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!

What super telephoto zoom is better?

Discussion in 'Lens Lust' started by Weston, Jul 28, 2009.

  1. Weston

    Weston

    674
    Dec 29, 2008
    Springfield, OR
    I currently have a 70-300 vr but it doesn't have enough reach for what I shoot.

    I am leaning towards the Sigma 150-500 os but am still looking at the Nikon 80-400 vr.

    Also any other super telephoto zoom recommendations welcome.
     
  2. There are a lot of them out there, I think that you will get a lot of input from different members here
     
  3. Depends on your budget. If you can afford the 200-400 f4 vr from nikon then that is probably the best. Also the sigma 120-300 f2.8 is quite good and you can the sigma 1.4x TC for a bit more reach. Both thse are heavy much more than the 70-300 and 150-500. Also dont forget the sigma 120-400.
     
  4. Weston

    Weston

    674
    Dec 29, 2008
    Springfield, OR
    Don't tempt me with the 200-400! I'm 16 so that's way out of my price range.
     
  5. Political Machine

    Political Machine

    63
    Feb 14, 2009
    MTL
    Wow, i wish someone bought me a d90 when i was 16...
     
  6. jonh68

    jonh68

    Sep 21, 2008
    Alabama
    If you are looking for a super tele, I would get the Sigma 100-300 f4 with a converter over any sigma whatever to 500mm. If budget is not a problem, the Sigma 120-300 with a TC is a good combo. Not as sharp as the Nikon prime, but is more versatile.
     
  7. Weston

    Weston

    674
    Dec 29, 2008
    Springfield, OR
    I bought my D90 and all my lenses.
     
  8. Weston

    Weston

    674
    Dec 29, 2008
    Springfield, OR
    Actually It wouldn't be possible considering the D90 is less than a year old! lol
     
  9. Weston

    Weston

    674
    Dec 29, 2008
    Springfield, OR
    The Sigma 120-300 is out of my price range and I want OS or VR if it is not
    f2.8. Thanks for the suggestion though!
     
  10. jimeast

    jimeast

    383
    Mar 17, 2008
    Metrowest. MA
    If you do not need to sell the 70-300

    I would suggest looking at the Nikon 300 f/4 AFS. It takes a TC 1.4 very well and has really good IQ capabilities. It leaves you a little less flexible at the long end, but it does give you a high quality solution for a reasonable price.

     
  11. Depends on what you want to shoot, and budget of course. If you want BIF, I'd use the 300/4. Not a zoom but an excellent lens, and my primary BIF lens. If you want reach for more stationary subjects, or for the zoo, the 80-400VR, though old is a very good lens. AF is not too fast but IQ is excellent.

    The Nikon 200-400 is too expensive ,and too heavy, so the two I mentioned were my choices,and am happy with both.
     
  12. Weston

    Weston

    674
    Dec 29, 2008
    Springfield, OR
    Most wildlife photography I do is early in the morning. So I really use VR. I have been looking at the 300 f4 . What version do you have?
     
  13. Early morning is a problem with all these lenses because of their 5.6 (or even slower) aperture.

    Optically, the Nikon 300 f/4 AF-S with the TC-14E beats any other lens in this category, unless you can afford a used 300/2.8 AF-S (which you won't be able to find for under $2000).

    But you will need a tripod in lower light unless you have VR/OS, and you will be restricted to relatively stationary subjects because you can't get the shutter speed up.

    If you can't or don't want to use a tripod, I'd recommend the 80-400 VR. It's old and focuses slowly, but it has excellent IQ at 400mm if you stop down to at least f/7.1. Better than the Sigma alternatives, IMO.

    Cheers

    Mike
     
  14. Weston

    Weston

    674
    Dec 29, 2008
    Springfield, OR
    Maybe since I have the 70-300 vr it might be good to wait for the 80-400 replacement.
     
  15. neimac

    neimac

    529
    May 26, 2008
    Idaho
    I think I would look at the Sigma 120-400 OS too.
     
  16. wgilles

    wgilles

    Apr 25, 2008
    NJ
    Well, one way to help out with the light issue in the morning is to use a Better Beamer. It gives you a smidge more shutter speed and great results.

    The 80-400 VR is great for "slower" Wildlife, I'd go with that, it's very sharp.

    If you want a prime, get a 300 f/4 AF-S and use it with or without a TC depending on the lighting conditions. Great lens, super sharp, and shake isn't an issue with a monopod.
     
  17. Weston

    Weston

    674
    Dec 29, 2008
    Springfield, OR
    What's the difference between the Sigma 80-400 OS and 120-400 OS besides range?
     
  18. Weston

    Weston

    674
    Dec 29, 2008
    Springfield, OR
    I'm not quite ready to get a flash yet.

    If I get the 80-400 VR should I sell my 70-300 VR?
     
  19. The 120-400 is newer and has HSM.
     
  20. Hi,

    if you can afford the 200-400/4, go for it. It is the best long zoom available at the moment.

    The Sigma 150-500 is much better than the old Nikon 80-400 I tested. The AF is faster, the IQ is better, and it's 100 mm more reach. The 80-400 is just too old, I guess. It was among the first VR lenses from Nikon, together with the 24-120.

    Maybe there will be a new AF-S-Version of Nikons 80-400, but nobody knows for sure. I can highly recommend the Sigma 150-500, which I use since more than a year on D300, D2Xs, D700 and D3.

    Regards

    Mattes
     
  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.