jtipps Loc: Dallas

I have gone through 2 other zooms in the 300 range trying to find a long lens that is sharp. I finally bit the bullet and spent a little more and got a Nikon 80-200 2.8 and have finally got it thourgh my thick skull it is not the lens, it has to be me. I shoot a D300 and have a nice variety of other lenses that are nice and sharp. I believe the problem is how I am focusing and have tried a lot of different methods.
The shots below were shot with single area or Dynamic. The problem is not on closer subjects but farther away The clear shot was around 30 yards out at 200 and the blurred about 50 at 145. These are both as shot with tripod and remote release, vr off.

Thanks guys.

All the data is on the original


Ditto

gordnanaimo Loc: Vancouver Island

Each lens has a sweet spot. Finding the right len with a long sweet spot usually involves the spending of vast amounts of cash. I recently bought a used 400mm prime for my pentax and it works great. Try ebay for some great deals. Nikon prime lenses are as good as it gets and stay away from zooms. Love your geese by the way.

jtipps Loc: Dallas

Thank you, I thought of that but am a little tired of buying lenses but I may have to.

glojo Loc: South Devon, England

Question
I am here to learn but what I found out the hard way regarding taking images of wild birds in their natural environment is the best images usually (not always) mean getting as close as possible to the subject and in my case this can only be done by the use of buying a longer lens. I believe my zoom was the 70 - 200mm 2.8VR but I stand to be corrected.

I was pleased with my results from this excellent lens but those images of subjects that were taken further away in my garden were never good enough for me and yes I was my own worse critic. Friends would say I was daft and there was nothing wrong with them, but.....

The reciting of these experiences is here to stimulate debate and hopefully be of use but here were my experiences regarding what I did next.

Looking at the 80 - 400mm would it be a repeat of the previous experience, a nice lens but still VERY slightly loosing its edge right at the limits I most wanted? I scoured as many forums as I could reading the comments of actual users and whilst a few stated how happy they were even up to the 400mm limit a significant majority were making similar observations regarding a slight degradation when using the lens at it longest setting. Another very relevant observation I found on all those forums was the speed of focussing! If we use a tripod and our subject stays in one location for a decent length of time, then fine but the speed of focussing is in most contributors opinion NEVER as fast as a prime lens!

BUT look at the price of a prime lens compared to the zoom.... The zoom lens offers great value for one but it will never compare to the prime although if you have a large pocket then the 200 - 400 lens will certainly get close and you will be VERY hard pressed to find owners complaining about that excellent lens. :) It is however very nearly as expensive as the 500 prime!

I was lucky with my last mistake, I purchased a second-hand Sigma 500mm prime lens which was a very good lens, very good indeed but it was not as good as the Nikon, it was not as good and will you be happy with something that could be bettered? After 18 months I bit the bullet and traded in the Sigma and thankfully I got the exact same price for that lens so in reality I had 18 months free use.

I am NOT an expert on this topic and these words are here to stimulate debate, the significant factor we have to acknowledge when looking at a prime lens is weight, weight and weight again.

I stand to be corrected here but I believe the 200 - 400 lens is 7.4Ibs just over 1Ib lighter than the 500mm prime which weighs 8.6Ib. The amazing 400mm F2.8 is a beast of a lens at 10.2Ib The 300mm 2.8 lens weighs 6.4Ib.

The 80 - 400 zoom comes in at an approximate 2.9Ib a considerable saving in weight and a significant saving in costs. 70 - 200mm F2.8 is approximately 3.4Ib which should be a rough guide to compare weights of the different hunks of glass! I must confess to thinking long and hard about buying the 200 - 400mm lens but I just know I would have forever wanted that extra distance. Have I any regrets? I can honestly say... Not a one, not a single regret and that 500 lens lives on my camera. I love it and have so much to learn regarding its use.

Do you have a local photographic shop that would allow you to play with any of the lens you might be considering and definitely do not be afraid of looking at second-hand but if considering this route I would personally be VERY selective regarding where I bought it from.

The images you have shot with the 200mm zoom might not be perfect for other reasons but distance, distance and distance :) The cheapest option might be to travel in an F-117 Stealth bomber but I'm told they are even more expensive that the 400mm prime lens :)

I was impressed with how well a decent lens will hold its value, I have lost money trading in my digital cameras but the only lens I have ever sold did not loose one penny although I did buy it second-hand. If you are going to get a longer lens getting it right first time might be the cheaper option :) ;)

jtipps Loc: Dallas

Glojo, Thanks for taking the time to post. I think there is a lot of truth in what you are saying. Most of my experience is with portraits, landscapes, macro, etc but not so much long shots. I hope we get some more opinions, this is interesting. I have thought as you stated that you buy a nice long lens but the best images are taken not so far away. I guess my thoughts were that I should be able to shoot 50-75 yards away and crop to a nice photo but that is not happening with me. I have taken some very nice images with the 80-200 but they have all been with the subject no further than 40 yards. Thanks again.

glojo Loc: South Devon, England

Thanks for taking my post in the spirit it was meant and with any luck folks will put you on the right track the zoom lens you have is an excellent lens and because it is the F2.8 model some folks might suggest you use a converter although 'thanks but no thanks :(.

If you have access to a Hum Vee that is fitted with some type of crane plus you have also won the lottery then Sigma make an amazing 200 - 500mm F2.8 lens and yes I did say F2.8. I guess it would be the ideal lens if you have a holiday on the Moon with that lack of gravity :) :)

SoHillGuy Loc: Washington

I like the slight blur to the birds wings in photo #2. I do think you are being too critical of your own photos.

jtipps Loc: Dallas

If you have access to a Hum Vee that is fitted with some type of crane plus you have also won the lottery then Sigma make an amazing 200 - 500mm F2.8 lens and yes I did say F2.8. I guess it would be the ideal lens if you have a holiday on the Moon with that lack of gravity :) :)[/quote]

Thanks for the tip, I just read reviews about the lens and ordered one, I will let you know how it works. That's assuming my wife doesn't find out a took out a second on the house to buy it because I won't be able to use it 6' under. that might be the most expensive lens I have seen.

jtipps Loc: Dallas

Thank you Sohill. I guess I don't understand how some of the members here are able to take such beautiful tack sharp images that appear to have been shot at quite a distance.