Recommend Nikkor Lens for D610: need more reach?
Jul 23, 2019 10:22:19 #
Hello there -
I have a Nikon D610, love it, still learning. I have the following lenses and wonder if I should get a variable zoom for more reach? I mostly like close-up floral photography but I have a steady view of backyard birds (feed them, all year round). We have two weeks travel planned in Australia/New Zealand in January. Also, are there any of these lenses I should get rid of? I would prefer to stick with a Nikkor lens and I have no problem buying used if the condition is good and my price range would be about $600-700-ish. Any thoughts or recommendations?
AF 18-35mm, 3.5-4.5 D ED IF
AF-S 24-70mm, 2.8G ED IF
AF 50mm, 1.8
AF-S Micro 105mm, 2.8 G ED, VR IF 1:1
AF 70-300, 4-5.6D ED
Thank you in advance for your kind consideration, experience and thoughtfulness. ~ Eileen
I have a Nikon D610, love it, still learning. I have the following lenses and wonder if I should get a variable zoom for more reach? I mostly like close-up floral photography but I have a steady view of backyard birds (feed them, all year round). We have two weeks travel planned in Australia/New Zealand in January. Also, are there any of these lenses I should get rid of? I would prefer to stick with a Nikkor lens and I have no problem buying used if the condition is good and my price range would be about $600-700-ish. Any thoughts or recommendations?
AF 18-35mm, 3.5-4.5 D ED IF
AF-S 24-70mm, 2.8G ED IF
AF 50mm, 1.8
AF-S Micro 105mm, 2.8 G ED, VR IF 1:1
AF 70-300, 4-5.6D ED
Thank you in advance for your kind consideration, experience and thoughtfulness. ~ Eileen
Jul 23, 2019 10:43:19 #
Your 70-300 should suffice, unless you just want another lens. If you want longer reach you could try a teleconverter, or just go ahead and get the lens you want.
Jul 23, 2019 10:46:36 #
Gspeed wrote:
Hello there - br br I have a Nikon D610, love it,... (show quote)
Consider the Nikon 200-500. I have it and like it very much. Sharp through the entire range. I am not a fan of teleconverters.
Jul 23, 2019 11:19:29 #
PixelStan77 wrote:
Consider the Nikon 200-500. I have it and like it very much. Sharp through the entire range. I am not a fan of teleconverters.
Strongly agree. Excellent but not small or light!
Jul 23, 2019 15:05:26 #
Gspeed wrote:
Hello there - br br I have a Nikon D610, love it,... (show quote)
Not Nikon, but the 100-400 Tamron or Sigma new is in your price range - about the same size/weight as your 70-300. I like the Tamron.
.
Jul 23, 2019 19:51:52 #
Gspeed wrote:
Hello there - br br I have a Nikon D610, love it,... (show quote)
a 100-400 Sigma would give you a slight improvement, but if you what to really get close, the Tamron 150-600 G2 would be my choice. It is as good as the Sigma Sport version and $700 cheaper, and in my opinion better than the Nikon 200-500, but not by much, however the extra 100mm at the long end is helpful. The G2 also has a fairly close minimum focus distance, adding to it's versatility, and unlike the Nikon, it is weather resistant.
I don't think you'd be happy with a TC on the 70-300. If this is the lens you have:
https://www.opticallimits.com/nikon--nikkor-aps-c-lens-tests/249-nikkor-af-70-300mm-f4-56-d-ed-review--test-report
You can see that by the time you zoom out to 300, the image quality suffers considerably. If you can get a TC to mechanically connect to the lens without hurting the lens' rear element the image quality will further deteriorate, and AF performance will leave you frustrated.
Jul 24, 2019 05:59:12 #
mas24
Loc: Southern CA
In your spending range, $600-$700, you might want to check with KEH for good to very good used lenses. Select the focal range you want, and give them a call for availability and pricing. Good luck
Jul 24, 2019 06:09:04 #
John Sh
Loc: Toronto, Australia
While well outside your spending range the Nikor 200-500 outclasses the rivals in two important areas.
1. f/5.6 all the way out to 500mm.
2. Absolutely no drop off in sharpness from 200 - 500.
I use it on a D500 and continually thank Mr Nikon for making it.
Have a look at Anne McKinnel's post re the Tamron 200-600. https://annemckinnell.com/2019/07/14/canon-400mm-f-5-6l-vs-tamron-150-600mm-g2-lenses-for-wildlife-photography/?utm_source=Anne+McKinnell+Photography+Newsletter&utm_campaign=776c0ca42e-Canon_vs_Tamron&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_1505b02a04-776c0ca42e-325319581&mc_cid=776c0ca42e&mc_eid=838d47cd50
1. f/5.6 all the way out to 500mm.
2. Absolutely no drop off in sharpness from 200 - 500.
I use it on a D500 and continually thank Mr Nikon for making it.
