Cheapest ($500?) AF 500mm lens?

<p>Dear cousins from the Nikon universe,</p>

<p>I'm a Canon photographer (very little knowledge of Nikkor lenses) with a Nikon APC-C uncle. My uncle asked me what would be "the next step up" from his 55?-300mm (probably f/5.6 at 300) zoom, which I could not hold quite long enough to read the markings (ADHD issues). I then queried him about several things:</p>

<p>Subject: birds<br /> Birds in flight or sitting still? Still<br /> Types of birds: Probably small birds in back yard, range 20-75 ft. (my guess)<br /> Budget: about $500<br /> Manual focus OK? No. (I had suggested one of Nikon's manual focus mirrors.)<br /> Prime or zoom? He didn't seem to have any preference.<br /> Enlargement size: prints up to 14" minor dimension.</p>

<p>Additional info: Novice photographer, point-and-shoot skill level. Probably doesn't need stunning image quality from his lens. My own assessment is that cheap would actually be a very good idea. While I would recommend a higher budget to many people, I realize my uncle is unlikely to care for this lens well (e.g. throwing it in a camera bag without either front or rear caps or protective filter, left to swim with other uncapped lenses and other stuff). I don't know whether a 500mm lens AF lens can be had for $500. I honestly don't have much familiarity with really long and/or really cheap lenses.</p>

<p>With an emphasis on CHEAP, AF capable, and 500 mm, what lenses might work?</p>

<p>Is there any hope of using a TC and still getting AF when using a 300mm f/5.6 lens? Perhaps f/8 with a 1.4x TC? I'm guessing not.</p>

<p>Thanks, my Nikonian cousins! :-)</p>

<p>PS Be gentle! ;-)</p>

<p>If the budget were around $5000, I have suggestions about 500mm/f4 AF Nikon lenses. For $500, unless it is stolen stuffs or broken.</p>

<p>If the budget is around $500, I would consider digi-scoping or perhaps get some Nikon 1 mirrorless camera; some of those may still be on firesale, and mount that zoom up to 300mm onto it via an adapter.</p>

<p>Unfortunately 'cheap' and 'bird photography' are not compatible words. Birds are small, very small, and any 500mm owner will tell you 500mm is ok but still short. In addition to that birds are constantly moving, especially the small ones.</p>

<p>As a result you need reach and speed and that means high expense. Even with a recent DSLR offering decent high ISO quality a fast lens is usually a necessity.</p>

<p>My favorite 'low cost' combo for birds is a prime 300mm f/4 with a 1.4x or 1.7x converter. Not sure about Canon offerings but on the Nikon side we are talking close to $1000 used.</p>

<p>Another cheaper option is to get closer to the birds, either by hiding under a blind, or by having the birds come to you, or both. They are a few phone apps (bird callers) that are very effective at attracting birds.</p>

<p>USD 500 for a 500 mm lens is at least challenging. Perhaps a 2nd hand reflex/mirror lens fits the bill. Or a 2nd hand Sigma 170-500<br>

Tamron recently introduced a 160-600 lens for about USD 1000. That would be my choice - or I would at least consider it, but it's twice the budget.</p>

<p>Well Canon lenses are somewhat more affordable, but there's frankly nothing in the Canon lineup that would meet these specs either. That's why I'm thinking it would have to be 3rd party.</p>

<p>Interesting thought about a mirrorless camera. That might be a cheaper approach, but it wouldn't solve the AF issue. He might as well have a 500 or 1000 Nikkor mirror, which he rejects because of the manual focus.</p>

<p>Stalking the birds (to get closer) is not an option. He has less patience than a hummingbird.</p>

<p>Which body does he have?</p>

<p>Jos, I think a $1000 lens might be an option, even though it's twice his stated budget. Dunno... But thanks for the recommendations. So far:</p>

