a :t: from me.
Richard
EDIT - Too late, see you've already made your choice!!!!
Last edited:
karpman
Well-known member
Yup could not agree more, Second hand market just seems a little dry for nikon at the moment, And the ones that are there are fetching a premium over there other make counterparts.
Theres a few lenses i'm watching at the moment and im dead struck on £300 i have made my limit and am going to stick to it without P+P that is though lol
I also back my self into a rut a little as a lens i am watching and want to buy don't end until sunday so will miss some possible options in the mean time:-C
Thanks for putting me on the right track though guys sure is a minefield.
karpman
Jaff
Registered Member
Well as with all these lenses the phrase 'good for the money' is often bandied around. Their performance is good but not great, certainly not in the same bracket as the more expensive lenses, like the 300f4 that you couldn't afford.
My recommendation is always think about the places you go to and how close the birds come and what kind of shots your after and work from there. Reach isn't everything you know, you learn to implement better fieldcraft to compensate. For example if you choose the Sigma 170-500mm then you'll get best results with plenty of support, like a tripod or if you're in a hide then consider a bean bag. Alternatively if you like walking around places and taking opportunities as they come then the 70-300mm VR is a nice walkabout lens and you can have a go for some nice flight shots, something that is possible with the Sigma but you may get a low hit rate that leaves you frustrated. As the saying goes, horses for courses, what lens is right for somebody else may not be the right one for you so give it some thought. Oh and if you bring up Tim Taylor's profile and go to his website he has a page full of places that sell s/h camera equip. Worth a look, although some of the sites might be old and in dire need of updating. Always check with the phone first.
This is probably my favourite picture I took with the 70-300mm ED
http://www.birdforum.net/gallery/showphoto.php/photo/148551/ppuser/42340
That's as much as I can offer. Don't step on a mine now will ya. 3
My recommendation is always think about the places you go to and how close the birds come and what kind of shots your after and work from there. Reach isn't everything you know, you learn to implement better fieldcraft to compensate. For example if you choose the Sigma 170-500mm then you'll get best results with plenty of support, like a tripod or if you're in a hide then consider a bean bag. Alternatively if you like walking around places and taking opportunities as they come then the 70-300mm VR is a nice walkabout lens and you can have a go for some nice flight shots, something that is possible with the Sigma but you may get a low hit rate that leaves you frustrated. As the saying goes, horses for courses, what lens is right for somebody else may not be the right one for you so give it some thought. Oh and if you bring up Tim Taylor's profile and go to his website he has a page full of places that sell s/h camera equip. Worth a look, although some of the sites might be old and in dire need of updating. Always check with the phone first.
This is probably my favourite picture I took with the 70-300mm ED
http://www.birdforum.net/gallery/showphoto.php/photo/148551/ppuser/42340
That's as much as I can offer. Don't step on a mine now will ya.
3
Option1
Village Idiot
That's a fabulous shot Jaff, which goes to prove the old adage, "it's the photographer, not the equipment."
Having said that, and I think this is at least similar to what you said in your first sentence, be careful about aiming a budget too low. While I've gotten good results out of cheap lenses at times, I invariably end up frustrated for some reason with them - can't stop down enough, lack of reach, slow focus performance, etc. Always end up wishing I'd gone further upmarket. "Good for the money" can be trumped at times by "You get what you pay for."
Of course it may just be that in referring to myself, I'm reversing the adage I used in my first sentence and blaming my equipment rather than myself for poor results.
Neil
Having said that, and I think this is at least similar to what you said in your first sentence, be careful about aiming a budget too low. While I've gotten good results out of cheap lenses at times, I invariably end up frustrated for some reason with them - can't stop down enough, lack of reach, slow focus performance, etc. Always end up wishing I'd gone further upmarket. "Good for the money" can be trumped at times by "You get what you pay for."
Of course it may just be that in referring to myself, I'm reversing the adage I used in my first sentence and blaming my equipment rather than myself for poor results.
