old 400mm+ lenses for wildlife

[jon_teague]

<p>Hello all,</p>

<p>Ive decided to finally get a big lens for wildlife and need one that has very good image quality. I posted a question before asking what my options were and have decided to get an older nikon prime. I have recently used an older 70-300mm nikon (i know its not in the same league, but just concerned) and was not impressed with its lack of sharpness and huge amount of chromatic aberration.</p>

<p>I was wondering what the CA is like on these older primes? Also im undecided between; 400mm f3.5 (maybe 2.8 if i can get one cheap enough), 500mm f4 and 600mm f5.6. With the 400mm i would more than likely buy a high quality TC to go with. would this affect the quality even if it was a nikon TC? If anyone has used any of these lenses (and also with TC's) of similar alternatives, any information would be very welcome.</p>

<p>Many thanks<br>

Jon</p>

[leicaglow]

<p>Jon, I just responded to your other thread, but CA on the old primes (while this is sort of generalized), tends not to be as bad as the CA on some of the newer non-pro Nikkors.</p>

[elliot1]

<p>Another lens to consider is the 600mm f4 which I think will give you needed reach for smaller wildlife and a fairly fast aperture.</p>

[dennis_d._hardenburger]

<p>I can highly recomend the Nikkor 500mm f4-P manual focus lens.<br>

It is extremly sharp corner to corner with good contrast and saturation, with very life like colors. It takes the 1.4 tc very well even wide open. It is one of the lighter super telephoto lens, but still need a good solid tripod. I can not hand hold and focus the lens very well, a gimballed head is a joy to use.<br>

I have heard the 400mm f3.5 is an excellent lens also, but I think you would want more reach.</p>

 

[dennis_d._hardenburger]

<p>I can highly recomend the Nikkor 500mm f4-P manual focus lens.<br>

It is extremly sharp corner to corner with good contrast and saturation, with very life like colors. It takes the 1.4 tc very well even wide open. It is one of the lighter super telephoto lens, but still need a good solid tripod. I can not hand hold and focus the lens very well, a gimballed head is a joy to use.<br>

I have heard the 400mm f3.5 is an excellent lens also, but I think you would want more reach.</p>

 

[carl_becker2]

<p>What body are you using? A very good viewfinder is needed with manual focus. The Nikkor 500mm f4 P works very well with either format if you can manually focus with it. A TC-14 also works well with it. The Nikkor 400mm f5.6 ED-IF also works well with DX.</p>

[conrad_smith]

<p>Jon --</p>

<p>The 400/3.5 is excellent on film with the TC-301 teleconverter but I sold that lens because of excessive CA with Nikon digital cameras. The 500/4 P is excellent with film and with digital bodies -- better with teleconverters on digital bodies than the 400, but not quite as good on film with the TC-301 as the 400/3.5.<br>

If you're not familiar with Bjørn Rørslett’s Nikon lens evaluations, have a look at <a href="http://www.naturfotograf.com/lens_surv.html">http://www.naturfotograf.com/lens_surv.html</a> He does a good job of describing CA with film and digital cameras.</p>

[yellowwoodguiding]

<p>If your going the manual focus route which the 500 P is a great lens for that solution. I currently have the 200-400, 500, and 600 Vr's, and if I could have only one it would be the 500. I can add the TC if needed, and its not hard to back off a bit. 400 is generally never enough reach when it comes to wildlife unless your talking roadside big game. Then 400 is just as often too much, then seconds later not enough. But once you get away from roads 400 isn't enough.<br>

Unless your using the manual tele's on D3 or the like kind of view finder I would recommend getting a custom Katz Eye view screen. I got a matte finish no prism and it greatly improved my shot sharpness compared to the stock screen. The prism will not work well, tried it, not enough light especially with TC's.<br>

The upside of the 500 P is it holds its value very well, so you can fork out for that, then save and jump to an AFS model. Once you use the P, AFS will rock your world. They are crazy sharp.<br>

