Got a 300mm f2.8...........what next 5 or 600mm (1 Viewer)

[ndwgolf]

Guys
I recently bought a new Nikon 300mm and started shooting birds and love it. I have quickly realized that 300 is just not long enough even with TT's so I am going to get another big lens but should that be the 500 or 600 f4's.
Now before you tear into me, I did ask on another thread about getting my first telephoto lens and everyone said go long but I really wanted the 300 for more than just birds...................and very happy with what I bought.
Anyways I want to get something longer so it will either be 500 or six hundred, so apart from the 1200 quid price tag......................what are the pros and cons of each of these lens
Thanks in advance

 

[Helios]

If money is no object, then 600/4 will be better, as long as your comfortable with handling and carrying it. It's quite a bit heavier than the 500, and with a solid tripod, camera, and camera bag we're talking about quite a bit of weight. So depends on how naturally strong you are, what other equipment your taking, and how far you plan on walking.

You can just about get away with a 500/4 as hand luggage on a plane.

 

[BillN]

The 300mm is reasonably "portable" - i.e. you can use it "hand held" as a walk about lens and consequently the 300mm always get a lot of use

Once they get bigger you will loose this - plus the hit on your bank account will be very noticeable.

The traditional answer you may get from quite a lot of "bird" photographer is "just try to get nearer" …… and save your self a load of money

Good luck

 

[gvca1]

Not an easy decision! I think it comes down mostly to how mobile you are. If your bird photography day is an 8K walk in the woods, with your rig over your shoulder, the 500 is much more comfortable than the 600. There's not doubt that the reach of the 600 helps, but 3.88 Kg vs 5.06 Kg, plus I suppose you really should beef up the support by an equivalent amount.

For me, regardless of the equipment, it comes down to patience, birding craft, mastery of your equipment, getting up early, etc. (Not that I'm good at it, but these are my goals)...

Jim

 

[ndwgolf]

Right now I haven't done any shooting after a hike, all my shooting has been out of a car, but I plan to change that when I get home next month. What about taking a 500/600 on a plane, will they fit in the overhead compartments?

 

[Hor Kee]

Another solution could be getting a Nikon 1 series and an adapter. The cropped field of view of the bare 300mm lens would be equivalent to 810mm. But you'll have to make do with the center AF point only.

 

[BillN]

Another solution could be getting a Nikon 1 series and an adapter. The cropped field of view of the bare 300mm lens would be equivalent to 810mm. But you'll have to make do with the center AF point only.

I've been really disappointed with this set up compared with my D300 or D7100 with the 300mm f4.
I expected "great" things when I bought the V1 and FT1 …… but it is not really for me ….Both in terms of IQ and ease of use

 

[Jason Bugay Reyes]

Right now I haven't done any shooting after a hike, all my shooting has been out of a car, but I plan to change that when I get home next month. What about taking a 500/600 on a plane, will they fit in the overhead compartments?

You can get the rolling bag from thinkTank photo http://www.thinktankphoto.com/categories/rolling-camera-bags/airport-series.aspx and it fits the overhead compartments too :king:

 

[Duke Leto]

Surely with a 300/2.8 I would use the TC's to get me to either 420/4, 510/4.8 or 600/5.6 and see what suited me better, a lot of people use the 300 with a 2xTC and get superb results, a lot cheaper than jumping in to 500 or 600mm lenses.
You don't say if the 300 has VR or not and not sure where you can get a 500 or 600 for £1200.
re Nikon 1, they won't currently replace the DSLR but its a good test bench for the technology and in the right conditions produces stunning images (see attached)

 

[Frogfish]

Which version of the 300/2.8 are you using ? The 300/2.8 VRII is the one I use and it is superb with TCs (see below).

Now if you want to add TCs to a 500/600 for even further reach then that is another matter. I'd get whichever meets the airlines hand-held luggage regulations (when in the bag) - both are fabulous.