Neil
Fozzybear
Ich bin ein Vogelbeobachter
The 70-300VR is certainly an excellent lens for walkabout shooting, it's what I use most of the time and although it's not got real pull it is excellent for a broad range of subjects. It really depends what Karpman wants to gain from the upgrade and the intended shooting conditions - for long-distance shooting on reservoirs it's not going to be much of an upgrade, but if the intent is to do lots of handheld walkabout shooting and birds in flight then the VR and AF-S will really be a boon there and the lens is, I understand, a fair improvement optically over the ED that Karpman has now.
karpman
Well-known member
Cheers jaff and option one cracking photo by the way.
Not as much as what i can afford it's what i want to spend, I took up birdwatching spent a fortune on that and now slided into photography.
I am a photographer second and mainly around my garden as much as anything else i don't want to blow a few thousand to sit in my conservatory.
Reviews are very misleading at best also was reading one that compared the cannon 100-400 against sigma and tokina lenses and the results were notable but very close.
I also do a good amount of carp fishing and will dedicate time and money to that, I'm not after a pro lens as such just a good used one and theres so many about.
cheers
karpman
p.s ill watch them mines
Not as much as what i can afford it's what i want to spend, I took up birdwatching spent a fortune on that and now slided into photography.
I am a photographer second and mainly around my garden as much as anything else i don't want to blow a few thousand to sit in my conservatory.
Reviews are very misleading at best also was reading one that compared the cannon 100-400 against sigma and tokina lenses and the results were notable but very close.
I also do a good amount of carp fishing and will dedicate time and money to that, I'm not after a pro lens as such just a good used one and theres so many about.
cheers
karpman
p.s ill watch them mines
karpman
Well-known member
Hi mate cheers,
I should of said were my mind lays now is to keep 70-300mm for a wlakabout and get a 400 maybe 500 for tripod lazy garden work?
shoulda said that a few post back sorry
karpman
Edit: I think the 80-400vr is what i really need but i am not gonna be getting one of them in the near future lol
karpman
Well-known member
sorry one more thing,
Since starting this thread i have looked at tons of lenses and reviews read all the great input you guys have had and still can't defo pick pick to bid for
Maybe i'm just rubbish at deciding, Sometimes i look at the photos i have took and think just make do, And get more reach.
The lens i was pretty much set on buying was a tokina 400 f5.6 Af, and then maybe a keco Tc. Then i read a review that say's it suffers from horrible barrel distortion and once again through me into disarray lol.
I have a 18-55 and the 70-300ed you know about so heading towards a 400-500mm now not easy for under 300 i know lol
Next upgrade then would be the camera body i suppose, another dilemma.
Thanks again
Karpman
Since starting this thread i have looked at tons of lenses and reviews read all the great input you guys have had and still can't defo pick pick to bid for
Maybe i'm just rubbish at deciding, Sometimes i look at the photos i have took and think just make do, And get more reach.
The lens i was pretty much set on buying was a tokina 400 f5.6 Af, and then maybe a keco Tc. Then i read a review that say's it suffers from horrible barrel distortion and once again through me into disarray lol.
I have a 18-55 and the 70-300ed you know about so heading towards a 400-500mm now not easy for under 300 i know lol
Next upgrade then would be the camera body i suppose, another dilemma.
Thanks again
Karpman
Fozzybear
Ich bin ein Vogelbeobachter
The plain truth is that finding a GOOD long lens of 400-500mm for less than three hundred quid is going to be very difficult. I spent rather more on a Sigma 150-500 and was pretty disappointed with it - I rarely use it so was really not worth the cost but I can't bring myself to sell it. It's also not easy to use a long lens like that, although I have quite a bit of experience using the 300mm f/4 with a 1.4x tc.
