80-400 Vr af lens

Does this lens auto focus by itself and id this the best lens for nature

photography

Perhaps you mean, does this lens have an autofocus motor built into it, such as is needed on a D40 or D40x. No, it does not. It would work fine on a D80/200/300/3, but won't be as fast (or as quiet) to focus as an AFS lens.

 

"Best for nature photography" is, alas, an impossible question. What part of nature are you thinking of? Landscapes? Birds in flight? Insects? Very small flowers? Large animals at great distance? No lens that tries to be everything you need will be truly good at anything in particular. Many people have produced excellent wildlife images with this lens, but will struggle with it in lower light. Tell us more about your subject matter and style of shooting (and what camera you expect to use).

I guess I want a lens which will get better pictures of birds and animals at a farther distance so I don't disturb the bird or or animal

does it have af with the d50 body

At a similar price point, I think the 300 f/4 afs + 1.4 tc is a better choice for wildlife than the

80-400vr.

I originally had the 80-400VR, but was disappointed in the lack of the Silent Wave motor. When the 70-200VR was released, I traded in the 80-400VR. I have the 1.4x Nikon teleconverter and am happier with this combo. The 2x Nikon teleconverter would be the next piece to add.

 

The other lens that is a great lens to have is the 18-200VR. Nice all round lens.

 

As Matt asked, what type of nature photography? One thing that you can do that will save you money and frustration in the end is to go rent whatever lenses and try them before purchasing. You discover a lot that you can't from looking at them in a magazine or taking photos of the inside of a camera store.

Can you use a teleconverter with the 18-200VR lens, which I now have? What would the distance then be 35-420 with the 1.4.

Mark,Yes the D50 will work along with the D70. I guess people are forgetting these cameras exist! I have the 70-300 VR and it works great on my D50.

Funny you should ask... I took this one yesterday from ~70 ft away with an 80-400 on a D200. Lens was set at 320mm. Manual focus on a tripod. VR off.

Don't bother putting a 1.4x on the 18-200mm. The image quality will be bad and it probably won't AF very well, if at all.

 

I have the 80-400mm VR. It's a pretty good general purpose lens. For slower moving animals it does OK. It's not the lens I'd pick for something like flying birds though. I also have the 70-200mm f2.8, and a 1.4x. This is too short for birds, most of the time. It's not that great for animals unless you can get pretty close. Probably the best option for the money if you want something for wildlife is going to be the 300mm f4 AFS with either the 1.4x or 1.7x. You would be best off using a solid tripod too.

 

--->No such thing as the "best" or "perfect" lens. All have trade offs.

 

 

Kent in SD

So you have a D50 - the 80-400 VR will work fine on that camera.

 

A TC on an 18-200 wouldn't work very well - the light loss would cause AF to suffer, and it's generally not recommended for zooms like that anyway.

 

You may also consider the 70-300 VR. There really isn't as much difference between 300 and 400mm as you'd think, and the AF is much better. About 1/3 the cost, too.

I wouldn't put any TC on the 18-200mm DX or any 2X TC on the 70-200mm/f2.8 AF-S VR. For the latter, you would have turned an excellent zoom into an optically poor combination, but people's demand on quality varies.

80-400 VR vs. 300/4 AF-S with 1.4 and 1.7x extender - a real dilemma. I own both - the 80-400 is lacking the AF-S speed advantage and the 300/4 AF-S is lacking the VR feature that I truly enjoy to break the 1/f shutter speed rule when the lack of subject motion permits (I generally should hand held). To get both VR and AF-S in the same range of focal lengths - the 200-400/4 comes to mind - a very costly proposition though. I don't consider the 70-300 VR an option as it cannot be combined with a TC and 300mm as the longest focal length is rather limiting for bird photography.

 

The 80-400 can be used for birds in flight but your chance are better with the 300/4 AF-S and a 1.4x and still slightly better with the 1.7x. The attached was shot with a D70and the 80-400 on my first outing with the lens.<div></div>

Have to agree with Dieter on what he has to say. I to own the 80-400VR and love it. I had a 80-200mmf2.8 and loved that lens until the I found myself using the 80/400VR most of the time because lots of my shots are taken from our boat. I used to use a 2xconverter on my 80/200 and that worked very well. But it had no VR. I found myself using the VR lens more and more from large stitched together pans and shooting Eagles all hand held, what freedom to be free of the tripod!I haveleandto well with this lens and find it to work even better with my mint D200 that I got for xmass(to many things brokedown around here and I just could not afford the D300).This was before the 70-200mmVR came out. If I had the choice now I might go with that lens and the converter I used with the 80/200.Check out my portfolio on the "Eagles of Homer" All were shot with the 400. Some of them were a bit soft. Also most of the pans were used with the 400 check out "Winters Day" A B/W pan of the Mat Valley here in Alaska. All were shot with the D70. Now this lens focuses faster with the D200 and I can shoot a higher ISO up to 1600 with NR on in the camera. Shooting birds takes some highmm lens. The 80/400VR is a good compromise. The big glass is so very expensive. Another Idea is to find on ebay a old manual focus 400mm and use a 2x converter. I used to use this on my F5 and it worked very well. Could not use on my D70 as metering did not work,but one could always ajust it via the screen.But using the D200 it will meter with my old lens.

Oh yes, Happy new year to all on this great forum. Lets have a great year!

I like my 80-400 VR and it is a staple lens in my camera pack. While I don't shoot

wildlife professionally I have been known to train my lenses on a variety of animals The

80-400 is a bit slow for my tastes. I prefer f4.0 or faster. For a true wildlife lens though

you might want to think about the 600 f4. This is heavy beast that will lighten your

wallet in a huge way. You will also need a great tripod with a Wimberley head on it. I

have a carbon fiber Gitzo that I use for this purpose. On a D2x this make the lens a

900mm f4. You will be able to reach out capture most animals without them knowing

you around. If you are shooting at dawn or dusk when the animals are most active you

might want to go with a 400mm f2.8... It's another pricey, heavy lens, but I love mine.

Of course the 80-400 can shoot flying birds. Here's one.