Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Computing > Digital Photography > Best lens for wildlife photography?

Reply
Thread Tools

Best lens for wildlife photography?

 
 
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-09-2013
DSLR - possibly Nikon D600 - planning a trip to Falkland Island to see
wildlife and also the scenery.

Maybe 70-200 with a magnifying ring on hand as well, or something else?

As usual, polite thanks in advance for the replies.
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Martin Brown
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-09-2013
On 09/05/2013 04:47, Savageduck wrote:
> On 2013-05-08 19:48:28 -0700, "Frank S" <(E-Mail Removed)> said:
>
>>
>> "Savageduck" <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote in message
>> news:2013050819012829267-savageduck1@REMOVESPAMmecom...
>>> On 2013-05-08 18:22:30 -0700, <(E-Mail Removed)> said:
>>>
>>>> DSLR - possibly Nikon D600 - planning a trip to Falkland Island to see
>>>> wildlife and also the scenery.
>>>>
>>>> Maybe 70-200 with a magnifying ring on hand as well, or something else?
>>>>
>>>> As usual, polite thanks in advance for the replies.
>>>
>>> If you can afford the D600 fine. However you will get more reach with
>>> an APS-C DSLR.
>>> The Nikkor 70-200mm AFII is a great lens with a great $$$$ price,
>>> again if you can afford it, fine. However the 70-200mm is not a do it
>>> all lens.
>>>
>>> Consider that you will probably need a walk-around lens with a wider
>>> range for those scenic shots, for FF consider the Nikkor AF-S 16-35mm
>>> f/4G VR, or the new 24-120mm f/4G VR. There is also the surprisingly
>>> good value and performer, the Nikkor AF-S VR f/4.5-5.6G IF-ED.
>>>
>>> Just remember with the D600 + 70-200mm you are looking at around
>>> $4500. For that you can get a D7100 + an 18-105mm kit lens + Nikkor
>>> AF-S VR f/4.5-5.6G IF-ED + an AF-S DX 10-24mm all for around $3100
>>> and an extra $1400 to spend on the trip, perhaps a spare battery and
>>> extra SDHC cards and a decent bag.
>>>
>>>

>>
>> A 70-200 with a 2x extender will be nice for snapshots;

>
> Actually the 1.7X will give you better results.
>
>> if you want seriously good product, 400mm will be the minimum for
>> real wild wild-life. If you have time before your safari, think about
>> renting the body and lenses you'll consider. It'll be better to look
>> at some trial images and be disappointed or elated than to have a
>> pocketful of best-I-could-do to lament over.

>
> I agree a 400mm or 500mm would be great, and I would only rent those
> lenses, I would also consider renting an extra FF body for some events.
> However, we don't know of the OP's travel arrangements to The Falklands,
> whether it will be via plane or a cruise of some type. We don't know if
> this is going to be a trip specifically for a photo shoot or a vacation
> with photography as incidental to the trip. So consider the extra weight
> and bulk of a 400mm or 500mm lens to add to general and landscape
> shooting requirements.


At the risk of being contentious and accepting here that you will have
to live with softer focus and donut shaped out of focus highlights a
mirror lens is not a bad compromise for wild life photography where size
and weight are important factors. I do have traditional long lenses too
but sometimes their large physical size gets in the way.
>
> From the point of view of a vacationer who has not done this type of
> photography before and from what he has said, has not even bought the
> DSRR yet (I assume he has yet to buy the D600 + 70-200mm and he is
> asking advice), I would thing he might be better off buying less
> expensive kit at this point on his DSLR wildlife photography learning
> curve. Then he could consider the transition to FF from APS-C.


Possibly the most important advice is take a camera and lenses with you
that you already know inside out and a spare body. Reading the manual in
driving rain whilst some rare bird makes its getaway is not good. Same
with weddings...

>> At the end, if you think your efforts will result in saleable stuff,
>> spare no expense; if it's for your own enjoyment, relax and enjoy the
>> experience, and take a little extra time and equipment to memorialize
>> your enjoyment.

>
> I believe he could do quite well with a lesser DSLR Say a D300S or a
> D7100 on his trip rather than the D600.
> Here is a D300S shot using an 80-400mm VR @ 200mm.
> <
> https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/...0_HDR-Ac2w.jpg


The kit used is generally secondary to knowing where to go and framing
the scene - assuming a certain minimum standard of gear. A really good
tripod is essential when using long lenses and a means to fire the
shutter without physically touching the camera (something I think modern
cameras lacking traditional cable releases are not so good at).

My old Pentax istD would sometimes forget to autofocus when triggered by
its remote control - a rather irritating fault.

--
Regards,
Martin Brown
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Ghost-Rider
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-09-2013
Le 09/05/2013 03:22, http://www.velocityreviews.com/forums/(E-Mail Removed) a écrit :
> DSLR - possibly Nikon D600 - planning a trip to Falkland Island to see
> wildlife and also the scenery.
>
> Maybe 70-200 with a magnifying ring on hand as well, or something else?
>
> As usual, polite thanks in advance for the replies.
>


Hello, I'm new here.
If weight, bulk and the bore and risks of having to change lens is
important, you might consider an APSC with a super-zoom.
I used to do everything with a D90 with the 18-200. I have shifted to
the D7000 with the 18-300 and it is perfect for travelling, scenery or
wild life, including close-ups with one or two MCON35 Olympus close-ups
lenses screwed on it.
The quality is there and allows reframing, I never change lens, have no
problem with dust, I always have the right lens on the body and a
limited weight hanging on my shoulder.
Examples available if you like.
 
