Lens for bird photography?

I have a Nikon D3300 that came with a kit lens (18-55mm) - fine for
general work. I sometimes get a bit disappointed when photographing
birds. I am retired, so don't have a high income, but have been
wondering about getting a better lens, prime or zoom, for birds and
other wildlife.

Would 200mm be long enough or would I need to go to 300mm?

MartinC wrote:
I have a Nikon D3300 that came with a kit lens (18-55mm) - fine for
general work. I sometimes get a bit disappointed when photographing
birds. I am retired, so don't have a high income, but have been
wondering about getting a better lens, prime or zoom, for birds and
other wildlife.

Would 200mm be long enough or would I need to go to 300mm?

Depends...

A 200mm might be okay for some bird shots, but generally
there simply isn't a long enough focal length. 300mm is
better, 400mm is better than that. It's only at 800mm
or so that you'll likely decide you don't want to try
anything longer (too danged hard to use).

What kind of a budget are you working with? A couple of
pretty nice lenses are the Tamron 150-600mm and if it
ever shows up, Sigma has something very similar in the
works. At $1070 the Tamron isn't horribly expensive,
and it is a pretty nice lens.

There are also 300mm and 400mm lenses that might cost
less. And either a Tamron or Kenko 2x Teleconverter
will work fairly well with a good sharp fixed focal
length lens.

--
Floyd L. Davidson http://www.apaflo.com/
Ukpeagvik (Barrow, Alaska)

On 2014-12-26 23:54:10 +0000, MartinC said:

I have a Nikon D3300 that came with a kit lens (18-55mm) - fine for
general work. I sometimes get a bit disappointed when photographing
birds. I am retired, so don't have a high income, but have been
wondering about getting a better lens, prime or zoom, for birds and
other wildlife.

Would 200mm be long enough or would I need to go to 300mm?

For wildlife and birds in particular 200mm would be marginal, and you
would always be looking for more reach. A 300mm is probably going to be
acceptable, but will also prove to be inadequate for some situations.
The thing to consider is the rising costs as lenses get longer and/or
faster. Given your statement regarding your income limited by
retirement and the fact that you are already a Nikon DSLR owner, I
would recommend looking at the Nikkor 70-300mm VR. It is a surprisingly
good value and capable of producing sharp images. It is light and not
particularly bulky.
Then there is the Tamron 150-600mm which will give you all sorts of
reach and us affordable when compared with other long lenses with fine
reputations.

There are folks here who might recommend more expensive, faster and
longer glass, but those two lenses should handle all your birding shot
with ease, and without bankrupting you.

http://www.nikonusa.com/en/Nikon-Products/Product/Camera-Lenses/AF-S-VR-Zoom-Nikkor-70-300mm-f%252F4.5-5.6G-IF-ED.html
http://tinyurl.com/nagolfp
and
http://www.tamron-usa.com/lenses/prod/150600_vc_a011.php#ad-image-0
http://tinyurl.com/lzvmddg

--


Regards,

Savageduck

In article , Floyd L. Davidson
wrote:

I have a Nikon D3300 that came with a kit lens (18-55mm) - fine for
general work. I sometimes get a bit disappointed when photographing
birds. I am retired, so don't have a high income, but have been
wondering about getting a better lens, prime or zoom, for birds and
other wildlife.

Would 200mm be long enough or would I need to go to 300mm?

Depends...

A 200mm might be okay for some bird shots, but generally
there simply isn't a long enough focal length. 300mm is
better, 400mm is better than that. It's only at 800mm
or so that you'll likely decide you don't want to try
anything longer (too danged hard to use).

What kind of a budget are you working with? A couple of
pretty nice lenses are the Tamron 150-600mm and if it
ever shows up, Sigma has something very similar in the
works. At $1070 the Tamron isn't horribly expensive,
and it is a pretty nice lens.

he is retired and has a d3300 with a 18-55 and you're suggesting that a
$1000 lens will fit within his budget, not to mention the gap???

based on what he has said, a 70-300vr would be the best choice, it's a
very good lens and certainly the best bang for the buck. the non-vr
version is less expensive, but unfortunately it's optically not as
good.

another option is the 55-200 which is more affordable but it isn't
really long enough for birding unless they're fairly close.

either is useful for non-birding activities. beyond 300mm it starts to
get pricey.

nospam wrote:
In article , Floyd L. Davidson
wrote:

I have a Nikon D3300 that came with a kit lens (18-55mm) - fine for
general work. I sometimes get a bit disappointed when photographing
birds. I am retired, so don't have a high income, but have been
wondering about getting a better lens, prime or zoom, for birds and
other wildlife.

Would 200mm be long enough or would I need to go to 300mm?

Depends...

A 200mm might be okay for some bird shots, but generally
there simply isn't a long enough focal length. 300mm is
better, 400mm is better than that. It's only at 800mm
or so that you'll likely decide you don't want to try
anything longer (too danged hard to use).

