Replacement for Nikon 80-400 (1 Viewer)

[dkperez]

It looks like I'm going to have to replace my Nikon 80-400. It's a fine lens, but it's costing me images because it focuses so slowly. With birds in flight or airshows, or even race cars on a road course, it just isn't fast enough autofocusing.....

SO, WHAT do I replace it with?

My requirements are that the replacement provide VERY high quality images, be extremely fast, precise, reliable autofocus and image stabilization, be HAND-HOLDABLE for extended periods, get out to at least 400mm, and it would be nice if it was at least MODERATELY cost effective...

The Nikon 200-400 is nice, but way too heavy and WAY too expensive.
The Sigma 120-300 f2.8 OS may be nice, but again it's way heavy.
The Sigma 150-500 OS is a possibility.
The Sigma 50-500 OS is a possibility.

The option that's most often been recommended by people that are knowledgeable about lens quality is the Nikon 70-200 VR II with a matching Nikon 2X converter. Great lens for 70-200, and very good lens for 140-400.

I like the IDEA of the Sigma 50-500 but I've been reading for several days and there are a LOT (lot being a relative number compared to Canon or Nikon) of reports about autofocus problems and OS problems with the Sigma lenses... Even isolating things to just the last year, there are a lot of reports of problems....

And, unfortunately, I can't try one because neither of the big camera stores in the Minneapolis area will have anything to do with Sigma because of past problems.

So, anybody have any ideas or alternatives I haven't thought of?

 

[flanken]

I's also suggest adding the 300mm f/4 AF-S to your list of candiates. Doesn't have VR, but I find that while having VR is nice for static shots, it's not necessary at typical bird-in-flight shutter speeds. It pairs well with a 1.4x teleconverter, and is also a good bit lighter than all of the above lenses except for the 70-200mm.

I have both the 300mm f/4 and the Sigma 50-500mm OS. I find that the 300mm f/4 has superb sharpness with a 1.4x teleconverter even wide open at f/5.6, although AF is a little poky (but faster than the 80-400) with the TC attached. The Sigma has very fast autofocus and excellent image stabilization. It shows a little spherical aberration at 500mm f/6.3, but is as sharp as the 300mm f/4 at 500mm f/8. These days, I tend to use the Sigma as my walkaround lens (it's a little on the heavy side, but quite handholdable) and save the 300/4 for use wide open without a teleconverter, although they're both quite excellent.

You might consider renting one or more of your potential candidates through these guys: http://www.lensrentals.com/for-nikon. Although it looks like of the ones you're considering, they only have the 200-400, 70-200, 300/4 and the 50-500 available. I rented the Sigma 50-500mm OS from them earlier this year for a week, was surprised at how good it was, and decided to buy it new (complete with a coupon for $85 off from one of their affiliates to recoup some of the rental cost).

I suspect that Sigma might have ironed out the autofocus problems for this year's lenses, but I have no concrete evidence aside from the fact that mine has been functioning properly for several months. Also, this year's lens has a smooth finish rather than the typical Sigma crinkle coat, so maybe they've updated the entire production process.

One thing to keep in mind for the 70-200 is its well-known focus breathing issue at short distances; at short ranges (under 5m) it might be well under 300mm in focal length even with the TC-20E III.

 

[Jaff]

The options you've listed vary greatly in price. I think the first thing you need to decide is just exactly what is your working budget for all this which would make our job of making helpful suggestions much easier.

 

[Dave Williams]

My requirements are that the replacement provide VERY high quality images, be extremely fast, precise, reliable autofocus and image stabilization, be HAND-HOLDABLE for extended periods, get out to at least 400mm, and it would be nice if it was at least MODERATELY cost effective...


The option that's most often been recommended by people that are knowledgeable about lens quality is the Nikon 70-200 VR II with a matching Nikon 2X converter. Great lens for 70-200, and very good lens for 140-400.

I think anything from the Nikon stable will be a compromise on one of your wish list , but I can't see Sigma being any better either .Sigma shouldn't perform as well, but they offer a real advantage in price
The 70-200mm but it will be fast at AF only with a 1.4TC. Just OK with the other two so you would only have a 280mm reach for BIF.
The 300mm with a 1.4 gives you quite a bit more reach at 420mm and will AF very quickly but again, fairly slow with both the 1.7 and 2.0TC. Not sure you would call this lens a moderate increase in price either though.
I know nothing of the 200mmf2 but that might work with a 2.0TC better than the f2.8 lenses. I don't know of anyone who has this combo for birds though.
You could wait and see if the rumours are true about launching a new version of the 80-400mm but I bet it's going to be pretty expensive , probably not as expensive as the 300mm f2.8 though.
However, if you want a solution now, as I did for exactly the same reasons, I would go with the 300mmf2.8 if you can afford it and get a 1.4TC first. I did and never regretted that decision.
cheers Dave

 

[gandytron]

There have been rumours (wishful thinking) circulating for a while that Nikon will bring out a telezoom to replace the 80-400 that has VR and AF-S. If you can hold on a few months there may be an announcement in the autumn, though this may have been pushed further back by the tsunami's impact on Nikon production.

Many photographers rave about the 70-200 vrII and seem to like it with the 2x TC, but an alternative might be to ditch Nikon altogether and move to Canon with a 100-400, though that might depend on how big your collection of other Nikon gear is...

If you are willing to go without he zoom the Nikon 300,mm and 1.4 TC will be a good alternative.

