Nikon lenses for nature photography

Hi,

Anyone use the following lenses for nature photography?
Comments? Advice? I have a d100. Desire to use for
photographing birds (and I must admit a desire to use the
same lens for concerts, if possible)

Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8G ED-IF AF-S VR Zoom
Nikkor 80-200mm f/2.8D ED-IF AF-S Zoom
Nikkor 80-400mm f/4.5-5.6D ED VR AF Zoom lens

Other suggestions. I also have looked briefly at strictly
telephoto (not zoom) lenses.

Gary

On 2/20/04 1:17 AM, in article ,
"Gary Mattingly" wrote:

Comments? Advice? I have a d100.

I use a D1x. Love it.

Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8G ED-IF AF-S VR Zoom

Love it. Some use it with a 1.4 or even 2.0 teleconverter.

Nikkor 80-200mm f/2.8D ED-IF AF-S Zoom

IMHO: get the 70-200 2.8 VR instead. The VR is great.

Nikkor 80-400mm f/4.5-5.6D ED VR AF Zoom lens

I like mine a lot. It is a little slow focusing and a little slow in glass
speed, but IMHO, I love the ability to zoom in and out from 80 to 400. A
fantastic range. Plus with my D1x you get 50% longer telephoto so it
becomes a 120-600. And its hand-held.

Since I have had it, I use it most of the time for birds. The only thing
against it, is it does not draw the crowds and respect as when I used to
pull out, and setup my big old 600 f4 (which is now a 900 f4) and my tree
stump size Gitzo Tri-pod. ;-)

Other suggestions. I also have looked briefly at strictly
telephoto (not zoom) lenses.

The standard used to be a 500 f4. That is why I bought a 600 f4.

--
PWW (Paul Wayne Wilson)
Over 1,000 Photographs Online at,
http://PhotoStockFile.com

Hi Gary,

I have the Nikkor 80 - 400 VR zoom, and love it! This is far and away my
favorite lens. A year ago I was part of a birdwatching [not photo] tour of
Costa Rica, and managed some amazing bird shots. I can consistently
handhold at 1/60th of a second at 400mm, and about half the time obtain good
photos at 1/30th with the lens at 400mm.

Yes there are three significant drawbacks: the lens is big, heavy, and
expensive. But it allows you to photograph things handheld that you would
normally would have to use a tripod. My "solution" to the heavy problem is
the best neoprene shoulder harness I could find.

If you're serious about bird shots, the 400 mm is the lens to consider, and
with a 2X tele-extender you have an 800 mm equivalent (with a two-stop
penalty, or a one-stop with a1.4X tele-extender). The latter may be the
best bet with your camera. Good luck!

Bob

On Fri, 20 Feb 2004 06:17:11 GMT, Gary Mattingly
wrote:

Hi,

Anyone use the following lenses for nature photography?
Comments? Advice? I have a d100. Desire to use for
photographing birds (and I must admit a desire to use the
same lens for concerts, if possible)

Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8G ED-IF AF-S VR Zoom
Nikkor 80-200mm f/2.8D ED-IF AF-S Zoom
Nikkor 80-400mm f/4.5-5.6D ED VR AF Zoom lens

Other suggestions. I also have looked briefly at strictly
telephoto (not zoom) lenses.

Gary

The 80-200mm f/2.8D is a decent lens in its several variations. I
also use a D100 and like the large Nikkor teles, the 200 f/2, 300
f/2.8, 400 f/4 and 600mm f/5.6. Also use the 2X Nikon converters, the
201 and 301. These lenses work fine wide open and are great for birds
etc. Usually these can be found at reasonable prices, since pros have
turned them in for the new larger series, like the 600 f/4.

If you like shooting bugs and small things, the 200mm f/4D is hard to
beat. Excellent resolution and a long working distance to prevent
upsetting the tiny critters.

