Another Nikkor 80-400mm VR question

[ted turner]

I�ve decided to add a long telephoto to my bag for wildlife work.

I�m going to be at the Bosque del Apache National Wildlife Refuge in

November, so I really need something at least as long as 300mm.

Currently, my longest lens is an older Nikkor 200mm, f/4, manual

focus that I use on my FE2 and F4.

 

I�m intrigued by the Nikkor 80-400mm f/4.5-5.6D ED VR because of the

range it offers and I would be able to take advantage of the VR

someday when I get a camera that can use this feature (likely a D1

or D2-series body rather than an F100 or F5). So, I suppose I�m

leaning toward buying lenses today with features I can fully utilize

on my next body even though it will probably be at least a year

before I do this. In the meantime, disadvantages of this lens might

be the auto focus speed on the F4 and the fact that it tends to be a

little soft at 400mm (so I�ve read).

 

I�m also intrigued by the Nikkor 400mm f/3.5 ED IF AIS. No VR or

auto focus. But again, I can�t use VR now anyway and auto focus

would probably be snail-slow on the F4. This lens should

outperform the 80-400mm at 400mm (and it�s faster). With a fixed

400mm I would certainly need to move around more, or switch to the

200mm on occasion, so it wouldn�t be as convenient. I�m seeing a

few of these fixed lenses popping up on ebay for about the same

price, if not a little more, than the 80-400mm.

 

If I had lots of money to blow, I might simply buy 2.8 versions of

the 80-200mm, 300mm, and 400mm. But with less than $1500 to spend

and needing at least 300mm, (preferably 400mm), I can�t decide

whether to prioritize my near-term needs (e.g., 400mm f/3.5 ED IF on

F4 and FE2 bodies) or long-term (80-400mm VR on current and future

bodies).

[todd peach seattle, washi]

I too am pondering long glass. I can't give you any definitive answer, but I'll point out the 'resale' issue. If you buy a decent competitively priced 400/3.5, you should be able to resell it for what you have into it. If you buy the new VR lens, you are more likely to have to eat 25% 'depreciation' if you find it is not working out for you. I am a little 'suspicious' of VR for reliability; I would expect the used (no warranty) values to take a beating.

[dan_andrews]

Ted, one other factor to consider is your shooting situation. For instance, if you're shooting slower film, your shutter speed may fall below 1/60, so you will have to use a tripod. You can figure out your own exposure times, but the part that might matter most at this point is using a tripod. Even after getting an F100, F5, D1X, D2, etc, you need to consider if your type of shooting will require a tripod.

 

When you mount a VR lens on a tripod, you have to turn the VR off (the VR system actually introduces vibration into a completely motionless lens...)

 

So, if you have to do that anyway, you might want to go with the AIS lens. Besides, it is sharper and has less distortion than the 80-400 VR.

 

Don't get me wrong, I have the 80-400 VR and I love the lens, but for what you're doing it doesn't sound like the best match right now.

 

In the long term, if you decided to go splurge on a D2H, you'll find that your AIS lens will work just fine, and at a 1.5x magnification to boot, giving you an effective 600mm/f3.5 AIS lens.

[rick_walker]

Hi, Ted. I was at Bosque del Apache last November and really enjoyed it. It's a fantastic place to shoot. I think you'll find 400mm to be a bit short, however. Aside from some environmental shots, you'll probably want to shoot at longer focal lengths, 500mm+. Here are some photos that I took on that trip:

 

http://www.geo-vista.com/bosque%20del%20apache.htm

 

All of them, except for the second photo in the second row, were taken with a 500mm 4.0 P lens, and several of those also included a TC-14b converter. The problem is that you've simply can't get much closer in many cases.

 

A fast lens definitely helps. I shot these photos with Provia 100 pushed to 200 and often had to shoot wide open or close to it to get a decent shutter speed. The best shots happen early, so the extra speed is very helpful.

 

Incidentally, the 500mm 4.0 P can be a real bargain right now. I picked up mine in Ex+ condition on eBay for about $1350, and it's a wonderful lens. It also has the virtue of metering with more recent bodies such as the D100.

 

I've heard some people say that the 80-400mm 5.6 is good with 1.4x converters, so it might be a valid option. The aperture will be a bit slow, since you'll likely want to stop down more than you would with a fixed focal length lens, but it might be workable.

