What is the best 300mm+ under $1000

[jason_lome]

<p>I have an opportunity to shoot nesting bald eagles. I don't care if it is used, my criteria is primarily sharpness, secondary AF and tertiary speed. Image stabilization would be nice but for under $1000 I doubt I could touch anything. Also, am I correct in wanting AF? Back in my learning days of all manual, I lost half my shots with a 55mm and I figure birds would move too fast.</p>

<p>My first option was the new Sigma 150-500mm 5.6-6.3 but this forum has noted that it is an unreliable lens. Possibilities are Nikon 300mm F4, Sigma 400mm 5.6. I even entertained the MC Arsat Yashma 2,8 300mm MF but lens quality is questionable.</p>

<p>Any opinions on teleconverters would be appreciated.</p>

[Two23]

<p>What camera are you using? Makes a huge difference in what I'd suggest. Also, when you talk about wanting sharpness I am assuming you already have a solid tripod/head.</p>

<p>Kent in SD</p>

[AndyMiller]

<p>Nesting Bald Eagles are often in tree tops and fairly well lit I understand, but we don't get them in the UK so...... Lenses? New or second hand? or how about hiring? If hiring how about the new AF-s 500 or 600 mm f4 VR Nikkors? Or the 400 mm f2.8 VR Nikkor. If this is a one off why buy when you could rent? </p>

 

[jason_lome]

<p>I'm using a D300. Also using a Berlebach wood tripod and a 16lb rated ball head.<br>

I would prefer to own and I expect to buy used. Buying new under a grand is a tall order.</p>

<p>Thanks</p>

[scott_murphy_photography]

<p>I would go with a used 400mm f/5.6 AIS ED-IF Nikkor. It is sharp as a tack and can be had on Fleabay (there are two there now, item numbers 290417942782 and 200400233382) for $500 - $550. I would probably steer clear of 200400233382 because it does not have the tripod collar on it and that is almost a given for shooting stuff like you want to. Throw in a Nikon TC-14B and you will still be under $1000. The TC-14B (1.4x, lose 1 stop) is a superb teleconverter. I will often throw it on my 600mm f/4 ED Nikkor and never see a bit of image degradation. The same goes for the TC-201 (2x, lose 2 stops).</p>

[robert_hooper1]

<p>To answer your question. In my opinion the <a href="http://www.bythom.com/300lens.htm">Nikon 300mm f4 AF IF-ED</a> would meet your stated needs. You can find them in like new condition for well under $1000 even in our photo.net. classifieds.</p>

[jason_lome]

<p>Thanks for your input.<br>

Scott mentioned the 400mm F5.6 Manual Focus</p>

<p>What are your opinions on manual focus lens?<br>

Also, I tend to stick with Nikkor glass - what of the Sigma 400mm F5.6 APO AF</p>

[mihai_ciuca]

<p>I second Robert's advice for Nikon 300/f4. You can add an 1.4 TC with almost no chage in IQ... and with your D300 you get the equivalent of 630mm. A good tripod and that's all you need. </p>

[mizore]

<p>I have a used 400mm f/5.6 AIS ED-IF and it really requires a very solid tripod to get the best out of it. You might consider adding a Sidekick to the mix if your tripod head uses Arca Swiss compatible plates.</p>

<p>Eagles don't tend to move rapidly except when diving for prey. I saw one sitting for minutes (and possibly hours) at a wildlife refugee on the Potomac, another one sitting near a pond in central Virginia. They tend to soar when flying (saw my first bald eagle soaring over a suburban road in Annandale, VA).</p>

<p>They will take off and fly away if you get too close and their idea of too close is quite long, though not as long as a falcon's. If you're not working out of a blind, 400mm without a converter may not be enough.</p>

<p>My personal copy of the 400mm isn't quite as sharp as I'd like, but that may be the copy or my handling techniques. If you go with that lens, get it at least a few days before your trip to learn how to work best with it. I've got samples of what my copy can do for me in my portfolio, see in particular the great blue heron shots and the shots of the crow. You'll want to do shutter release by cord or remote trigger and if your camera can do mirror lockup, that also helps.</p>

<p>Big birds don't change vectors as much or as radically as smaller birds or game, and if you're photographing the nest, manual focus won't cost you that much.</p>

<p> </p>

[huntrbll]

<p>I would consider a used Nikon 80-400 VR lens, which you should be able to get for under $1,000. It is not the fastest focusing of lenses, but that is not necessary under the shooting requirement you outline. Most reviews of this lens consider the optics excellent out to 300mm, and very good between 300 and 400. If possible, rent one for a day then make a decision.....</p>

[liljuddakalilknyttphotogra]

<p>I'm here writing the same response I left in the Nature forum....<br>

Go for the 300mm AF-S f/4. TCs - cheap but great is the Kenko 1.4, though I like the build of the Nikon one a lot better - but it costs a lot more.</p>

[philip_ashley]

<p>Jason. I will second the Nikon 300mm f4 lens, also the Nikon 1.4 converter. I mentioned the following a few weeks ago on this forum to another persons inquiry with a similar question, which is, go to the website of Ronnie Gaubert, "Birds of Louisiana" and take a look at his pictures of the "Black Crowned Night Heron". I believe you will be impressed. I had only seen his pictures for the first time two days before my last post. I was exetremely impressed with the amazing quallity of his pictures with that lens.</p>

