Nikon 300mm f/4 AF-S for a new birder (1 Viewer)

[buddingbirder]

Hello.

I'm relatively new to birding, however I've been a photographer for quite a while, doing some astrophotography. I'd like to start trying some wildlife photography, mainly birds. I've started out by trying some photos with an old 200mm MF Nikon prime lens, which didn't give me nearly enough reach. So, I'm looking to upgrade to a newer, AF-S model that will give me better range.

I'm looking at Nikon's 300mm f/4 prime to start, and then probably adding the Nikon TC-14II in the future for further reach as the 300mm probably won't be enough (I'm assuming).

I'm also looking alternatively at Nikon's 70-300mm, which seems to be a better "all purpose" zoom, while if I bought the 300mm I may need to look at a zoom later on more other telephoto shots where 300mm is just too much reach (and I believe that I can't use TCs, the slower aperture is also a bit annoying). Also, how does the AF speed of this lens perform?

Or, do I just need to practice my bird shots with my current lens that I'm using? I'm still a bit unsure of some of the tricks to bird photography, I sat in a field today for a while, waiting for the birds, but none came no matter how patient I was. All that I ended up with was a few wood ticks, which are probably roaming around my house somewhere, it makes me nervous...

If anybody could give me some tips, I'm relatively new to this type of photography. I'll probably be going to our town's local nature preserve tomorrow, where I can try to get some better shots than the forest behind my home.

Thanks in advance, your help is greatly appreciated!

 

[RJM]

Welcome to BF. You neglected to mention the camera body you are using now.

 

[fugl]

I'm looking at Nikon's 300mm f/4 prime to start, and then probably adding the Nikon TC-14II in the future for further reach as the 300mm probably won't be enough (I'm assuming).

I've used the 300mm f4 Nikon (paired with my venerable D70 camera) for over 7 years now & have been very satisfied with it. Most of my bird photography involves targets of opportunity encountered while out birding & for this purpose I've found the 300mm f4 ideally suited: very sharp (even wide open), hand holdable (I almost never use a tripod) & close-focusing. I generally carry the camera in a shoulder bag in which I also keep a short zoom for the rare occasions when I need less than 300mm.

I've sometimes thought about adding a TC14 for extra reach (always nice to have) and maybe I'll do so yet one of these days.

For examples of what the D70/300mm f4 combo is capable of used in the way I've described, check out my Flickr.account. Apart from a few wide-angle & close-up shots, just about everything there was taken by this combo.

 

[buddingbirder]

Pardon me, how stupid to neglect mentioning my camera body. I'm using the Nikon D7000.

Thank you for the replies, and thanks for the advice and quick response Fugl. I checked out your flickr, you have some great shots. But it gets me wondering, if you never need anything longer than 300mm, would I be fine with the smaller, lighter 70-300? I only lost one stop of exposure.

Also, how did you get so close to the birds at only 300mm without them flying away? I apologize for being so naive, I've never done this type of photography in the past.

Thank you!

 

[Aegea]

But it gets me wondering, if you never need anything longer than 300mm, would I be fine with the smaller, lighter 70-300? I only lost one stop of exposure.

I had a 70-300 and sold it to get a 300/4 AF. I was never happy with the IQ of the 70-300 at 300, and it did not work at all well with a teleconverter. Maybe I had a bad copy, but my 300/4 is very much better in both respects. And you probably will want more than 300mm - few birders complain that their lenses are too long ...

 

[fugl]

And you probably will want more than 300mm - few birders complain that their lenses are too long ...

Too true, everybody wants more reach, but the trade-offs (weight, having to haul around a tripod) just aren't worth it for me. But then I'm a birder first & a photographer second & other people's priorities may differ.

 

[buddingbirder]

Thank you for replying, it looks like when I get around to buying my lens, the 300mm f/4 with a TC-14II will be my choice, and probably a Manfrotto monopod.

Also, does anybody know if a successor, perhaps a G version, of the 300mm f/4 is in the works? It's already an older lens, and a new version with better AF and VR would be nice.

 

[Duke Leto]

Ah the $64000 question what will nikon bring out a recent unofficial survey on bf (you'll need to find the thread) had if I recall a 400/5.6vr near the top just as canon have.

The 300/4 is a cracking lens and works well with a 1.4, if you could stretch the budget get a 300/2.8 vr it works very well with all nikon tc's and is hand holdable

 

[Fozzybear]

Note: I know this will go against what pretty much everyone else will say. I'm not looking for an argument, just relating out my personal experiences as someone who tends to photograph wildlife on the fly during walks rather than at a distance from hides (where really long lenses do very much come into their own).

