Bird newbie asking about affordable lens for such
Jan 28, 2021 19:46:02 #
oconnortf wrote:
I have a d3400 and often some of the kits for the ... (show quote)
Thank you for the wonderful advice/information
Jan 28, 2021 19:46:27 #
Marilia wrote:
You’ll need to be real close using a 200mm...
Thanks for the information!
Jan 28, 2021 19:47:15 #
zenagain wrote:
You have a lot of great advice above.
If interested i have a Tamron 18-400 for sale for $445.00 shipped.
If interested i have a Tamron 18-400 for sale for $445.00 shipped.
I'm certainly thinking about all these offers I have received
Thank you Jan 28, 2021 19:47:47 #
Dave H2 wrote:
I use a Tamron 18-400 which is available for around $300-350 used. I bought mine from a fellow here on Hog and am well pleased with it. It's my walk around lens on my D7200 and has both autofocus and stabilization.
Good luck.
D
Good luck.
D
Thank you for responding. I appreciate it
Jan 28, 2021 19:50:30 #
gvarner wrote:
BIF photos are pretty hard to do. Good ones anyway. Unless they’re hovering it’s difficult to keep them in your field of view, especially if you’re zoomed way out. Not much room there to work with. I have a D7200 with an 18-200 and most shots were at 70mm when I was trying to capture seagulls that were relatively close. Should have been using burst mode but I got a couple decent ones out of about 60 shits.
Thanks for the information!!!
Jan 28, 2021 19:51:17 #
oconnortf wrote:
I have a d3400 and often some of the kits for the ... (show quote)
Thank you for the information. I appreciate it
Jan 28, 2021 19:51:50 #
skipwv wrote:
I used the Nikon 55-300 in Antarctica and got beautiful pix of penguins and seals. It worked well in the harsh weather conditions and stayed on my D5300 for the whole trip. I also had a D5000 with the 18-55 on it for land- and seascapes. I now have a D7200 with the Sigma 18-300 but still have the other two and use them occasionally. I think they actually are a bit better than the Sigma, except for the difference in zoom range. Good luck birding!
Thank you for the helpful information
Jan 28, 2021 20:45:02 #
joecichjr wrote:
Thank you for the great advice, which is what I have been doing. With the crappy weather, so far just mallards and geese. I have to doing some online research about where birds are around here (Southwest Chicago suburbs). The weirdest thing is that we have had literally no birds here for the last five years. Anyway, thank you for chiming in. Your dad's shot is exceptional... I guess you inherited it
Sorta chilly there now too? Maybe the birds are following the covid restrictions and staying home- where its warm.
Jan 28, 2021 22:13:27 #
Brian in Whitby
Loc: Whitby, Ontario, Canada
kpmac wrote:
Once you start birding you won't be happy with 300mm or less, Joe. Save up for the lens you want. I have an older Sigma 150-500 that I am thinking of selling. PM me if you think you might be interested. It would fit your budget but I'm not sure about selling it yet.
A very good lens for birding. The Sigma has replaced this lens with a 150 - 600 lens. I don't know the price in U$ but it cost me in the ballpark of $1200 CDN. I love it!
Jan 28, 2021 23:24:09 #
joecichjr wrote:
I have seen so many magnificent bird photos here, ... (show quote)
A 400 f/5.6 Tokina AT-X AF would be a good choice. Sharper than the recommended zooms, and in your budget.
Jan 29, 2021 15:32:10 #
I would suggest that you look into the Sigma 150-600 f5-6.3 Contemporary. That lens is not all that heavy, will give you an equivalent focal length of 225-900mm and is auto focus and fully compatible with your D7100. The current price (new) is less than $800 and a used one can be had now for even less. Mine is very sharp and focuses quickly. It might be just the lens you are looking for.
Jan 29, 2021 16:55:19 #
[quote=quixdraw]Actually before I got the 200-500 I used an FX AF Nikkor 75-300 4.5 5.6 on my D7200. That delivered an equivalent top end of 450 mm.
Another one trying to make something out of nothing! It gives you the look of a 450mm but not the reach. It's still a 300 mm no matter what you put it on. 300mm is 300mm. PERIOD!!! Harry PS I used to believe that too but then I talked to someone who actually knew something about lens!
Another one trying to make something out of nothing! It gives you the look of a 450mm but not the reach. It's still a 300 mm no matter what you put it on. 300mm is 300mm. PERIOD!!! Harry PS I used to believe that too but then I talked to someone who actually knew something about lens!
Jan 29, 2021 17:01:16 #
[quote=Gene51]$500 is going to be tough. Unless you plan to hand hold and rely on optical stabilization, you'll need to budget for a decent tripod and head.
You shoot birds with a tripod? I can just see myself, trekking around with a camera around my neck and a tripod over my shoulder. NOT!! Of course you need a stabilized lens. This IS the twenty first century, not 1905!
You shoot birds with a tripod? I can just see myself, trekking around with a camera around my neck and a tripod over my shoulder. NOT!! Of course you need a stabilized lens. This IS the twenty first century, not 1905!
Jan 29, 2021 17:34:59 #
joer wrote:
Joe, I too like the 70-300 AF-P version...fits your bugdet, focus and sharpness is awesome.
Thank you again, Joe
Jan 29, 2021 18:09:05 #
Look at the Sigma 150-500 on eBay. They are around $500, if you shop you can get them for less. It has OS, but for birds, you will probably need a higher shutter speed, so the OS won't make any difference.
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.