Nikon 400/3.5+tc or 500/4p+tc for nature/birding?

[leo s.]

Hi all,

 

I have considered buying a long lens for a while now,and have come to

the conclusion that either the 400/3.5 or 500/4 would be

ideal,especially because they both work well with teleconverters.

What concerns me is the availability of teleconverters(and price)...

Currently im leaning more towards buying the 500/4 due to its better

reach,but i havent been able to find a TC-14C (supposedly this is the

best matched TC for the lens)...Can anyone give me and idea of the

price/availability of this TC?...perhaps the TC-14B would work just

as well??

My alternative is the 400/3.5 + TC301(no problem getting these TCs as

far as i can see)... which would give me 800/7 ,and the 500/4 + TC14C

would give me a 700/5.6...anyone have any thoughts on the suitability

of each combination for what i want to photograph?(I realize from

other threads that the 600mm route is best for birding,but its too

heavy and expensive,and i would like to compromise)

 

and one final question...

From the point of view of availability of braces/mounts which would

attach the lens+TC setup securely to the tripod,what is available

that would be suitable for each of the lens/TC combinations?

...ive ordered a 1325 and B1 and am also planning to order the RRS QR

plates,hopefully i havent overlooked anything else that i need.

 

Thanks

[don_baccus]

If bird photography's of interest to you, and you don't intend to go the 600/4 route, then there's no doubt in my happy little bird-shooter's mind that the 500/4 is the better choice for you. 700/5.6 is more appealing than 800/7 - you'll appreciate the extra speed. Since only a 1.4x is necessary to get there, it seems reasonable to expect the combination to be a bit sharper than the 400/3.5+2x. These two factors are a more important than the slightly longer reach of the 400/3.5+2x combination (and, of course, in a pinch you can use a 2x with the 500/4).

 

I don't use any special braces for my 600/4+1.4x when shooting birds. If they're sitting so still that you can use a brace you can also use a cable release and mirror lockup, and if they're not sitting still you need to be able to move around and shoot so an extra brace isn't practical.

 

As far as which 1.4x TC to use with the 500/4, I'm a Canon shooter so can't help you with the specific information you need.

[birdsofearth]

Leo, Don's suggestion is correct to go for 500mm lens.

Do not buy this 400mm f3.5 lens, though this lens is an excellent lens, either most of the times you will have to glue a TC-14b/TC-301 for it or you will have to shoot from a blind. Even with TC-14b its reach is very limited. I used this lens just for few days and returned immediately and opted for 500mm lens.<p>

As for comparing expensiveness of 500mm vs 600mm lens is considered, difference is not much, may be around $600 (used market). So, with 600mm lens, if you are not going to walk for miles and going to shoot near your car only, then give a thought for 600mm lens. If possible rent both and see which one suits your needs, or buy 500mm from anywhere, where you have a return/exchange option. (bhphotovideo,dels-cam etc).<p>

About using TC's, there no such thing as TC-14c, for 300mm and higher lenses you can either use TC-14b(Manual) or TC-14e (AF), again this depends on what lens you have, AF or MF.<p>

You do need a flash bracket for 500-600mm lenses. Don't forget to <a href='http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-search.tcl?topic=Nature+Photography&topic_id=34&query_string=telephoto+tripod+flash+bracket'>search</a> this forum for additional information.

[danny_weber]

>>there no such thing as TC-14c<<

 

Yes, there is. Although it's no longer made, the TC-14C is

probably the best one for the 400/3.5.

[scott_fairbairn]

I owned the 5oof4 p lens and used it mainly for birds. You will definitely be using a TC(1.4x) with it for birds. I used the tc14B which works just fine. I wouldn't think that a 2x tc with the 400 would yield as good results, especially since 4oo is too short most of the time so you would basically always be using the doubler. The TC 14C I believe was made to mate with a discontinued lens, the 300mmf2.0. Good luck finding it, I can say that the 14b works well.

[bjorn_jorde_redwood_city__]

Scott is right: the TC-14C was made specifically for the discontinued 300/2.0 lens, and only sold with this lens. It was never a separate item on a price list from Nikon.

