Piltdown1952

Earlier I posted about my dilemma regarding the need for a longer lens and the cost of what I really wanted. I work with a Nikon D7100 which is FX which means the lenses are 1.5 longer than what I think of when I think of my many years of shooting 35 mm full frame. So my 55-300 mm zooms out to the equivalent of 450 mm. But I wanted more for my trip to Costa Rica where I would be shooting birds and monkeys. Various teleconverters and off-brand lenses were discussed (and one lens that was over $10,000!) but I settled on the Nikon AF 200-500 mm f.5.6 ED VR lens. The good news: this is a gem of a lens and with the 5.6 and VR can be hand-held in daylight situations. The bad news: $1,400. I can't justify that price. But one of you suggested Borrowlenses.com and I rented the lens for eight days, plus insurance and shipping for $148.85. Everything went flawlessly and I would use them again. Do the math: if you go on vacations or safaris once or twice a year the cost of rental versus purchase would be amortized over five years. So thanks again! This forum was a real money saver.

imagemeister Loc: mid east Florida

Thanks for your feedback !...
.

PixelStan77 Loc: Vermont/Chicago

Great decision. I have one and love it.

JoAnneK01 Loc: Lahaina, Hawaii

Yes, renting can be a valuable asset when it comes to using the higher priced professional lenses.

JFCoupe Loc: Kent, Washington

Yes, lensRental and Borrow Lens are great to have available. I rented the Olympus OMD EM1 MK II prior to purchasing it along with the 300 mm F4 lens. A week of use convinced me that it was a good option to my Canon 5D MK II.

Retired CPO Loc: Travel full time in an RV

I have one and have loved it since day one. So will we get to see some Costa Rica photos ?

rgrenaderphoto Loc: Hollywood, CA

Great out of the box thinking.

billnikon Loc: Pennsylvania/Ohio/Florida/Maui/Oregon/Vermont

The lens is currently on sale. I own two, and now I also own the new 500 5.6. So, I will be listing my mint, used twice, 200-500 next week on this site. My cost will be around $1100.00 including shipping. Do not private message me as I already have received many many reply's.
Even at $1400.00 the lens is a steal for what you get. It should cost a lot more for the image results you get. Good luck and keep on shooting until the end.

uhaas2009

Thanks for your input

I Derfdog

Used 200-500's are sold on this site fairly often. I bought mine here and am totally happy with it.

Piltdown1952

I decided to use these shots to learn Lightroom with so it may take a bit of time to post. I think I have some howler monkey shots that will be great with a bit of work. The howlers stay high in the trees so the long reach was a necessity.

sailfree

I would respectfully suggest a bit more research on the subject of "crop factor." A smaller sensor does not give your lens more reach than that same lens on a camera with a full frame sensor. What you get on that smaller sensor is a cropped view because the sensor doesn't have as much area as a full frame sensor. Thus the term "crop factor." You cannot increase the magnification of a lens by reducing the size of the sensor. There are many excellent articles on the internet that clarify the common misconception that a 1.5 crop factor means your lens is 1.5 times longer.

Piltdown1952

Wow! Somebody actually said "respectfully" on the internet. So rare these days. Thanks. Yes, I think I understand the effect on film or sensor size on the reach of lenses. My first camera was a 1970 Nikkormat with a 50 mm f2.0 lens which was what we called "normal" back in the day. So I think in terms of the 24 x 36 mm frame of the old 35 mm film days. I also shot some with a 2-1/4 by 2-1/4 twin lens and even a 4 x 5 view camera, so I understand how image size determines what is normal, wide angle, and telephoto. When I went digital (first a D70, now a D7100) the huge price differential between the full frame (35 mm equivalent screen size) and the DX format was too much for me to justify. But I still think in terms of full frame equivalencies (since I've been shooting various Nikon lenses and bodies for 47 years) so when I say that the 200-500 on my DX has the "reach" of a 750 mm on a full frame I'm pretty sure I understand what I am saying. There is a function on the D7100 that allows you to zoom in a bit more but it is just a crop, which I would rather do post-shooting. Enjoy this forum!

Geegee Loc: Peterborough, Ont.

No, the crop factor of 1.5 does not magically make your 300mm lens into a 450mm lens and the perspective is still that of a 300mm lens. What it does is give you the field of view of a 450mm lens because the smaller sensor cannot record the edges of the full frame field of view because the sensor is not large enough. Only the angle of view is changed.

However you are still better off than if you had cropped this field of view from a picture taken with a full frame camera as you still have all the megapixels that your sensor is capable of. For example if you have both a full frame camera and a crop frame camera and both have 21 megapixel sensors your "450mm" image would still give you a 21 megapixel file. If you had cropped the same size image from a full frame image file you would have reduced the megapixels of the file to 14. (21/1.5=14)

Many pros have both full frame and crop frame cameras and they usually use the crop frame camera with their high powered telephoto lenses when they need extra reach.

There is another way to "extend" the reach of your 300mm lens. Go into your shooting menu and select Image Size. The default is a crop factor of 1.5 but you also have the choice of a 1.3 crop factor. You might say that a 1.3 is less than a 1.5 so what's the point? Well it goes like this:

Take your 300mm lens for intance - 300 X 1.5 X 1.3 = 585mm. So now you almost have a field of view of a 600mm lens.

The advantages are, it costs you nothing and there is no "extra" glass (teleconverter) added to your lens. The only disadvantage is that it will reduce the megapixels of your image file to 16 (21/1.3=16). Which is still quite respectable for reasonably large prints.

I'm not saying that this is an ideal solution but it certainly is worth trying. I use it whenever I really need some extra reach.

Bill P

I need to pick a tiny nit. If that sortof things offend you then move on, nothing to see here.


The 7100 is a DX camera, not and FX camera, so with a FX lens,you get the view of a heavily cropped full frame shot.