Quality issues mean also you should make sure that if you buy second-hand it's with either a shop where you can test the lens properly or from someone that is trustworthy and will allow returns - you don't want to spend all your cash on a lens only to find it's softer than a bag of cotton wool! Buying lenses from ebay can give bargains but it's a minefield! I had to take back and exchange the Sigma as the first one was really poor (Sigma QC is awful!) and the second one is hugely better but still not all that.
Quality issues mean also you should make sure that if you buy second-hand it's with either a shop where you can test the lens properly or from someone that is trustworthy and will allow returns - you don't want to spend all your cash on a lens only to find it's softer than a bag of cotton wool! Buying lenses from ebay can give bargains but it's a minefield! I had to take back and exchange the Sigma as the first one was really poor (Sigma QC is awful!) and the second one is hugely better but still not all that.
Last edited:
Duke Leto
Without habitat, there is no wildlife. It's that s
If I were looking I'd try and find a Sigma 400/5.6
or look here for further reviews.
Karpman, trouble is with reviews is that they give you a report which may not necessarily impact the user in the real world.
As you have a defined budget, just sit tight and wait for the right one to appear
or look here for further reviews.
Karpman, trouble is with reviews is that they give you a report which may not necessarily impact the user in the real world.
As you have a defined budget, just sit tight and wait for the right one to appear
Option1
Village Idiot
Jaff's idea isn't the worst I've seen, although I think it's harder to get a great image out of a scope than it is out of a good, dedicated camera lens. Can't deny the reach advantage of the scope though.
In addition to Steve's link to DPReview, one other thing that works for me is to look at as many images as you can find online of the lens you're interested in. The search facility on this site can be very useful for that, as can the galleries here on BirdForum. While I like to read the reviews or user experiences, both of them can vary so wildly and can be more reflective of buyer's pride or remorse, or personal biases, or of poor techniques. My decisions have usually been more influenced by the image results I've seen.
Neil
In addition to Steve's link to DPReview, one other thing that works for me is to look at as many images as you can find online of the lens you're interested in. The search facility on this site can be very useful for that, as can the galleries here on BirdForum. While I like to read the reviews or user experiences, both of them can vary so wildly and can be more reflective of buyer's pride or remorse, or personal biases, or of poor techniques. My decisions have usually been more influenced by the image results I've seen.
Neil
Jaff
Registered Member
Thanks, I think. 8-P :-O
The best lens review site I know of is www.photozone.de Very impartial IMO. Also you might find user reviews for some lenses on WHE, ie one's that are still availbale new.
Digiscoping does require a little more work and patience but the results when you nail it are just as (if not more) rewarding. And plenty of tips in the Digiscoping forum for getting started and with a budget of £300 you can get yourself some good kit. All very much dependent on which scope you have, if any that is!
karpman
Well-known member
Hi guys,
Missed a sigma 170-500mm today whilst i was buying cars in Wimbledon,Work sucks eh?
Anyway as for search i have done plenty of that one here and in the gallery.
Tokina 400mm f5.6 Atx yields little and sigma 400mm f5.6 only a little more, And of course there is the fact of if the user is upto to getting the best from the lens?
The Tokina is len that interest me a lot at the moment 1, for price 2, for quality.
Finding photos taken with the lens is a challenge though.
As for digiscoping it is an option i looked at before buying a dslr have a scope which is not great but is being upgraded soon but it's not a route i wish to take at the moment.
gonna do a luke says and hang tight for a moment.
kapman
Missed a sigma 170-500mm today whilst i was buying cars in Wimbledon,Work sucks eh?
Anyway as for search i have done plenty of that one here and in the gallery.
Tokina 400mm f5.6 Atx yields little and sigma 400mm f5.6 only a little more, And of course there is the fact of if the user is upto to getting the best from the lens?
The Tokina is len that interest me a lot at the moment 1, for price 2, for quality.
Finding photos taken with the lens is a challenge though.
As for digiscoping it is an option i looked at before buying a dslr have a scope which is not great but is being upgraded soon but it's not a route i wish to take at the moment.
gonna do a luke says and hang tight for a moment.
kapman