A lot of the 300/2.0's has been converted for use with movie cameras, and the corresponding teleconverters are sold separately. BTW, only about 300 units were ever manufactured.

I happen to have one of these, but I wouldn't worry too much about it.

The TC-14B is an excellent converter, and the only difference is a slight improvement in edge sharpness on some lenses.

 

I got mine from a guy in Seattle who does this conversion.

 

--Bjorn

[jim_bridges1]

The TC-14C is the "matched teleconverter" made for and came with the 300mm f/2 EDIF lens in 1984. And the combination went for a list price of about $21,000 USD.

[birdsofearth]

I was wrong about TC-14c. Here are few pages about it. (<a href='http://www.cameraquest.com/nf3002.htm'>A</a>, <a href='http://www.foto.no/nikon/lens_converter.html'>B</a>)<br>

When I did my search once again with 'Lycos' I got few pages.

[bob_royse]

These topics have been discussed many times here.

 

The longer the lens you have, the more opportunities you'll have. It's really that simple. If you're dead set on only those 2 lenses, then go with the 500mm with an optional 700mm/f5.6 and 100mm/f8. If you get the 500P, Kirk Enerprises manufactures (or at least used to) a bracket for the it and the TC300. It definitely helps a lot at 1000mm.

 

I'd also recommend getting Kirk plates over RRS plates for the lens. They both do the same thing, but I like the Kirk flash bracket over the RRS bracket and they aren't interchangable on each other's plates. The Kirk bracket needs only one screw to attach and is more flexible. Attaching a flash bracket is probably the least enjoyable aspect of bird photography to me.

 

I owned that 500mm for about 5 years and I purchased it for many of the same reasons you suggest, but today I'd think differently. It wouldn't be my first choice now. With the carbon fiber tripods, the weight savings of a 500mm lens over a 600mm becomes less of an issue. If you're using manual Nikkors, the 800mm/f5.6 might even be the best choice (except for the minimum focusing distance). The percentage of weight from the lens is really a small part of the total package to be carried. You'll have the lens + TC, camera with winder/booster, tripod, head, plate, flash bracket, flash unit, battery pack, binoculars, etc.. To all the whiners who complain about the weight of a 600mm lens, I can only ask where exactly are you dancing and prancing with your 500mm lenses that wouldn't be better served with a 600mm?

 

Another thing to consider before making a big purchase is whether or not it's worth investing another dime in the Nikon system. IMO it's not a good idea. I switched to Canon and got a 600/f4 after I sold my 500mm Nikkor. Yes, AF was of minor help at times, but having a 600mm lens was even more advantageous. I've since gotten the 600IS lens, which has given me more photo ops for birds in leaps and bounds. With IS lenses you can easily use a 2x as your standard TC with amazing sharpness. I now shoot as freely at 1200mm as was previously possible with a 300mm lens. The advantages of 1200mm as a standard lens over 700 or 800mm are too many to list. While I realize that an IS telephoto from Canon is probably too expensive for most people (it would have been for me!) as an initial big lens purchase, at least heading in that direction with a Canon AF telephoto would be a better first step IMO. The Canon 500/f4.5 is realily available used for a reasonable price and you now get AF with the 1.4x on the latest cameras.

 

That's this bird photographer's opinion.

[leo s.]

Thanks to all who answered,

I apologize for resurrecting frequently brought up topics...i did do a search,and spent a while going through the archived threads but was still unsure with time running out which would be my best option...

The info you have all provided has been very helpful in confirming to me that i was choosing the most logical path which for me is the 500/4 and TC-14B/301(and not forgetting to keep my eye open for any stray 14Cs that might pop up on the used market;)

 

I will probably do a large proportion of shooting from a hide...and for me,the 500 sounds like it will fit the bill.Anything larger would require an extra magnitude in effort(and cost to a lesser degree),and ultimately i think it might be better directed to making sure im well hidden from my subjects.If my enthusiasm for this type of photography continues after ive spent some time with the 500,i will consider the other suggestions people have made.Thanks again.

