tombest

<p>Carla, there are a lot of great responses and you have a lot to think about. I haven't heard anyone mention it so it bears saying, some of the D7000's had a back focus issue that required a bit of tuning. I know because I had one. Mine wasn't awful but each lens I owned and used on it required a fair amount of correction to dial them in so the focus was sharp. I had the most issue with my 70-200 f2.8 VR1 and I had to use all of the available adjustment to get sharp images. I probably could have used 21 or 22 points but the 20 that were available got me close enough. If you haven't checked your two lenses (especially the 55-200) I would do that. That can make a big difference in the quality of the captures you get. </p> <p>On the wide side, I own and use a Tokina 12-24 f4.0. It's a great lens. My son bought the 11-16 f2.8 but I think if he had it to do all over, he would have gone with the 12-24. The zoom range of the 11-16 is very narrow and functions more like a limited range f2.8 prime. Only you can decide how wide is wide enough but you'll hear a lot of people with 12-24s tell you they are at 24mm more often than at 12. Also, a 50mm f1.8 Nikon is a great lens to have. Wicked sharp, fast, very light and cheap to buy used. On a D7000 it's a very useful portrait lens that will help isolate your dogs in portraits. Good luck.</p> <p>Tom</p>

<p>Terri, you're in a pickle. Everything that would solve your problem is either too expensive, too heavy or doesn't fit. It doesn't leave you with many options that will result in excellence. I'm inclined to recommend that you get a D5300 and use your 55-300 with it. Results will be better than with the D3000 you have and the layout and size are very similar so the learning curve will be lessened. The D5300 has the capability to use Auto ISO and I think I would learn and use it. It will allow you to have the camera adjust the ISO automatically as needed while you manually set a shutter speed or f-stop. If your lens won't gather enough light to make higher shutter speeds possible (as it would with any of the f2.8 offerings) then you have to live with the noise from higher ISOs. It's a trade-off but there are software editing options for noise that can mitigate the degradation. There's no free lunch here. And if that is something you should decide to do and money is a consideration, can you go back to Best Buy and return the 50 f1.8? You could apply the value to whatever you buy or just get your money back. The 50 f1.8 is a very good lens, just not what you need right now.</p> <p>Tom</p>

<p>I don't know if anyone is still checking this post, but I did decide to go with a Gitzo GT-3542. There is a rebate that takes some of the sting of the price away so I mustered the troops to chip in where they could and found a way to fund it. I sincerely hope this thing is all I expect. There is much banter around about what tripod to buy and why this one or that is as good or better than a Gitzo. Soon I will be able to comment on how they compare with the two Induros I have. Again, thanks for the suggestions and comments<br> Tom</p>

<p>Fun photos this week.<br> Patrick, thanks for the nod.<br> Leszek, love your Rudolf dilemma. No snow, no buddies...<br> Jose, is that for real? Those colors are insane.<br> Tony and the rest... Merry Christmas, Happy Holidays back at you.</p> <p>Tom</p>

<p>Another option is to download Nikon's app called <em>Manual Viewer</em> onto your phone. Into that you can store manuals for all your camera and flashes and have them with you in digital format regardless of your phone platform. Having had it with me has helped several times when I've gotten stuck.<br> <br />Tom</p>

<p>After 41 years of marriage we've accumulated an interesting collection of ornaments. This one is about 35 years old and one of our favorites. Mr. Mousy sleeps contentedly.</p><div></div>

<p>Sebastian, I'm grateful for all the research and testing you are doing. And the news about the 200-500 is very encouraging. I suspected that the 12mp shot was fuzzy due to magnification. I moved from a D200 to a D7000 and was shocked at how much more resolution I had. I got some great shots with the D200 but never got it out again after the D7000. I retired them both after I got the D7200. Unless the next new body does something truly amazing, and I mean <em>TRULY</em> amazing, I won't be tempted to upgrade. It's quite a bit more camera than a D7000 and just plain killed the D200 for anything in low light or tracking of moving subjects.</p> <p>Your initial question posed here was of a comparison between a full-frame camera on a 200-500 vs. a crop-sensor on your 300m f4.0. Out of curiosity, how much gear are you renting? Was is either rent a D7200 and stick with your 300mm or rent a 200-500 and use a D600 or D610 that you own or have access to? Your question mentioned a D610 and you did your 200-500 testing with a D600. Just curious.<br> It's been a fun thread.<br> Tom</p>

<p>Ofer, there is nothing like Wakodahatchee. The birds are close and not skittish. Make sure you see it before you go. There is very limited parking and they open the gate at 7:00 AM. Get there too late and there will be nowhere to park. If the lot is full, Green Cay is about a mile west of there. Distances are a little further since the wetland is significantly larger but birds are plentiful.</p> <p>In the Vero area, there are a couple of places you could visit. One is called Viera Wetlands and the other is Merritt Island National Wildlife Refuge. Both are near Melbourne but not all that far from Vero.</p> <p>Shark Valley is also a must see. From where your brother is, get west and get on the Tamiami Trail (US41). Take it until you get to the entrance. It's part of the Everglades National Park. Sebastian mentioned it and it is well worth the drive. Birds are close and if you're lucky, you'll have to walk around an alligator or two while on the paved loop.<br> Sebastian, sorry for the momentary hijack of your thread. Happy birding.</p> <p>Tom</p> <div></div>