 

A very inexpensive, but good option is a used Sigma APO Macro 400mm 5.6 lens. That specific model lens is very sharp and well made and often sells for around $225 to $250 on eBay. It works well with the Sigma 1.4x EX converter and could be a nice bridge to something more expensive at a later date. If you go that route, make sure you get the APO macro version, not the APO or non-APO ones. There's a big difference in quality.

[armando_roldan]

I have had a 80-400mm VR and its nice lens but very heavy, not that fast and though the VR function is a cool feature but I usually shot at higher shutter speeds to make that point mute. I also had the 400mm f5.6 Sigma and I found it an excellent lens for the money and fairly light, but you give up zoom and Nikkor optics. I looked at the 400mm f3.5 but I couldn't see myself spending almost $1500 for fixed focal length, especially giving up the auto focus. I now have a 300mm f2.8 AF-I and its awesome( but a tad heavy) and excellent with 1.4x teleconverter. In my opinion, get the 80-200 f2.8( or 70-200f2.8 VR) and the Sigma 400mm and teleconverters. That should put you in the $1500 neighborhood and have 2 different lenses and the 80-200mm f2.8 is probably the best lens Nikon makes...I can't in all honesty ever tell someone to buy a 80-400mm. Its a good lens but not for that kind of money.

[craig_bridge]

My 80-400 VR sample is soft in the 300-350mm range and improves at the 400 end. The tripod collar is a joke; however, Kirk Photo has an expensive replacement to solve that issue and it does a fine job. I suspect the tripod collar is the real reason why some people claim the 400mm end is soft. It is usable with a Tamron SPAF 1.4x TC (or Kenko pro), but you better have fast film because 560mm f/8 is slow for early morning late evening lighting.

 

The problem with AF isn't that it is all that slow if you have a high contrast edge in the active AF sensor and you aren't too far from the correct subject distance. Where it really suffers is in hunt situations. If your F4 is an F4s or has a battery pack, the additional battery voltage is likely to significantly improve the AF speed. An F4s and F100+MB15 do about the same AF speed wise in non-hunt situations, but take away the MB15 and the F4s wins!

 

Depending on what VR capable body you use it on, you don't have to turn off VR on a tripod! Heavier bodies like my D1X don't have the intermittent VR jog blur issues that lighter bodies like my F100 have (and I would expect the F80/D100 might have them as well).

 

This lens isn't the best choice for a first long tele, but it definitely beats an 80-200 + 2x TC at 400mm.

[greg s]

A lot of people are getting longer lenses these days (snapping up good auction deals as others upgrade). I've noticed less of the older AIS primes and 500mm P available lately.

 

Anyway, there is one older Nikon prime which can still be found in numbers for a relative song, the 300mm AF f/4. This lens is very sharp when stopped down to F/8, and when you buy that DSLR in the future, it's a really nice lens to have. I use mine more than I would have imagined.

 

So, if you find yourself at odds trying to have something in hand for Bosque, keep in mind that an f/4 300 AF is a very versatile lens in the long term and it costs pocket change compared to the long primes, which take some shopping and luck, when bought used. (bought a 300 on auction in new condition for $440, included shipping)

 

Sorry to take this a bit off track... just a little food for thought. :)

[alex_lofquist]

I agree with Greg that this is an exceptional lens, even wide open. Though it autofocuses swiftly with the F5 (and probably with the F100), it is somewhat slow with the F4S, but acceptable. It works well as a semi-macro lens with lots of working distance when equipped with a 1.4X TC and a 25mm extension tube. While I generally have the Nikkor P 500mm on my F4S, the 300 f/4 is almost always on my F5.

[ted turner]

I really appreciate all of the excellent advice you guys provided. Joining photo.net was certainly the right thing to do. These forums are a tremendous resource.

 

I think I�ll avoid the 80-400 VR for now. Speed, depreciation, and unusable VR (with current bodies) are factors that have bumped it down my priority list. I was more interested in the range, not the VR, anyway. Man, it would be nice to have that much range in one lens.

 

I wasn�t aware of, and therefore had not considered, the 500/4 P. Great reviews on this lens everywhere I look. And those Bosque shots are wonderful Rick! One of these babies is currently available on ebay right now, so I�ll keep my eye on it. And there are several 300/4 EDIF�s up for auction too.