[craig_andrew_yuill]

Although a 400mm lens is rather short for a lot of bird shots, it is very useful for taking photos of birds that are rapidly moving about, such as when they are in flight. I've found that trying to get birds in frame with a 600mm lens is a more-difficult proposition than doing so with a 400mm lens. I wish that 400mm f/4 lenses were in more lens line ups. I currently use a 300mm f/2.8 lens + 1.4x converter to get one. Of course people can argue that MF lenses, like the 400mm f/3.5 and 500P f/4, are not as good for that purpose as the latest AF lenses, but I feel that using specific techniques such as prefocusing can help one to successfully take sharp in-flight photos. I hate saying it, being a Nikon user, but I kind of agree that the latest Canon teles are probably, overall, the best around. It's a real shame that Canon has a virtual monopoly on image stabilization. It'll be a few years before Nikon has has a significant line of such products. Still, the IS lenses do command a significantly-higher price than even the new Nikon AF-S lenses, and the MF Nikons you mention can be had, used, for only 1/3 to 1/2 the cost of comparable Canon IS lenses. Don't forget that if you do get a Canon lens you will still have to add the expense of a Canon SLR and other Canon-specific accessories that won't work on your current Nikon gear.

[paul_dibiase3]

The Nikkor 500mm f/4 P lens is an excellent optic and about the minimum one would want for photographing birds. It is significantly lighter than the modern AF telephotos which also helps when you have to lug it about. Keep in mind that the heavier lenses also require heavier tripods and heavier ball heads. The 500mm P lens will work with the Arca B1 though the B1 is at its limit. A heavier lens requires a bigger ballhead or the Wimberly setup, both of which add weight.

 

Combined with the TC14B convertor, this lens gives outstanding results with barely any noticable degradation of the image. Combined with the TC301 the results are still very good though there is some noticable image degradation. It is certainly better than simply enlarging the image more when printing. I have also used this lens with the new Kenko 1.4x convertor. The results were good, perhaps as good as with the Nikon convertor. And the Kenko passes the electronic signals to the body so you retain features like matrix metering.

 

As far as price is concerned a used 500mm f/4 P lens is less than 1/3 the cost of a similar new AF lens from either Nikkon or Canon. For many of us it is the only way we can afford to have such a long telephoto lens. Yes, you will miss some images you could have taken with the AF lens, but you will get many, many more images that you would never have taken with a lesser lens.

[david_montgomery]

B&H has recently lowered their prices on the Canon IS super teles. The Canon 600 IS is $100 more than the Nikon 600 AF-S. The Canon 500 IS is $200 <B>less</B> than the Nikon 500 AF-S.

[paul_dibiase3]

On the subject of IS/VR telephoto lenses, I have to admit that if I had the extra money, when Nikon makes such a lens as I expect they will, I would purchase it in a minute. However, my biggest motion problem when shooting birds and other small animals is not camera/lens movement but subject movement. For every image I lose due to movement and vibrations of the camera/lens combo, I must lose twenty or more due to subject movement.

[brian_small]

Leo-one other possiblity you might want to consider is Nikon's excellent 600mm f/5.6 MF lens. You seem to be willing to accept a manual focus lens and this is kind of a "sleeper" that I hear very little discussion about(especially here on Photo.net). This lens is as sharp as any of Nikon's other fantastic MF telephoto lenses, it has a narrower angle of view than the other two lenses you are considering(better for birds in many instances), it has a respectable minimum focusing distance, it's about the same weight as the 500mm f/4P, it's nicely balanced and of course it matches with both the TC-14B and TC-301. With today's better quality, better pushing, faster films I think this could be an excellent choice for what you have in mind. I know this lens will do exactly what you want and as other's have said, you can never have too long a lens when it comes to photographing birds!

[leo s.]

Ok...you've convinced me....i really thought i might be able to get away with a 500,but so many of you concur that the 600 gives the edge that is needed for successful wildlife photography.So i will aim to get a 600/5.6..talk about diving in at the deep end...i only just got a 300/4.5!!;)Thank you all again.