I have both the 70-300vr and the 300mm f/4, though the older version without AFS. I'd probably use the prime a lot more if it had afs as the focusing on mine is very slow but I like the flexibility of the zoom and the fact that it's more compact and lighter to lug about on long walks. I find the zoom has a lot less colour fringing too, it can be really obvious on my prime (if I accidentally over-expose then fringing ruins more shots on the prime than the zoom) but again may be much improved on the later AFS version. The focusing on the 70-300VR is superb, very quick and positive - I couldn't ask for much more from it, especially on an f/5.6 lens! It's also very sharp... not razor sharp like the prime (on a tripod at close range it can reveal an amazing amount of feather detail!) but VERY good indeed and I tend to get more keepers with it than the heavier prime when handholding.

If there was an AFS VR 300mm (or 400mm f/5.6!) I'd certainly consider buying one but find the 70-300 works really well for me so it is likely to remain my regular lens for a long time to come. Would love a 500mm but would need to fund a permanent sherpa to lug it about for me! I have a 150-500 sigma too but hardly ever use it as it's too cumbersome for me, I can't easily train it quickly onto a bird when out on a walk and for a shy guy like me a lens that big really draws too much attention! Should sell it on really but can't quite bring myself to do that.

 

[swainsons]

Pardon me, how stupid to neglect mentioning my camera body. I'm using the Nikon D7000.

Thank you for the replies, and thanks for the advice and quick response Fugl. I checked out your flickr, you have some great shots. But it gets me wondering, if you never need anything longer than 300mm, would I be fine with the smaller, lighter 70-300? I only lost one stop of exposure.

Also, how did you get so close to the birds at only 300mm without them flying away? I apologize for being so naive, I've never done this type of photography in the past.

Thank you!

The D7000 and 70-300 is a very nice combo, but if birding is your main interest go prime with converter. Quality is not really comparable. If the bug really bites you will regret spending money on the 70-300 and not the prime. You will eventually end up buying even bigger more expensive lenses, thats the way it is with bird photography. Reach is a big factor.

I really love my 300f4 with converter as a walkabout, VR is for sissies, get a tripod or monopod.... and with the 300f4 you can also get nice and close for bugs/ spiders etc, which the f2.8 version does not allow.

Good luck.

regards

 

[flanken]

I also use the 300/4 and 1.4x teleconverter combo with the D7000 (although I use the Kenko 1.4x rather than the Nikon TC-14), and most of the shots in my gallery were taken with this setup. It's a great setup, and works well for most bird shots, although on my specific lens AF speed takes a hit with the TC mounted. The 300/4 doesn't have the convenience of a zoom, but its image quality is excellent for the price and weight.

Admittedly, I recently bought the Sigma 50-500mm f/4.5-6.3 OS, which has started to replace the 300/4 as my walkaround lens. It's almost as sharp at 500mm f/8 as the 300/4 & TC combo is at 420mm f/8, plus it autofocuses faster, has a very effective OS system, and has the convenience of going down to 50mm in a pinch. Downsides: it's about 500g heavier, takes expensive 95mm (!) filters if you want to use a circular polarizer, costs somewhat more than the 300/4 even with TC, and has some noticeable spherical aberration wide open at f/6.3.

Even with the Bigma, though, I think I'm still keeping the 300/4. Recently I've been using it without the teleconverter to take advantage of the speed and DOF isolation at f/4. I find that if I'm going somewhere where I don't know the shooting distances and environment, and want to have the greatest chance of grabbing a sharp shot, I tend to take the Bigma, but if I'm just trying to get better compositions on birds I've photographed before (e.g., the California gulls that I visit regularly), it's fun to take the 300/4 instead and see what I can do without the need to record everything I see.

 

[buddingbirder]

Thanks for your replies!

AF is very important to me, does the 300mm f/4 take a big hit with the Nikon TC-14II?

 

[flanken]

Thanks for your replies!

AF is very important to me, does the 300mm f/4 take a big hit with the Nikon TC-14II?

I previously used my 300mm f/4 with the TC-14E I, which is identical to the II except for minor cosmetic differences. AF performance suffered the same with that as it did with the Kenko 1.4. The focus racking speed is not diminished with the TC, but it tends to stutter briefly around the correct focal point (a back-and-forth motion) before locking focus. With the D7000, it's still pretty quick, and fast enough for most in-flight shots, just not quite as fast as without the TC. One thing to note is that I got my 300mm f/4 used, and my particular copy has quirks that other people don't seem to have; for example, it can't autofocus with the TC-17E even though other 300mm f/4s seem to be able to. Thus, my findings may not apply to all 300mm f/4s, especially a new one.