Also like said above, get a gimbal and a tripod that can definitely hold the weight well. Once you own a big tele you'll be amazed at how many shots you can really get. Generally photography is not really about the equipment but a monster lens really does improve your results. Probably out of guilt for the cost :)</p>

[Kent Shafer]

<p>I have the 400mm f/2.8 AIS. It's very sharp and works great with a TC-14B. I have no problem focusing it with a D300 or D700 with the standard screens but have been thinking about a Katz Eye anyway. It's a very heavy lens but graceful and nimble when mounted on a strong tripod with Wimberley head.</p>

<p> </p>

[jon_teague]

<p>Thanks for the replies,<br>

Im quite tempted by the 500mm also.<br>

Ive been looking on ebay a lot recently, but havent come across many 600mm f4's but they sound ideal.<br>

conrad, thats a very helpfull website thank you.<br>

Also what i meant to ask aswell was if its worth paying a lot extra for an ED lens?<br>

sorry for so many questions, i just dont want to rush into this too fast<br>

Jon</p>

 

[jon_teague]

<p>oh also i currently own a d200 so i would definatly consider the katz eye</p>

[joseph_smith3]

<p>Jon, I own and have used both the Nikon 400mm f 3.5 and the Nikon 500mm f 4.0 P lens on a Nikon D 200 and D 300. I do my processing in Nikon Capture NX2 and do not see any CA with either lens; perhaps NX2 just eliminates it from the NEF files during processing.<br>

The matched Nikon tcs for both lenses are the Nikon tc 14B and the tc 301. Both work fine with both lenses.<br>

The 500mm f 4.0 has more reach, is superbly balanced for tripod use and is a joy to use. It's image quality is superb even with the 1.4x tc. My copy is easy to focus w/o any special focusing screens although they would be a help. The 400mm f 3.5 is front heavy, so when used on a tripod, you really have to lock it in place with a high quality ball head or gimbal head. It has a built in lens hood that is somewhat short. One benefit it has over the 500mm is that it fits into a Lowepro Minitrecker backpack making it easier to take on an airplane. Both lenses when used with Nikon extension tubes make great "macro" lenses. <br>

My advice is to get the 500mm f 4.0 P if you can find a good copy. Other things being equal, extra focal length is always a plus. The key thngs to look for in either lens is clean glass, a properly functioning diaphragh, and camera mount. To get a high percentage of keeper images, with any long lens, you will need a very good tripod, the right ball head or gimbal head and excellent long lens shooting technique. It requires the right "system," not just the lens. Good luck and welcome to nature shooting.<br>

Joe Smith</p>

[elliot1]

<p>What is your budget?</p>

[John Crowe]

<p>I use a 400/2.8 AIS with a TC-14e II. I could not tell the difference in performance between the TC-14B and TC-14eII, but the TC-14eII was in better optical condition. I even used the 400/2.8 with the TC-16A AF teleconverter, even though not recommended by Nikon. Combo worked fine but focus range was limited. Optical quality was as good as the other TC's.</p>

<p>There is currently a 400/2.8 at keh.com for a very good price, they rarely become available for less than $1500 USD. There is a 500/4 P in almost new condition at auction on eBay at a reasonable starting price considering it's immaculate condition. It could go as high as $2500 USD though. </p>

<p>In the past month or so two 600/4's sold on eBay for less than $1500 USD which is also rare. They had various minor problems that would not affect the optics. I also recently saw a 500/4 P sell in the $1500 USD range, either keh or ebay. You have to be very patient for the 500/4 and 600/4. Be prepared to spend several months before finding one at the price/condition you want.</p>

<p>As far as CA goes all of these will be very good. My 400/2.8 is extremely well controlled.</p>

[dennis_george_miller]

<p>beautiful results here with 400 3.5 and tc 300, with the d40, even hand held! it is heavy and long, which seems to steady the thing. amazing for bird photos. </p>