[scott_fairbairn]

On the subject of IS/VR, I recently read in a British photo mag that they had been told that Nikon plans to release a 500mmf4 AFS VR lens this fall.

[robert_landry]

Leo,

 

Get the 500mm f/4 P. The 600mm f/5.6 is a fine lens, but the 500mm +1.4X will get you to 700mm @f/5.6. The 500mm is also a great lens and can be found used quite easily at very good prices. The 600mm f/5.6 will be harder to find. Another great thing about the 500 P is that it has the electrical contacts for use with the newer bodies such as the F5 and F100 for aperture selection via the sub-command dial. You can also modify Nikon's TC-14E converter to mount to the 500mm and retain the electrical connections. I have the 600mm f/4 myself and there are plenty of warm days this summer when I wished I had bought the 500 instead.

[stnoonan]

<p>First off "On the subject of IS/VR, I recently read in a British photo mag that they had been told that Nikon plans to release a 500mmf4 AFS VR lens this fall." This has to be a joke, we've been waiting for the 80-400 VR Zoom for over a year, with release dates changing all the time.

 

<p>Second, you don't mention what bodies you will be working with, but why not consider the 500 f4 AFS? I bought one with the TC14E to maintain autofocus and love it. <a href="http://www.stnphotography.com">Check here for sample images</a>.

[bob_k]

It's a trade-off.

 

On the one hand, the 500 is longer and can take advantage of newer exposure modes.

 

On the other hand the 400 is sharper, faster, smaller, lighter, and most importantly, less than half the price of the 500 on the used market. The 400 combined with the tc-14b and the tc-301 is a relatively inexpensive way to get into super telephotos.

 

If you're considering paying the higher price for the 500P then you should also consider making a bigger jump to an AFS 500.

[Albins images]

Bob k, I did what you suggest, for all the reasons that you give: I got the extremely sharp AND portable 400/3.5 + TC's for an extremely good price. When I go AF I will make the great (but now unaffordable) jump to 600mm AFS, new bodies and shorter AF lenses, but in Nikon-MF terms, this is it. The 400 may not be the ultimate wildlife/birding lens, but I do feel it is the ideal compromise!

[leo s.]

Thanks again to all those that have offered their advice.I have tried to find a reasonably priced 600/5.6,so far without much success.The 400/3.5 and 500/4 do both sound like attractive alternatives,and both are relatively easy to find for a reasonable price.At the moment price is the biggest barrier for me,so i can rule out the 500AFS.In any case,i don't have an auto focus body,just my trusty F2 and an N2000 as a backup.

I still would prefer to get the 600/5.6(if i can find one at the right price),as the extra reach would make frame filling pictures of small to medium sized birds attainable.If i haven't found one in the next couple of weeks,i will probably compromise and buy either the 500/4 or 400/3.5.

[Albins images]

In addition to the above answer to Leo Stachowicz question, I'd like to give a short impression of my experiences so far.

 

* The 400/3.5 is fairly small and fits nicely in a small backpack. An advantage when travelling by air. Weight: idem.

 

* It is VERY GOOD on its own, even wide open.

 

* It works okay with the TC-14B, some colour-fringing and reduced contrast, sharpness visibly reduced. The resulting 560/4.5 combination is a very useful one though, that I have used often!

 

* It works very well with TC-300/301 AND TC-20E. The latter comes in a much smaller package and is favoured for that reason alone. Contrast is good & sharpness seems better at 800/7.0 than at 560!

 

* Min. working distance of little over 4m is somewhat old-fashioned and sometimes annoying.

 

* When working into strong light, flair is a very serious problem! The construction of a longer lens-hood should be considered.

[david_goldfarb]

Just to reinforce the above suggestions, there's no substitute for more focal length and speed for bird photography (so long as you can keep the whole system stable). I shoot Canon manual focus for bird photography, and I could do a lot more when I got a 600/4.5 than I could with a 300/4.0 or a 400/4.5 (all with 1.4x and 2x converters). It's also good to have a second lens for those special opportunities when you can get closer, or if you want a hand held flight lens, so a 400 and a 600 or a 300 and a 500 make good combinations.