Reply With Quote
 
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-09-2013
On Wed, 8 May 2013 20:47:22 -0700 Savageduck wrote:-

>Here is a D300S shot using an 80-400mm VR @ 200mm.
><
>https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/...0_HDR-Ac2w.jpg


Very nice!

 
Reply With Quote
 
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-09-2013
On Wed, 8 May 2013 20:50:29 -0700 Savageduck wrote:-

>> Here is a D300S shot using an 80-400mm VR @ 200mm.
>> <
>> https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/...0_HDR-Ac2w.jpg

>
>That
>>

>was not the shot I intended to link to, here you go:
><
>https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/.../DNC_7613w.jpg
>>


LOL!

Still nice but I liked the first one better!
 
Reply With Quote
 
PeterN
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-09-2013
On 5/8/2013 9:22 PM, (E-Mail Removed) wrote:
> DSLR - possibly Nikon D600 - planning a trip to Falkland Island to see
> wildlife and also the scenery.
>
> Maybe 70-200 with a magnifying ring on hand as well, or something else?
>
> As usual, polite thanks in advance for the replies.
>


If your budget permits, I would consider a D800, which, will give you a
much better cropped image, than any smaller sensor camera, plus you will
have the advantage of being able to use a wide angle lens.
The test shot below was shot with my D800, using the 70-200 lens with a
1.7 extender. I was about 150 yards away. The image on the left is full
frame, the one of the right is a crop of that FF image.
<https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/97242118/_DSC6570.jpg>

If you want on all purpose lens, then think about the 28-300. While it
is not as sharp as the 70-200, it weighs a lot less and gives a wider
angle of view.
Here is an image I shot from about 50 yds with the 28-300mm, also cropped.
<https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/97242118/shtopem%20from%20floppin.jpg>


--
PeterN
 
Reply With Quote
 
me
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-09-2013
On Thu, 9 May 2013 11:22:30 +1000, <(E-Mail Removed)>
wrote:

>DSLR - possibly Nikon D600 - planning a trip to Falkland Island to see
>wildlife and also the scenery.
>
>Maybe 70-200 with a magnifying ring on hand as well, or something else?
>
>As usual, polite thanks in advance for the replies.



It would help to have the problem bounded a bit more. Size?, weight?
$$? Other lenses you intend to have as well. How do you intend to
handle the wide end, or you don't care below 70mm?
I have the 18-200mm VRII, 1st gen 70-200mm f/2.8 VR (with 1.x and 2x)
and 1st gen 200-400mm f/4 VR (with 1.4x and 2x).
on a D70, D200 and D300 all handheld and I carry all around quite a
bit.
 
Reply With Quote
 
Wally
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-09-2013
On Thu, 9 May 2013 11:22:30 +1000, <(E-Mail Removed)>
wrote:

>DSLR - possibly Nikon D600 - planning a trip to Falkland Island to see
>wildlife and also the scenery.
>
>Maybe 70-200 with a magnifying ring on hand as well, or something else?
>
>As usual, polite thanks in advance for the replies.


Serious wildlife photography is a demanding art. If high quality
nature photography is your goal, the most important thing is to get
some solid experience first before setting out on this trip.

I use a Canon 7D and 100-400mm lens. The lens is very compact and
easily goes into a briefcase together with the camera body, laptop,
extra couple of lenses and backup body. This is a big advantage for
travel. The 400mm gives the equivalent of a 600mm lens on a full frame
35mm camera. The lens is versatile and very sharp at the long end (but
samples vary, so test it if you buy it).

In the Nikon line, use a DX body and the 200-400mm lens. The 200-400mm
is much bigger (and much more expensive) than the Canon 100-400, and
with its bulk and weight you will need to consider how to safely get
the lens to its destination. I would NOT put it into checked luggage.

You won't need a tripod for either of these rigs, and I would avoid a
tripod anyway so you have mobility (unless you are shooting static
subjects like a bird on a nest).

For top results, you will need a full frame camera, but then you will
also need a proportionally longer lens -- and a tripod, because you
won't be able to hand-hold this. Getting such fancy gear to the
Falkands and back will be a challenge.

Most likely you were not thinking of such pro gear, and might be well
satisfied with something simpler, such as a 70-200mm lens optionally
with an extender, or maybe the new Canon 70-300mm (the one with the
white body), or the old version Canon 70-300mm, which is cheap and
pretty sharp, and even better when stopped down.

Or you could go down another level and use a point-and-shoot with a
20x zoom lens.

Wally
 
Reply With Quote
 
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-09-2013
On Thu, 09 May 2013 12:51:12 -0400 PeterN wrote:-

>Here is an image I shot from about 50 yds with the 28-300mm, also
>cropped.
><https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/97242118/shtopem%20from%20floppin.jpg>


LOL! Some real wildlife!
 
Reply With Quote
 
PeterN
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-11-2013
On 5/9/2013 4:36 PM, (E-Mail Removed) wrote:
> On Thu, 09 May 2013 12:51:12 -0400 PeterN wrote:-
>
>> Here is an image I shot from about 50 yds with the 28-300mm, also
>> cropped.
>> <https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/97242118/shtopem%20from%20floppin.jpg>

>
> LOL! Some real wildlife!
>


Actual she and her boyfriend were very nice people. We quite a nice
conversation.

--
PeterN
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Canon lens for wildlife roy@carealternatives.com Digital Photography 11 11-29-2005 03:12 PM
megapixels or zoom lense? Which is best for wildlife,landscapes? northfork500@netscape.net Digital Photography 26 07-25-2005 02:32 PM
Re: megapixels or zoom lense? Which is best for wildlife,landscapes? VK Digital Photography 15 03-12-2005 07:28 AM
Best digital for wildlife shots? Ray Muensch Digital Photography 15 12-27-2004 07:25 PM



Advertisments