Wildlife Photography Equipment

[santosh_r]

Hello everybody,

 

I ve always been interested in wildlife and now i want to do

photography that includes everything from mammals to small birds. I m

looking out to invest in equipment to suit my needs.

I would like to know what best Nikon has to offer because some ppl say

that canon is better.... never ending discussion. I dont know enough

to comment on that.

I want a good zoom lens which can be used with a TC while retaining AF

and Exposure feedback. I will be using a digital body so 1.5x can be

added while suggesting the lenses.

Later i am looking for a decent prime to shoot small birds ..somewhere

abt 800mm to 1000 mm shud be fine. So again lens with TC ..AF and

exposure retained.I cannot afford the 200-400VR AFS,4002.8 AFS,500f4

AFS....

Please help me decide as to what would be the right equipment to suit

my needs.

Thanks.

 

Regards,

Santosh

[arnabdas]

"a good zoom lens which can be used with a TC while retaining AF and Exposure feedback."

 

A used 80-200/2.8 AF Nikkor is the least you are looking for.

[ivan_verschoote1]

If you're looking for quality forget zoom lenses + tc (except 200-400/4 naturally). Personally I should opt for a 300/4 AFs + 1.7 Tc which give you a very decent 510mm (+ 1.5 digital). This compromise should give the best quality/price ratio without breaking your bankaccount.

[santosh_r]

Thanks Ivan,

 

U say 300f4 afs will be a good choice.

But will it AF with the 1.7x or 2x TC on a D70 and comply with the exposure as well ?

 

Santosh

[lex_jenkins]

What size prints do you want to make? That's a major determining factor.

 

I just ordered a Nikon D2H, which has been discontinued and replaced with the D2Hs (which offers no additional resolution). The recently discounted price was irresistable and I don't expect to make prints larger than 8x10. If I do, there's always interpolation - some people report good results from this.

 

To compensate for the limited resolution (without interpolation) the D2H has blistering speed. Faster autofocus than the Rebel, 20D, D100, D70, Fuji S3 or Olympus E-1. That's very important to me. I can manually focus as fast as those cameras most of the time for my purposes (which doesn't include wildlife photography). So if I'm going to go with an AF system it had better be faster than me.

 

It also has extremely fast frame rates at maximum resolution. That's a must. I'm spoiled by the motor drives on my F3 and FM2N.

 

So if I ever did want to do wildlife or serious sports photography this camera can handle it. If things work out well enough it may replace slide and color negative film for all of my color photography. But I won't give up b&w film anytime soon.

 

The only minus I can think of is the weight. I'd hoped to find one of the lighter, more compact, less expensive dSLRs satisfactory for my needs. No such luck. I'll have to buy a good belt carry system because my back and neck can't handle a heavy load anymore.

 

If 4 megapixels isn't enough, wait a few months for prices to settle out on the D2X. It's significantly less expensive than Canon's top dog right now and will only get more affordable in coming months.

 

And if you're still undecided forget about the camera itself for now. Decide on what kind of lenses you need - the best and fastest you can afford, regardless of brand. That's what will tell you what camera to buy.

[luis triguez]

Depending what kind of nature photography you'll intende to do.

But something no less than 200. And a good teleconverter, just in case.<div></div>

[umd]

<i>some ppl say that canon is better</i><br><br>

 

Have a look at <a href = "http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=009rky">here</a> to learn what serious wildlife shooters use.

[jemini_joseph]

Santosh <br>

 

You have lots of choices.

You said you cannot afford anything above 4000 range. Here're my suggestions

<br><br>

1) If you can afford between $3000 to $4000, go for Bikon 500mm f/4 AF-I which is

the previous version to AF-S. It will retain AF and send right exposure to

camera with TC-14E. Not with any other TC's. This weighs around 8.5LB

<br><br>

 

2) If you want to be around 3000 range, try to get 300/2.8 AF-S II.

You will get AF and exposure info to camera with TC-14E, TC-17E and TC-20E.

Not sure how good is the quality with TC-20E. I know it's acceptable.

But I believe My next choice is better than this above 500mm. This weighs around 6LB

<br><br>

3) If you cannot spend in that range and can spend between 2000 to 3000 then

try a used Sigma 500/4.5 HSM lens and TC-14E. This will also retain decent AF

(not 100% on D70 because effective aperture is f/6.3)

and send exposure to camera. Here the camera won't get the corrected aperture.