<p>Ofer, have you been to Oleta before? I'm not sure where you are planning to bird since that park is more of a recreational park. I mountain bike there and they have a nice beach and picnic area but unless you plan on renting a kayak and paddle around the marsh, I don't know how much bird life you will see. If you area planning to kayak, keep your gear to a minimum. If it were me, I'd have the D7200 and 70-200 with the 1.4 on hand if I needed it. But do kayak and camera gear mix? I don't like the odds. There are far better places to find birds down here than Oleta. Better yet, leave your camera gear at home that day and bring your mountain bike. It's a great trail.</p> <p>Tom</p>

<p>Sebastian, it seems that critical sharpness is your 1st criteria as long as that sharpness doesn't come at the expense of slow or inaccurate focus. The shots you have posted here are very sharp and I have a concern that anything less than this level of clarity will be unacceptable. I'm glad you're going to test the lenses against each other but it wouldn't surprise me if you end up with the 300, in whatever variant you have or rent. It's a proven producer for you. That being said, the 200-500 might offer you some shots you might have not been able to capture with the 300 because of the added reach. I'll be anxious to hear the outcome of the test. Will you resurrect this post or start another?</p> <p>Tom</p>

<p>Good point about the haze. But the wetlands that Sebastian is headed to are a little unique. These are well established wetlands, several of which have boardwalks in and through them, so the birds are <em>much</em> less skittish than in a more wild setting. Some of the rookeries are no more than 30-40' from the walkway. I've had situations where a bird, usually a Tri-colored Heron, would stay put on the railing while I walked close on the other side at a distance of about 8'. But it's happened with Wood Storks, Black-bellied Whistlers and Roseate Spoonbills too. The longer lenses give you a little more working distance or isolation or a different vantage point than the masses. Black Necked Stilts are pretty tiny and the extra reach is helpful for them too. Wakodahatchee will spoil you for other locations. This picture is a pretty common occurrence there.</p> <p>Tom</p><div></div>

I suppose that if critical sharpness is your #1 priority, either of the 300s will provide more of that than any of the zooms in the range you're considering. But I did notice that Brad introduced the primes at a distance of 5.7m - about 20'. It would be interesting to see the sharpness potential of the 300s at longer distances, then cropped to similar perspectives compared to a lens @ 500mm. Might be close or even better. Since you know what you have in the 300s, why not just get a D7200 and stay with the lenses you are familiar with? 24mp give you 'crop ability' you didn't have with a D300. The package will be smaller and very friendly to handle and shoot with. Tom

<p>Sebastian, I have a couple of questions. Where are you planning to visit down here? Are you sticking with Wakodahatchee or do you plan to visit other sites like Green Cay, Shark Valley, Merritt Island or Loxahatchee? Wakodahatchee isn't very hard on reach and as you probably learned from your earlier visit, the 300mm was probably enough. (Nice capture of the Great Blues, by the way.) If you hit Green Cay, Merritt Island or Lox, you're going to need more reach. Green Cay and Merritt Island are bigger and Lox is truly wild. The 200-500 would suit you well/better in those places. (and it's not really too big for Wakodahatchee either) </p> <p>Last year, a friend and I rented a Sigma 150-600 Sport, he with a D7100 and I with a D7000. The ability to zoom and the extra reach available over the 70-200 w/1.4 teles attached was phenomenal. Reach is always going to be important in birding so the 1.5 conversion of the D7200 (which I now have) will excel over the 610. Plus the D7200 has Nikon's latest autofocus module in it, exceeding the capabilities of the D610. That <em>will</em> make a difference. Plus it will see and focus better in low light. For what you intend to shoot, I think the D7200 is a no-brainer. I don't have the 200-500 so I can't comment directly on the combo but from everything I've read, you'd be very pleased with the results.</p> <p>If you do decide to go that way, I would recommend you convert/assign the rear AE-L/AF-L button to function as 'back button focus'. If you aren't familiar with that, doing so will remove the autofocus function from the shutter release and move it to that rear button. The advantage of that is that while the button is held down, you remain in continuous autofocus. When the button is released, it stays locked onto the last focus point. It gives you both focus modes within the same button. I would never go back to using the shutter release as the focus initiator after using my D7200 that way. Takes a little getting used to and then it becomes automatic.</p> <p>The D7200 is truly a wonderful camera, 2nd only to the D300 in frame rate. I can't think of any logical reason to choose the D610 over the D7200 for what you intend to do. I've shot with both of them. I bought the D7200.</p> <p>Tom</p>