Have a look at Anne McKinnel's post re the Tamron 200-600. https://annemckinnell.com/2019/07/14/canon-400mm-f-5-6l-vs-tamron-150-600mm-g2-lenses-for-wildlife-photography/?utm_source=Anne+McKinnell+Photography+Newsletter&utm_campaign=776c0ca42e-Canon_vs_Tamron&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_1505b02a04-776c0ca42e-325319581&mc_cid=776c0ca42e&mc_eid=838d47cd50
Jul 24, 2019 07:21:10 #
billnikon
Loc: Pennsylvania/Ohio/Florida/Maui/Oregon/Vermont
Gspeed wrote:
Hello there - br br I have a Nikon D610, love it,... (show quote)
Only one of those lenses give you any reach. The 70-300.
Jul 24, 2019 07:42:19 #
Your inventory seems thorough, and I don’t see anything you should lose.
Before you spend the money on a long lens, ask yourself how often you use the telezoom you have now, and how many times you lost that shot because you didn’t have the reach.
I keep thinking I need another lens, but can’t decide on much longer or much wider, and any of my choices seem to be much more expensive.
Before you spend the money on a long lens, ask yourself how often you use the telezoom you have now, and how many times you lost that shot because you didn’t have the reach.
I keep thinking I need another lens, but can’t decide on much longer or much wider, and any of my choices seem to be much more expensive.
Jul 24, 2019 08:10:00 #
Lagoonguy
Loc: New Smyrna Beach, FL
I was in NZ & Australia on a five week cruise/land tour in November of 2015 and I found that my Nikon D7100 & 18-300 was ideal since it has a FX equivalent of 27-450. It was great for glacier shots and wildlife and worked well for most non city environments. I also used a D750 & Sigma 24-105 f4 Art and loved the photos but for versatility the 18-300 was more useful. So my suggestion is buy a used or refurbished Nikon 28-300 and you will be ready for most of what you see. If you go with your current gear I would take the 24-70 f2.8 and the 70-300. Have a great trip!
Jul 24, 2019 10:14:30 #
You have all you need and I see no reasons to get anything else.
The 18-35 lens is a fantastic lens and very useful for landscape photography, assuming you know how to use wide angles. The 24-70 f2.8 is a professional lens well known for its resolution and it is a very good lens for landscape photography or even some portraits.
What could I possible say of the 50mm f1.8 besides that it is a well corrected, sharp and useful lens on a full frame body. The Micro Nikkor needs no introduction, it is the lens to have for macro photography and portraits.
The 70-300 VR is a better lens than what you have now. The AF is superior and so are the images. You have all you need and I see no reason to buy anything else just use wisely what you now own.
The 18-35 lens is a fantastic lens and very useful for landscape photography, assuming you know how to use wide angles. The 24-70 f2.8 is a professional lens well known for its resolution and it is a very good lens for landscape photography or even some portraits.
What could I possible say of the 50mm f1.8 besides that it is a well corrected, sharp and useful lens on a full frame body. The Micro Nikkor needs no introduction, it is the lens to have for macro photography and portraits.
The 70-300 VR is a better lens than what you have now. The AF is superior and so are the images. You have all you need and I see no reason to buy anything else just use wisely what you now own.
Jul 24, 2019 11:21:16 #
Your "weakest" lens in your kit is the 70-300 but to significantly improve it is over your budget. Examine your images taken at longer focal lengths and see if they are limiting. Perhaps longer "range" can be achieved by cropping your image in post processing. Consider how often you really "need" the reach and then make a determination. I prefer to Nikon 200-500 but it's a $1200 hit to the wallet.
Jul 24, 2019 13:47:28 #
Hi, you might improve your lens arsenal by changing your 70-300 to a used 70-200 f2.8G. I don't think that the 70-300 is that sharp between 200 and 300. I you also need additional reach, I have had excellent results with the Sigma 15-600 Cont. lens (the latest version not the first). Also the 150-600 Tamron G2 is very popular, but the copy I tried was not as sharp as the Sigma.
Additionally, for phenomenal panoramas, bring a good tripod and use your 50 f1.8. Shoot horizontal sweeps with the camera on the tripod vertically mounted. I have not found anything as simple as this for outstanding panos.
Additionally, for phenomenal panoramas, bring a good tripod and use your 50 f1.8. Shoot horizontal sweeps with the camera on the tripod vertically mounted. I have not found anything as simple as this for outstanding panos.
Jul 24, 2019 14:04:34 #
PixelStan77 wrote:
Consider the Nikon 200-500. I have it and like it very much. Sharp through the entire range. I am not a fan of teleconverters.
Exactly what I would say! I am always pleased with the images I get from it on my D850 body.
I suggest, though, you go see one, handle it on your camera body, and see if you are willing to deal with the size and weight before you buy.
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.