martinfisherphoto Loc: Lake Placid Florida

Hey Guys,
Hope alls well your way. Been over in Macro land for some time now, but I still photograph BIF and other wildlife on a regular bases. I currently have the Nikon 70-300mm VR and love the results for the money spent. In combination with the D7000 I have maxed out it's capabilities and wanting to finally up grade. I'm strictly a hand holding crawling around kind of photographer and want a somewhat light all purpose lens and was hoping the new Nikon lens mentioned would fit the bill. A big investment so approaching with caution. Would love to see Photos taking with this lens and hear feedback from anyone that's Using this Lens. I have found some of the best birding areas here in Florida and want to take my photography to the next level. Thanks for your time
Martin

howlynn Loc: pueblo west, co

Fstop22, I shot with the 80-400mm VRII. Here are a few shots I've taken with it mounted on a D7100. Also use on D7000. For BIF I really like the fast focus. Easy to pan with when shooting moving targets.

western scrub jay 220mm


osprey 400mm


model bomber - 400mm

martinfisherphoto Loc: Lake Placid Florida

Thanks,
love the detail in the scrub jays feathers. That's the kind of detail I'm looking for. More detail than my 70-300mm

snails_pace Loc: Utah

Whenever I see posts like this, I always wonder if there is a straight across comparison of lenses. Can you post an example pic that you would like to improve? And provide camera settings?

So for a reasonable comparison to see if you have maxed out your lens capability - a few questions -

Are you shooting in RAW and taking advantages of the format - noise reduction and sharpening in particular. Lightroom is probably a min for RAW converter with many plugins like Topaz Detail 3 and Denoise offering superior processing.

If you absolutely insist in a jpg format - which is not maxing out your lens capability - have you taken advantage of the in-camera refinements for jpgs? It's possible to go in and modify the camera's "off the shelf" settings for sharpness, contrast, etc etc.

The picture of the jay is stunning. But ... to be fair ... it does look like it has been processed by someone with advanced skills ... and in particular sharpened - to bring out the feather detail.

To get a good lens comparison, you'd need to both take pictures with the same settings/ level of processing. That's the only way you could tell the difference in lenses.

So with questions like this, just be sure you are not comparing jpg pics taken with the stock camera settings with a fully processed RAW image - and thinking that all the difference is in the lens.

I think the 80 - 400mm VR AFS lens is quite a good one based on the reviews. But for handheld shooting, the difference might not be as much as you are thinking.

Put another way .... you might see a much bigger improvement in your images by spending $200 for soft ware and learning to use it than spending $2600 for a lens.

Just an alternative view and feel free to ignore this if you feel it has no value or doesn't apply to your situation.

martinfisherphoto Loc: Lake Placid Florida

I Think I have a little experience at using a lens and as stated think I've reached the capabilities of my 70-300mm lens. One can only get so close when shooting birds of prey and other wildlife. The 70-300mm is not the sharpest lens but for $500 I'm been more than happy with it's performance. I'm looking to up grade to a higher quality of lens and am looking for examples taken in the Field rather than rely on Reviews taken in controlled conditions. What better way than to ask birders themselves.

example of 70-300mm lens