If you have f/5.6 on the lens, that's what camera will get while the actual

effective aperture is f/8. But the exposure will be perfect. You don't have

to worry about putting any exposure compensation. This is what I use. One more thing

you have to know is that you have to make a simple modification to TC-14E to make

work with this sigma lens which can affect resellability of TC. The

lens alone weighs 6.8LB

<br><br>

4) Another choice for this range is the 300/2.8 AF-S (First version) with

TC-14E, TC-17E and TC-20E. I would say Sigma lens alone will be sharper than Nikon

300/2.8 AF-S + TC-17E at 500mm. But Nikon with TC-14E will be sharper than

Sigma but you will get only 420mm. This is my assumption. TC-20E is also 100% compatible. This

weighs around 6.5 LB

<br><br>

5) If you want to go for below 2000 then the best choice will be 300/2.8

AF-I. This is amazingly sharp lens for the price. You can use TC-14E and

TC-17E and TC-20E with this lens too without losing AF and exposure info to camera.

I've seen this is being sold for 1300 to 2000. This weighs around 6.5LB

<br><br>

6) If you want to go below 1500, then 300/4 AF-S+ TC-14 and TC-17E will be the best

choice. Never tried this lens. Not sure how good the AF with TC-17E will be on a lower end

body. I think it will really good with D2H level camera.

<br><br>

 

Hope this helps bit. Here is a sample from my Sigma 500/4.5 HSM lens alone on D70.

This 100% crop.

<br><br>

<img src="http://www.color-pictures.com/images/sigma500/cardinalfemale.jpg">

<br><br><a href="http://www.color-pictures.com" target="w-2">http://www.color-pictures.com</a>

[luis triguez]

Good one Jemini

[santosh_r]

Jemini,

 

Thanks a lot for ur suggestions.

Genuine and really helpful to me and all of them

who had similar queries.I think ill take a closer look at the D70 + 300 f4 with TCs combo.

 

Nice shot that !

Thanks again

 

Santosh

[jemini_joseph]

Thanks for the comment guys..

I've gone through the dilema couple of years back. My budget was 2000 dollars. I bought Nikkor 600/5.6 ED lens first. It's real great lens. But once I happened to see Sigma 500/4.5 HSM from a friend of mine. I was amazed with the lens and loved the fast AF. So I sold the MF lens got this one from photo.net for $1800. It was a great deal. I'm really happy with it even after two years. I don't think there's a better deal for around $2000 even now.

[greg s]

Santosh,

 

Besides the Sigma 500mm that Jemini uses, another used lens to keep on the lookout for is the Nikon 500mm f/4 AF-I (the pre AF-S version). I got mine at a good price and I've seen some others out there in excellent condition at reasonable prices. Not sure what your budget is, but sooner or later you will most likely obtain a 500 f/4 if you pursue bird/wildlife photography. Cheers, -Greg-

[mark_chappell]

Santosh: I consider myself a 'serious' wildlife shooter (website <A HREF="http://

biology.ucr.edu/

personal/MACphotos/index.html">here</a>). Regardless of what system you end up

with, if you want to photograph birds, especially small ones

(and many other shy critters), you're going

to want the longest lens you can possibly afford. Since your budget is constrained I'd

second the recommendations for the 500 Sigma HSM, which has a very good reputation.

Nevertheless, even if you get a 500, and even with an APS sensor DSLR, you'll be using it

with a teleconverter nearly all of the time for small birds (if you peruse my site, which

shows focal lengths used, this will be obvious).<P>

 

With respect to the never-ending and often pointless N vs C wars: having shot with both

systems I don't see much of a difference EXCEPT in big telephotos, where the stabilized

Canon lenses are much easier to use than their Nikon equivalents (400/2.8, 500/4, 600/

4). I doubt if there is much difference between N vs. C superteles on an optical bench

(both are superb),

but stabilization is a huge advantage in providing sharp images 'in the field'. I hope

Nikon gets its act

together quickly and

moves VR into their big glass.

[jemini_joseph]

Oh, one difference I like to mention here about sigma to Nikon is that it's maximum aperture is f/4.5. Nikon's Minimum apertur for reliable AF is f/5.6. Sigma with TC, the effective apertur is f/6.3. That's reason it hunts little bit with TC. I don't think the combo is reliable for flying birds. Greg's message made me think about it. Thanks Greg.. :)

 

Like Mark mentioned you won't see any difference in optical quality unless you go for one of Canon's big lenses. That's why I didn't move yet. I cannot afford one of those lenses now. You will be able to make more difference with a better tripod and better technique.. But IS is no match. Move to canon if You can afford one..