Nikon AF 80-400mm VR or Af-s 70-300mm VR

I am looking to buy a lens with more lenghth into wildlife photography

especially of birds. The 70-300mm is cheaper with a faster autofocus and more

light weight, but the 80-400mm is a broad range of zoom and i found one

selling very very cheap,

Have you considered a 300mm F4 AF-S with a TC14eII? Look into this before you decide.

Found one selling very very cheap - the Nikon 80-400 VR usually sells for $1000-1400 whereas the 70-300 VR is a $450 lens. I own the 80-400 as well as the 300/4 AF-S (with TC-14E and TC-17E) Ray Martin is referring to - 300mm is minimum for bird photography and I would not purchase the 70-300 for that purpose. The AF on the 80-400 is not very fast but the lens itself is excellent. The plus of it over the 300/4 AF-S is the VR feature, which comes in handy for static subjects. Including one converter, the cost for a 300/4 AF-S and a 80-400 are virtually identical. If you are on a budget, an older 300/4 AF-D together with a KenkoPro converter is an alternative - cost should be around $500 for the lens and $200 for a converter.

Ray and Dieter are right. The 300 f4 with a converter is a nice combo. I just got it a couple of

months ago. If you are in a budget the 300 FD will do but I strongly recommend the AF-S

model.

 

Rene'

I would get a 300mm/4 but NOT a Nikon TC. You might want to consider a Kenko Teleplus Pro 300 as it works far better as a TC both at 1.4 and 2.0.

 

See 2.0x photos here: http://www.photo.net/photodb/folder?folder_id=769560

 

The 80-400 VR is a bit soft and slow. 300mm is a bit short for any nature shooting. So what Dieter Schaefer said at the end of his post. BTW, the bike shot made a publication not to be named per rights.

 

VR. . .we never use it. A good mono or tripod is MUCH better.

Don't know if you can wait or if these will be any good, but Sigma just announced two new long zoom lenses with OS (Sigma's version of VR).

Truthfully, both lenses are too short for birds unless your birds are in the zoo.

I have the AF80-400mm VR lens and I love it. The freedom it gives from the tripod is great. I shoot most of my panoramic shots with it and all my eagles of Homer were shot with it. I have found that up grading from the D70 to the D200 has made the lens hunt and focus much faster. The lens is very sharp. If you can find one cheap I would go for it. Would love to buy one for my wife she shoots alot from her kayak and the VR would help her alot. Its a great lens.

Ray you may want to read this review about the 80-400mm VR.

 

http://nikonglass.blogspot.com/2007/12/af-80-400mm-f4.html

 

You may also be interested to know that John Caz's findings from a few years ago have shown that the 300mm f/4 lens does not perform as greatly on the D200 and D300 cameras as it does with film. The optical performance of both the 80-400mm and 300mm deteriotes slightly on the new digital bodies even though they are both great performers. He also mentioned that amazingly, the new AFS 70-300mm VR performs superbly on both mentioned cameras.

 

His personal ranking goes something like this:

 

A) Optical performance on modern digital body 1)AFS 70-300VR, 2) AF 80-400mm VR 3) AFS 300mm

 

B) AF and handling performance 1)AFS 70-300VR, 2) AFS 300mm 3) AF 80-400mm VR

 

Of course, the big problem with shooting wildlife is focal length so the 80-400mm VR may be the preferred choice since its an excellent performer and offers the focal length that the others don't.

 

Check out this index page for more interesting stuff

http://nikonglass.blogspot.com/2007/12/wow-my-first-post.html

 

 

Cheers

Peter

The above link is wrong and the correct link for the main index page is the following:

 

http://www.johncaz.com/

Even short teles can be used for bird work if you use a hide.