[joemikel1]

<p>Hi Jon. I must disagree with your solution. Manual focusing is the best way to get frustrated in the field. I have finished yesterday a 5 days photo-bird trip. One of my mates carried a 500 f4 - P. I think he only could get a 20% of the situations (car-hide, moving birds,...), while I could get about 98% of them. My lens, with equal price as his ( a sigma 500 f4.5 hsm) gave me tack sharp images all the time. Maybe someone could argue that the 20% he made had better IQ than mine (I would strongly disagree), but still I had images of the best situations (action, bif,..).<br>

So, my advice is, get an AF lens and forget about manual focusing...</p>

[jon_teague]

<p>thanks again for the replies and advice!<br>

keh.com is an amazing website, ive never been on it before. Also i think i already have that 500mm lens you mentioned on my watch list :)<br>

The absolute maximum i could probably go would be around £1500 which is about $2500<br>

jose, you have a good point, however i have used long lenses before (600 f4 and sigma 800 rental from my uni) and i found myself manual focusing a lot of the time as the lenses arent always very accurate. Also i have found the sigma 800mm f5.6 to be very soft.<br>

Jon</p>

[elliot1]

<p>I just went through the same considerations as you and ended up ordering a 600mm f4 from KEH. I am expecting to receive it in the middle of the week. Since you have used it, perhaps you can tell me a little about it. Is there any reason you are considering other lenses instead it it?</p>

[Albins images]

<p>I still own the 400/3.5. Works reasonably well on D200 - bit fuzzy. Better on D300.<br />The lens itself is wonderfully compact for its performance.<br />I'll keep it for furure use.<br />For bird photography.. see comments above concerning the 500's and 600's !</p>

[jon_teague]

<p>Sorry Elliot i should have added i used the new ED II 600mm lens which is about£7000 or $11,250. Which version are you getting, AI, AIS, ED etc etc?<br>

I have been looking for the 600mm f4, however i havent found one within my price range yet.<br>

The main reason im put off by the 400mm is because i would like the longer reach of the 500 or 600mm lenses and i would only need to add a TC-14 to them to make them either a 700mm f5.6 or 840mm lens at either f5.6 or f8 depending on the original aperture. Also the 400mm with the tc-300 would turn it into a 1200mm f10 (abouts) which seems too slow.<br>

Also i dont think i would really want to go much past 700 or 800mm</p>

[elliot1]

<p>I am getting the AIS from KEH. I don't know if it is a good deal or not but I got the lens with the trunk for under $1700. It was rated as BGN so seeing will be believing. I have purchased bargain lenses before from KEH that looked like new. I should have it in my hands before the end of the week and will try to post some sample images over the weekend after I test it out. If the images are sharp and colorful, I will be quite pleased. I would obviously prefer an AF version but they are too much $$$$ for me.</p>

[jon_teague]

<p>wow that sounds very cheap! Im still looking but have had little luck, might just have to play the waiting game. Also ive decided to go for a smaller lens such as the 400 f2.8 or 500mm so i can add a TC, but when i need somthing a bit shorter i can take it off. Would be great to see some sample pics though elliot!</p>

[elliot1]

<p>Busy hockey weekend but managed to snap a few test shots with the 600mm. Love it! MF is much easier than I anticipated. Images are amazing sharp! I am thrilled.</p><div></div>

[elliot1]

<p>2nd shot</p>

<p>I have come to find out the my lens was used at some point by the Dallas Morning News. Although the trunk looks very well travelled, the lens is in amazingly good condition. This is the 4th KEH bargain lens I have bought - all have been in excellent condition showing little wear. Glass is 100% perfect and the exterior of the lens shows just the slightest signs of usage. If you are looking for used lenses, they are a wonderful source.</p><div></div>

[elliot1]

<p>Correction: Both shots were taken with the D7000, NOT the D700.</p>