@5m and 600mm

@ about 50m and 600mm

Very small warbler (8-9cms) @ around 20m and 600mm

 

[opticoholic]

Yeah, if you "recently" bought the very latest VRII 300 f/2.8, I would definitely try for quite a while the latest best 2X teleconverter with your 300, and maybe rent the 600mm first and make sure you really want it in addition to your great 300. Good luck.

 

[BillN]

Have a look at the following site, it's very good

particularly "lens comparisons" towards to bottom of the page

http://photographylife.com/reviews/nikon-300mm-f2-8g-vr-ii

The 300mm f4 comes out very well
and the f2.8 VR is used with various TC's to compare with the 400mm etc.

The 300mm f4 is by far the best value for money lens and with the TC x 1.4 it could be said to be very near the 400mm

 

[Frogfish]

The 300mm f4 is by far the best value for money lens and with the TC x 1.4 it could be said to be very near the 400mm

Except that is now f5.6 vs f2.8 (and boy is that f2.8 worth it's weight in gold sometimes) and then you can add TCs to that ! Of course I know you were not comparing the 300/4 directly to the 400/2.8, just saying

The reason I try not to use the new 80-400VR vs the 300/2.8 and TCs is exactly for that reason f5.6 vs f2.8 for early morning or dusk birding ? Not on my life.

 

[tyb1987]

I am eyeing on these lens too. 500 offer lighter weight and cheaper price. But 600 offer far range than 500, hard to make decision,

 

[mpe]

Guys
I recently bought a new Nikon 300mm and started shooting birds and love it. I have quickly realized that 300 is just not long enough

If you bought the 300mm only recently and feel that it is not long enough, I have a feeling that it is unlikely that a 500mm or 600mm will make the situation any better. In fact it could also introduce a new sorts of problems. Especially when you shoot just from a car.

I think bird photography is all about patience, understanding of birds habits and getting close. Longer lenses are good but can't really substitute that. 300mm 2.8 is a kind of lens that wasn't too short for many Wildlife Photography of the year award winners. A lens that can get you to the National Geographic cover if you use it right.

 

[BillN]

Also these new circa 25 mega pixels plus bodies may need a change of technique versus the 12 to 15 mega pixels

I find the D7100 less forgiving than the D300

 

[Frogfish]

I am eyeing on these lens too. 500 offer lighter weight and cheaper price. But 600 offer far range than 500, hard to make decision,

You really need to consider the type of bird photography you do and whether a 500+TCs or 600+TCs is going to be of real value (and are you static or mobile). If it is simply for long long reach then often they are not the best solution because of the environmental impact on any images taken at long range (say once you get over 50-70m).
Then digiscoping can come into it's own and can be a much cheaper way to get the reach you need (whether to see or photograph). Neither are going to give you Nat Geo IQ at over 70-80m though.

If it is for close-in then the MFD needs to be considered too. Last week I continued shooting with a 300+2.0TC when my neighbours with 500/600 lenses had to put them down when a Tesia (small thumb-sized bird) came within 3-4m. That also often happened when I was using a 500mm. Now with the 300+TC I can keep shooting far more often due to the much shorter MFD.

 

[pe'rigin]

You didn't say what camera you have, if the D800, then that 300mm F4 or F2.8 combo Steve wrote is going to be all you need. The 600mm is going to give you wonderful shots, but as Helios has written it's heavy, very heavy and you have to buy a very good tripod even with VR.

I did see on Sunday a chap hand holding the Canon 600mm, sooner him than me.
You want pin sharp images, if you are going to spend that sort of money!

 

[BillN]

Just got a used 300mm f2.8VR, (bought it a few months ago but just picked it up) ………. all I can say is wow++++!!!

Only had it a couple of days but even through the window in bad light it is making my high ISO images look really good, (even wonderful!!)

I used to think why spend that kind of money on a lens …….. now I think that it is a real bargain and wish I bought one sooner

if you are thinking about buying the f2.8, don't even hesitate, surely the 300mm f2.8 plus TC 20E lll is all you need!

 

[Colin A]

I have all three and use the 2.8 as my travel lens. The 500 is more portable than the 600 but in my view the 600 is slightly sharper if you can cope with the weight