What kind of a budget are you working with? A couple of
pretty nice lenses are the Tamron 150-600mm and if it
ever shows up, Sigma has something very similar in the
works. At $1070 the Tamron isn't horribly expensive,
and it is a pretty nice lens.

he is retired and has a d3300 with a 18-55 and you're suggesting that a
$1000 lens will fit within his budget, not to mention the gap???

I'm retired and on a budget. I bought a Tamron 150-600mm because
the lens you recommend is pretty near worthless.


--
Floyd L. Davidson http://www.apaflo.com/
Ukpeagvik (Barrow, Alaska)

In article , Floyd L. Davidson
wrote:

I have a Nikon D3300 that came with a kit lens (18-55mm) - fine for
general work. I sometimes get a bit disappointed when photographing
birds. I am retired, so don't have a high income, but have been
wondering about getting a better lens, prime or zoom, for birds and
other wildlife.

Would 200mm be long enough or would I need to go to 300mm?

Depends...

A 200mm might be okay for some bird shots, but generally
there simply isn't a long enough focal length. 300mm is
better, 400mm is better than that. It's only at 800mm
or so that you'll likely decide you don't want to try
anything longer (too danged hard to use).

What kind of a budget are you working with? A couple of
pretty nice lenses are the Tamron 150-600mm and if it
ever shows up, Sigma has something very similar in the
works. At $1070 the Tamron isn't horribly expensive,
and it is a pretty nice lens.

he is retired and has a d3300 with a 18-55 and you're suggesting that a
$1000 lens will fit within his budget, not to mention the gap???

I'm retired and on a budget.

you obviously have more money than he does.

he said he doesn't have a high income and owns a camera+lens that sells
for about $500, which means he's very likely to not want to drop $1000
on a lens and one that's more specialized than a 70-300.

your 'budget' includes not just that lens but multiple nikon slrs and
lenses including the nikon d3 and d4.

I bought a Tamron 150-600mm because
the lens you recommend is pretty near worthless.

it's actually an excellent lens, especially for the price.

better lenses do exist but for a lot more money, which does not have.

On Fri, 26 Dec 2014 16:37:32 -0900, (Floyd L.
Davidson) wrote:

I'm retired and on a budget. I bought a Tamron 150-600mm because
the lens you recommend is pretty near worthless.

Can you shoot handheld at 600mm? I never worked with anything that
long.

In article , Bill W
wrote:

I'm retired and on a budget. I bought a Tamron 150-600mm because
the lens you recommend is pretty near worthless.

Can you shoot handheld at 600mm? I never worked with anything that
long.

the 150-600 is stabilized, as is the 70-300vr i suggested (and a lot
less money).

On 12/26/2014 6:24 PM, MartinC wrote:
I have a Nikon D3300 that came with a kit lens (18-55mm) - fine for
general work. I sometimes get a bit disappointed when photographing
birds. I am retired, so don't have a high income, but have been
wondering about getting a better lens, prime or zoom, for birds and
other wildlife.

Would 200mm be long enough or would I need to go to 300mm?


What is your budget?

What size birds do you plan to shoot?
Will you be shooting birds in the wild, or in Zoos?
How heavy a lens can you carry to locations?

Length for shooting in the wild is like money. One can never have enough.

I do a reasonable amount of shooting birds. I use all Nikon lenses.
either my 70-200 with a 1.7 extender, or 80 -400 with a 1.4 converter.
Slower focus acquisition than the 70-200.

this image was shot with my 70-200

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/97242118/20140114_Pompano%20buttefly%20%20birds_5757.jpg

My D800 will autofocus at f8, so I can geet away with the latter.
I have played with the Tamron 150-600. It is not only too soft at the
long end for my tastes, but target acquisition is much too slow. I have
also played with the Sigma 150-600, I thought it a tad faster and
sharper than the Tameron, but it's price was about 1K more, and weighs
about 2lbs more. I loiked thw pre production lens I played with, but
Sigma has a spotty reputation for consisthncy.
In fairness I should add that the Tamron with a Canon format seems to be
better than the Nikon version, but neither seems to be well constructed.
If you are shooting in zoos, I have found that a 300mm, on a full frame
is an ideal zoo lens.

Here is a typical z00 shot.
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/97242118/different%20mandril.jpg

HTH

--
PeterN

Bill W wrote:
On Fri, 26 Dec 2014 16:37:32 -0900, (Floyd L.
Davidson) wrote:

I'm retired and on a budget. I bought a Tamron 150-600mm because
the lens you recommend is pretty near worthless.

Can you shoot handheld at 600mm? I never worked with anything that
long.

It ain't easy, but it can be done. That lens is fairly
light, and does have VR. It's nothing like trying to
handhold a 600mm f/4! That's one that I can't do
anymore at all. And it's very clumsy to pack around,
even on an ATV. The 150-600mm is very nice for that.

--
Floyd L. Davidson http://www.apaflo.com/
Ukpeagvik (Barrow, Alaska)