On 2/20/04 10:54 AM, wrote:

For bird photography the only lens you listed that will come close to a
usable focal length is the 80-400. And to be really useful you would need to
have a 1.4x teleconverter, unless only shooting large birds that are easily
approachable

You forget, Using a D100 you get 1.5x the lens length. So the 80-400 becomes
a 120-600. And I believe this lens does not work with teleconverters.

But it has the VR (Vibration Reduction) and that makes it really good for a
walk around lens. I went the the SA rookery and used the 80-400 VR instead
of my "normal" 600 f4 and I loved being able to shoot all the action all
over the place. No swinging the lens around on a tripod. No problem shooting
some mating Wood Storks in one second and then a group of Snowy Egrets
flight dancing into the area in the very next second. I never could have
done that with my 600f4.

And it is always better to shoot approachable birds. Less air (haze) to
shoot through.

You probably should take another look at fixed focal length
telephoto lenses. If you can find a good 500 f4 used in your price range
that will make a good start on a D100. Even a 300 f2.8 with a matched 2x
teleconverter will give a better image than the 80-400. If you can rent and
try them out that would be the best thing to do.

But another great thing is that you can compose in the camera much better
with the variety crops that a 80-400 (120-600) can give a photographer. I
have shot little shorebirds with my 80-400 VR.

--
PWW (Paul Wayne Wilson)
Over 1,000 Photographs Online at,
http://PhotoStockFile.com

KBob wrote:
On Fri, 20 Feb 2004 06:17:11 GMT, Gary Mattingly
wrote:
Snip
f/2.8, 400 f/4 and 600mm f/5.6. Also use the 2X Nikon converters, the
Snip

I dont believe that there was ever a Nikkor 400/4 or an AF 600/5.6. There
are however there 300/4 AF(S), 500/4P or 600/4AF(S) but there are 400/5.6,
400/3.5 and 600/5.6 in AIS Mounts..

--
Vin
Melbourne, Australia
Remove no and spam from both sides of the @ sign email address to reply

On Mon, 23 Feb 2004 22:23:03 GMT, Vin
wrote:

KBob wrote:
On Fri, 20 Feb 2004 06:17:11 GMT, Gary Mattingly
wrote:
Snip
f/2.8, 400 f/4 and 600mm f/5.6. Also use the 2X Nikon converters, the
Snip

I dont believe that there was ever a Nikkor 400/4 or an AF 600/5.6. There
are however there 300/4 AF(S), 500/4P or 600/4AF(S) but there are 400/5.6,
400/3.5 and 600/5.6 in AIS Mounts..


Sorry, I never said anything about these lenses being autofocus, and
this is not a feature that I generally need to use. My big Nikkors
are the 200 f/2.0, 300 f/2.8, 400 f/3.5 (not f/4) and the 600 f/5.6.
All of them are ED glass, and all are manual focus.

I brought out my old trusty 600 f4 non-autofocus to shoot some KiteBoarders
the other day. Boy did I miss that auto-focus... With that being said, I was
surprised how well I did and once I got back into the groove. I was
pleasantly surprised with the ratio of sharp images to soft images. Of
course back in the OLD times I shot many xx,xxx (or more) images with that
beast. Auto-focus is still the King with me.
--
PWW (Paul Wayne Wilson)
Over 1,000 Photographs Online at,
http://PhotoStockFile.com



On 2/25/04 8:14 PM, in article
"KBob" wrote:

All of them are ED glass, and all are manual focus.

On Thu, 26 Feb 2004 01:45:04 GMT, PWW
wrote:

I brought out my old trusty 600 f4 non-autofocus to shoot some KiteBoarders
the other day. Boy did I miss that auto-focus... With that being said, I was
surprised how well I did and once I got back into the groove. I was
pleasantly surprised with the ratio of sharp images to soft images. Of
course back in the OLD times I shot many xx,xxx (or more) images with that
beast. Auto-focus is still the King with me.

Well, with all these old lenses I've got to keep telling myself that
autofocus isn't really all that necessary...