[Dieter Schaefer]

<p>Best: 300/4 AF-S - and I agree with Lil, a Kenko or Tamron TC will work fine - though I do use a TC-14E. As sharp but with slower AF, and working as well with the aforementioned third-party TCs - the Nikon 300/4 AF IF-ED that Robert Hopper already mentioned; it's priced substantially lower than the AF-S version. I don't have personal experience with the longer MF Nikkors - but unless there is a substantial cost advantage, I would prefer AF.</p>

[steve_phillipps]

<p>Depends how far you'll be from the nest. Unless you're pretty close a 300mm is pretty short - even with a 1.4x TC and the 1.5x from the D300. If you're happy with MF the Nikon 400 f3.5 is a fabulous lens, as is the 600 f5.6.<br>

I'd also avoid zooms, with birds you always seem to want as much magnification as possible and the zoom will be slower and less sharp most likely.<br />Good luck.<br>

Steve</p>

 

[jwallphoto]

<p>I also go with 300/4 AF-S, but with a 1.7X TC (still much smaller than a 2X). That puts you at 500mm @ f/6.7. It's lightweight and can be shot hand-held for those times you need to get it off the tripod. I wouldn't think of going manual focus if I could afford to get AF. With AF-S you can still manually focus even when you're set on AF. For the times when you want to grab focus control from the lens, it's worth a lot to be able to just do it, rather than having to switch the lens back to MF first.</p>

[jason_lome]

<p>I'm still open, but the 300mm F4 IF-ED (not the AF-S) with a 1.4x or 1.7x TC seems like the ticket. Does the auto focus still work with the TC on the lens? Also, now that I am considering a TC, the Nikon made versions start really high. I suppose my next question is which teleconverter should I consider.</p>

<p>The 300mm AF-S seems like a sweet lens but it is more than twice the price and the 400 F3.5 is even more not to mention manual focus.<br>

I cannot even find a 600mm F5.6 online for sale.<br>

I certain hear you (Steve Phillipps) about being close to your subject. I had a hand me down 1000mm telescope that seemed just the right magnification but the image quality isn't worth mentioning. I purchased a gilly suit which fools no one but other humans.</p>

<p>Thanks to everyone for their response. I've spent a lot of 'surfing research' and this really helps.<br>

jason</p>

[Dieter Schaefer]

<p>Jason, I did own the 300/4 IF-ED and used it with a Kenko TC - and yes, AF still works. Nikon has no TC that will maintain AF with this lens - all Nikon TCs either require AF-S lenses or are strictly MF. And before someone jumps at me - yes, the Nikon AF-S TCs can be "modified" (filing off a tab) but given their price, that isn't really an option (for me at least). AF on that lens is a bit slow but the focus limiter ring is very useful (much more than the switch on the AF-S version) and proper use of it can speed up things quite a bit.</p>

[steve_phillipps]

<p>Here was a 400 3.5 https://secure.ffordes.com/index.htm<br>

The 600 is harder to find for sure. I used to have a 600 f4 MF lens but I'd be cautious of these as mine was pretty softish.<br />Steve</p>

<p> </p>

[scott_murphy_photography]

<blockquote>

<p ><a href="../photodb/user?user_id=442384">steve phillipps</a> <a href="../member-status-icons"><img title="Frequent poster" src="http://static.photo.net/v3graphics/member-status-icons/1roll.gif" alt="" /></a>, Mar 31, 2010; 04:45 p.m.</p>

</blockquote>

 

<blockquote>

<p>............The 600 is harder to find for sure. I used to have a 600 f4 MF lens but I'd be cautious of these as mine was pretty softish.......</p>

</blockquote>

<p>You must have a bad copy Steve, because my AIS 600mm f/4 ED is sharp as a tack, even wide open. Throw on my TC-14B and it makes for an 840mm f/5.6 that is out of this world!</p>

 

[david_feindel]

<p>Yet another vote for the Nikon 300mm f/4. Stretch if you can to get the AF-S version; you'll be glad you did in the years ahead. I used this lens plus a Kenko 1.4 TC to get great pictures of bald eagles at the Tule Lake/Winter Wings Festival. The eagles would generally be perched in trees and you could get within 50-75 yds of them. AF speed isn't that important in this setting, but the ability to "touch up" focus is. You'll likely have confusing backgrounds which can cause the camera to focus on the wrong thing. And with this lens, shooting at f/4 (or f/5.6 with the TC) depth of field is fairly shallow. Of course, if you're shooting across a river...you can't get closer. But the 300mm * 1.4 = 420mm on a crop body is still a pretty long lens. A solid tripod and good technique is also required to get sharp images. Good luck!</p>

[moop]

<p>heresy perhaps. but i would vote for the flexibility of the Sigma 150-500. if it is a one off gig then rent a lens .if you are going to keep it then get the Sigma. Mine is great. You need to know how to use it, but once you get to grips with that, then it is pretty impressive. I have even used it with a Kenko x2 and it has been good. not great, but good.<br>

Why get a 300mm then try to boost the focal length with a converter? can the 300mm f4 AF at 500 mm? The Sigma can<br>

just my 2p</p>