1. Welcome to NikonCafe.com—a friendly Nikon camera & photography discussion forum!

    If you are thinking of buying a camera or need help with your photos, you will find our forum members full of advice! Click here to join for free!

Oh No! More Dragons - Comparing 200 to 300

Discussion in 'Macro, Flowers, Insects, and Greenery' started by OHcorgis, Jun 30, 2008.

  1. I went out yesterday to the pond inbetween raindrops, which means early afternoon. Dragons were busy in the glaring sun. I brought my 300 f/4 and 200 f/4 micro to see which I might like better. The 200mm is quite a bit lighter. I think it does as nice a job for shooting dragons. What do you think?

    300mm

    2623940700_f362fd1353_b.

    300mm

    2623956532_c3a4b0da2a_b.

    200mm

    View attachment 218212

    200mm

    View attachment 218213

    200mm - Don't know what this teeny tiny is??? Severely cropped.

    View attachment 218214
     
  2. Looks as if either will give you excellent results. Just depends on which one you are more comfortable with. If either meets your working distance and magnification preferences, go with it. I use a Tamron 180 and like it very much. It is light, focuses down to 1:1, and is fairly sharp IMO. I have the older 300 f4, and need extension tubes to get the necessary magnification, which kills metering for me (just manual tubes and D50).
     
  3. Thanks Tom. I think for dragons, I will stick with my 200mm macro lens. For birding, I love my 300 f/4 with or without the 1.4TC. I just wish we had more variety of dragonflies here in NE Ohio.
     
  4. Hi Birgit!

    Difficult to say which one is better. I use 300 and my friend use 200. I have tested his 200 and I would say there´s really no difference optically... I like 300 more because of the working distance, ofcourse...

    I was just thinking that what was the metering mode you were using as 3rd one looks excellent but then there´s some really bad blown shots like #4? I use usually center weighted and don´t have that kind of an issue (or were you using a Canon camera:biggrin:) ...because some how I can´t think it would be a lens related... Or is is Post processing thing?
     
  5. I am finding that I get about the same working distance with the 200 micro as I do with the 300 when shooting dragons. I am able to crop in pretty close with a 200 micro.

    I was using matrix/exp +0.3. We had quite variable weather. I am sure when I shot #4 the sun came out full strength. I will set for center weighted and hopefully get better results! No Canon LOL. Not PP either. Just me:frown:

    Thank you for your input, I appreciate it.
     
  6. Nice shots (except #4) The last one is a moth - Virginia Ctenucha. We even have them up here!

    I use the 200 micro but I've purchased a PN-11 tube and will get a 300 f4 for the working distance.

    Cheers,

    Larry
     
  7. Thanks, I did not think that little thing was any kind of butterfly! It looks like a little person in a cape.

    I must look into a PN-11 tube:biggrin::biggrin:
     
  8. Spectre

    Spectre

    Feb 20, 2008
    Oregon
    Birgit,
    I really like the Widow Skimmer in #2, very nice shot. The blue one in #3 appears to be a Western Pondhawk (Erythemis collacata) Male.
     
  9. Thank you. #3 is actually an Eastern Pondhawk:biggrin::biggrin: I do believe they are one and the same perhaps depending on where they reside.
     
  10. Walter

    Walter

    Jan 13, 2006
    Columbia, Maryland
    Walter Rowe
    My favorite 300/f4 dragon fly shooter is Ronnie Gaubert. He lives in southern Louisiana and has a wonderful garden in his yard that attracts lots of them. He takes the most spectacular macro and close-up images of dragon flies, butterflies, etc. He uses his 300/f4 in combination with extension tubes to permit closer focusing and more out-of-focus backgrounds. Check out his work.
     
  11. Walter, Thank you for the url. I took a look and his shots are awesome!
     
  12. Put the centre over the junction of the wings and body. This should do it.

    Bob F.
     
  13. Jeff Lee

    Jeff Lee

    May 16, 2006
    Oregon
    1-3 are very nices images....both pieces of glass are incredible.
     
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.