 

[DJ ODonnell]

I've owned the Sigma 150-500 mm for about three years now. At 4 lbs, it is hand-holdable for short periods of time. AF is fast and capable of getting BIF. The OS is very steady, but noisy and it takes about a half-second to kick in. Not important when shooting BIF, but if you're close to a perched bird, the noise from the OS will sometimes spook the subject. This has happened to me when I'm within 15-20 ft. of the subject. The lens is somewhat soft at 500 mm wide open, but stopped down to f8 sharpens up dramatically. At that aperture, I can still shoot at 1/1200 sec. or faster in good light at ISO 400 (Nikon D3100).
Earlier this year, the OS failed and I had to send the lens in for repairs. I had over 10,000 shots on it, so I felt that it was reasonable for it to fail. Since the return of the lens, it is operating like new (i.e., with all the pluses and minuses listed above).
I like the lens for the price I paid for it (> $1000). If I had the money, would I buy Nikon? YOU BET! But then, I don't so I'll stick with the Sigma.

 

[stoop]

You didn't say what body you are using. The last two two shots in my gallery are BiFs using the 80-400mm on a D300. Get the settings right and it can pass on for flight shots on a D300. I also have the 300 f4 but miss VR with 1.4TC. 300 f4 without TC is incredible for close encounters with flying birds. The 70-300mm has VR and af-s and I love bar the reach. I've thought about the 70-200 with 2xTC.....but

...Wait for Nikon announcements in August....I am.

 

[pe'rigin]

Announcement for a replacement 80-400mm F4 today, along with others, whether all of them get to the production line in 2011 who knows.

Long over due this lens.

 

[JPAC]

I don't think an AF-S version of the 80-400mm will focus that much faster, if any. The 50mm f1.4 AF-S doesn't compared with the previous version. I'd prefer a 100-500mm f5.6 for the extra reach, if Nikon did a camera that would AF at f8 that would be great.

I would wait just a little longer to see what lenses they come with, I think that last list is fiction. A 800mm f4 would be interesting but way too expensive and heavy.

 

[gandytron]

Announcement for a replacement 80-400mm F4 today, along with others, whether all of them get to the production line in 2011 who knows.

Long over due this lens.

Do I understand this correctly? You are saying that a new lens has been announced today? I cannot find anything on this on a quick google search... only this, please can you clarify?

Thanks

Dave

 

[pe'rigin]

That's the one, Dave, not official I know but the site's usually right.

This lens is long overdue a make-over and by rights should be next in line, some of the others I'm not too sure about.

The quake probably hasn't helped Nikon's production schedule.

A 800mm F4 is going to be some weight, and cost. I can't imagine carrying that monster around all day.

I think DK's best option would be to wait for the new 80mm-400mm lens.

 

[dkperez]

OK, life is too short to agonize over this silliness....... I looked at a bunch of stuff, of wildly varying prices, weights, and capabilities....

Today I ordered a Sigma 50-500 OS and next week I"ll hit the local camera place and pick up a Nikon 80-200 VR II and a Nikon 2X.......

Test, fiddle, and if the 50-500 isn't as good as the Nikon it goes back. If it's soft, ugly, or problematic, it goes back. If it's optimal and works great I'll keep everything.....

My 80-400 will either get traded on the 80-200 or go on Ebay.....

 

[Duke Leto]

Value for money get a 300/4 and a 1.4tc it's light and very sharp, will out perform the 70-200 and 2x and be cheaper and will be sharper than the 50-500

 

[Dave Williams]

I can understand why you went for zoom flexibility but not why you chose two of them !
Good luck with your decision though, there is never a right one, just the most suitable for your needs and budget.
I think I would have bought the 70-200mm plus 2.0TC then maybe instead of the Sigma, the Nikon 300mm f4 plus a 1.4TC for the same price. You might be able to stick the 2.0TC on the 300mm and manual focus to give you 600mm at f8.The 500mm f4 will AF albeit slowly. You could certainly use the 1.4TC on the 70-200 to give you a 280mm very fast AF lens for BIF with the benefit of zoom and VR.
On the other hand maybe I would have not bothered with the 300mm and just bought the 1.4TC and save the balance towards a D400 when it arrives.
See what I mean, no right answers just a myriad of choices !!!!!
cheers Dave

 

[Duke Leto]

Spot on Dave

 

[Keith Reeder]

Announcement for a replacement 80-400mm F4

That wouldn't be a replacement though - the current lens is f/4.5-f/5.6.

An f/4 would be a brand new - big, expensive - lens.

Maybe it's just a typo, but it makes me doubt the accuracy of the rest of the rumour...

 

[Dave Williams]

That wouldn't be a replacement though - the current lens is f/4.5-f/5.6.

An f/4 would be a brand new - big, expensive - lens.

Maybe it's just a typo, but it makes me doubt the accuracy of the rest of the rumour...

Or maybe they can't be bothered typing the whole thing in !
You are of course right Keith, and it might cause confusion as Nikon do have the 200-400f4 zoom.
I was led to believe the rumoured lens launch is in fact the 80-400mm f/4.5-f5.6 AF-S VR and I would guess it would come at around £1750 off the top of my empty head
cheers Dave

 

[JSER]

My son never takes off his Nikkor 28-300, except to add a 1.5 converter, it is a great lens if a little costly, worth ever penny.

 

[Keith Reeder]

Or maybe they can't be bothered typing the whole thing in!

Probably should've stopped after the "4", then..!

Nikon AF-S VRII Zoom-Nikkor 80-400mm f/4G IF-ED N

 

[Duke Leto]

Lol isn't that why its a rumour