<p>300/4 w/ 1.4x or 1.7x ($1000'ish used)<br>

Sigma 170-500 used<br>

Tammy 160-600 new ($1000)</p>

<p> </p>

<p>Elliot, I wish I knew which body, but I don't, other than that it's an APS-C model. (Budget = cheap.) <br /> Sorry for not having better info! :-(</p>

<p>mm if not using a 500mm a lot it could also be an idea to rent whenever it is needed.<br /> Many ppl who are not profs buy long fast lenses which end up sitting in a cupboard most of the time because thos lenses are used in few situations and are to heavy to lug around. When looking at it closely it often turns out that renting a good lens turns out to be much more cost effective...</p>

<p>Something else that might work is switch to a Nikon one (1) camera and add a FTn adapter and a 300mm something lens... the crop factor then helps for the longer reach... ( I know it is cheating..:-) )</p>

<p>CPM, he's open to renting to try out different lenses, and I told him I thought that was a good idea. However, ownership is the eventual goal. I think most of his bird photography would be birds that happen to fly into the back yard, and I suspect he would actually use the lens on a daily (or at least weekly) basis.</p>

<p>2nd recommendation for the Nikon 1. Will this camera operate the focus and aperture on an ordinary Nikkor lens with an adapter? Nikon's adapter?</p>

<p>Sarah, the adapter I have in mind is the Nikon FT1 (Nikon <strong>F</strong> mount <strong>t</strong>o Nikon <strong>1</strong> mirrorless mount): http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/823722-REG/Nikon_3613_FT1_Mount_Adapter.html</p>

<p>It will maintain AF with the center AF point on Nikon 1 mirrorless cameras. If your uncle can take advantage of some of those Nikon 1 J1 or similar fire sales, e.g., your uncle can do it in about $500: http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/823584-REG/Nikon_27567_1_J1_Mirrorless_Digital.html<br>

I know, some of the remaining colors for those J1 are not that desirable.</p>

<p>Whether that is a good solution or not is up to your uncle to decide. I have much better ideas but the cost will be several times of $500.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>Will this camera operate the focus and aperture on an ordinary Nikkor lens with an adapter? Nikon's adapter?</p>

</blockquote>

<p>http://imaging.nikon.com/lineup/acil/lenses/mount_adapter_ft1/</p>

<p>I very much appreciate your advice, guys! I'll be back later. I have to go fix a lawn mower.</p>

<p>(Wow, you Nikon people have a LOT more active a forum than we Canon folks.)</p>

<p>Great! I just caught your posts!</p>

<p>Woohoo! This Nikon 1 sounds promising! I'll investigate after I clean the grease from my hands! Thanks, guys!</p>

<p>CPM, your post and mine crossed. The FT1 will maintain AF with AF-S lenses. The quality of that AF is another question.</p>

<p>Sarah, another option is the new Tamron 150-600mm lens, but at this point it is only available in the Canon EF mount. The Nikon version is not yet available, as far as I know. That lens is a little over $1000.</p>

<p>:-)</p>

<p>Sarah, I know you asked for a 500mm and I know we're supposed to use a 500mm or better for birds, but let me suggest (as I often do) the Nikon 70-300mm VR. Since you don't know what Nikon body your uncle has, let's assume it's at least a D50 (currently available used at KEH for $99.)</p>

<p>Here's a bird in flight with that combination. One of the good things about it is that it's much easier to follow flying birds with it than it is with a longer, heavier lens.<br>

<br />More birds with this combination <a href="/casual-conversations-forum/00VVrS">in this thread</a>.</p><div></div>

<p>Hector, I wonder how much cropping you have done with that hummingbird image. Do you mind showing us the entire frame of that image, scaled down to 700 pixels on the long side, and how much that portion represents in the whole frame?</p>

<p>Sarah, before you get too excited about the solution using the FT1 and Nikon 1 cameras, I suggest you talk to a few people who use that combo on a regular basis and get their input; just keep in mind that any $500 solution is going to involve a lot of compromises. I should point out that I have never used the FT1 myself.</p>

<p>If he has an older, lower resolution body, his best bet may be a used D7000. The increased resolution with the lens he has will give him better ability to crop his images while maintaining high resolution and get to a 500mm field of view with good IQ possibly equivalent to his current body with a 500mm lens.<em><br /></em></p>

 

<p>The 500mm mirror lens wasn't all that awful...and probably about that price or less. Nikkor 300/4.5 ("ED" type with 1.4 extender would be a relatively inexpensive <em>fix</em>. The 500 "P" model might be about 1K more, but better quality glass. Also, look into film 645 or med format lenses, such as Pentax or Mamiya (F4 to 4.5, I believe)...the latter would go for $400-600, tho they would require quality adapter to Nikon. Anything of quality and AF will be spendy.</p>

<p>Les</p>

<p>Sarah, Elliot nudged my consciousness with his suggestion. I have a D5100 (same sensor as the D7000) and recently took <a href="/photo/17736925">this photo</a>, my one and only bird photo. (so take this advice with a gain of salt) It's a 100% crop of an original 16mpx file. Not so good if you are making bigger enlargements (8x10 and above) but more than adequate for the net. I used a 55-200mm kit lens on a dull (ISO 1600) day. Up to 14" prints? I don't think so. Some of the P&S cameras, under bright light, might satisfy him too. Only shallow pockets prevent me from going the 500mm plus extenders route. So I guess this is as good as I'll be expecting for a while. Best, LM.</p>

<p>In that same position I wouldn't be a bit embarrassed about leaving the dSLR behind and spending the $500 or less on a good Canon superzoom P&S. Those Canons with 30x to 50x zooms on teensy sensor digicams are incredible values for the casual backyard birder. The image quality and overall satisfaction will be better than compromising on any 500mm AF tele for $500 or less.</p>

<p>I recommended one of those Canon superzooms to a home-bound friend who enjoys photographing birds in her yard. She's developed her skills well enough to have outgrown her Sony P&S with midrange zoom.</p>

<p>By the way, the Nikon 1 System cameras have excellent autofocus. I can still recommend the V1 if you can find one reasonably priced - the EVF eye level finder really helps. If Nikon's recently introduced 70-300 zoom was more reasonably priced I'd consider it, even though I rarely need a long lens. For now I'm able to get by with manual focusing teles and zooms on the V1 via the Fotodiox all-manual adapter. But manual focusing is a bit of a chore with the V1. While the EVF is bright enough, there is no focus confirmation aid - it's strictly eyeballing it like a ground glass finder. I manage with stationary birds but struggle to keep up with moving critters like my neighbors' dogs frolicking in the yard.</p>

<p>Sarah - I'm a little surprised this option hasn't been brought up yet, and whether it will work will depend on what camera body your uncle has.</p>

<p>Some Nikon APS-C bodies contain a motor to drive certain autofocus lenses, and other models do not. If you uncle has one of the models with that built-in motor (D70, D80, D90, D7000, D7100), then the original 300 mm f4 AF-I lens may be just the ticket (it can be had for less than $500 from KEH.com with a 6 month warranty). The lens is a bit heavy because it's built like a tank, and it is optically excellent. It can be coupled with a 1.4x or a 2.0x teleconverter to give 420 or 600 mm focal lengths. There's a limit on the teleconverters - to maintain autofocus, Kenko teleconverters should be used (Nikon's most modern ones will NOT fit and could damage the lens). Autofocus will be somewhat slow by modern standards and the TC-combinations will cause it to hunt in low light. But with a decent tripod he should be able to get shots he'll be quite happy with.</p>

<p>Again, all this depends on which Nikon camera he has. The D3xxx and D5xxx lines of bodies won't autofocus with this lens.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>Hector, I wonder how much cropping you have done with that hummingbird image. Do you mind showing us the entire frame of that image, scaled down to 700 pixels on the long side, and how much that portion represents in the whole frame? --Shun</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Here is the full frame so you can see the crop. Even with cropping, and the mere 6MP of the D50, it still makes a nice print. </p><div></div>